Of crow bars and foundations

[This is an expanded version of MCFly 36's lead story, entitled "Getting facts out of these guys? You need a crow bar."]

They don't want you to know. They don't want us to tell you. Who? What? Well, the popular chain of bars under the "Kro" logo is going to be launching a “partnership” with Foundation (see box below) to promote climate awareness and action among Manchester's drinking classes.

But since these sorts of partnerships always run the risk of “greenwash”, MCFly wanted to get a comment, any comment, out of both Kro and Foundation about what the deal actually entails. As we wrote in the last MCFly-

“at time of going to press, we are unable to say whether there are ANY firm commitments from Kro to do anything to prove they are walking the talk. If they don't voluntarily and rapidly get shot of their wretched patio heaters [see bottom of this blog post] that are directly heating the planet, they will be a laughing stock, they will make Foundation a laughing stock and they will create cynicism and contempt for the very "eco-branding" that they want to promote.”

Since then MCFly has been trying in vain to get answers. We've emailed and phoned repeatedly. At time of going to press, we have had no reply from either organisation. A search of both their websites, on October 31^st, gives no mention of the proposed partnership, so it may have been put on hold while the two organisations decide what to do.

Background
On October 13 Foundation announced on their twitter account “We're looking forward to the launch of the Kro Bar and Foundation partnership, starting the 1st November. More details to follow.”

MCFly was told that there would be an opportunity for Kro patrons to support Foundation's work (perhaps by voluntarily donating money during transactions) and that Foundation's profile would also be raised. Given that the Copenhagen Climate talks loom large, and Kro is a Danish-themed chain, it must have seemed like a no-brainer.

Foundation
Foundation is the newly-created Climate Fund for the North West, and“gathers up donations from people and businesses and uses them to support individual carbon reduction projects across the Northwest.”

Hved er Kro?
Kro is a (deservedly) popular chain of cafe bars around Manchester (see www.kro.co.uk). The first one was set up opposite the Manchester University Student's Union in 1999, and the business has won a string of awards, and expanded rapidly. It is run by Mark Ruby, whose family is Danish.

Here's where YOU come in, gentle readers. We hope you'll have more luck than we have had.

Write to email/phone Kro and Foundation and tell them you want answers All the usual things- be polite but persistent etc. Think about taking your custom elsewhere until you get a sensible reply.

Kro HQ
Manchester Science Park,
61 Pencroft Way, Manchester
M15 6AY
Tel:0161 232 9796
Fax: 0161 273 7550
Email: oldabbey@kro.co.uk

Foundation
c/o Groundwork
First Floor, Fourways House
57 Hilton Street
Manchester
M1 2EJ
0161 237 3200
Foundation Chief Officer
mark.turner@climatefund.org.uk

Patio Heaters
Wyevale, Britain's biggest garden centre chain, stopped selling patio heaters two and a half years ago, due to climate change concerns.

Fiona Hall - a Liberal Democrat MEP – wrote a report that called for a ban on outdoor heaters. This call was has been backed by the European Parliament.
But Fiona Hall told the BBC that figures she had seen showed that if a car was run for a year it would emit three tonnes of carbon dioxide, while the figure for an outdoor heater would be four tonnes.

From Euro MPs back patio heaters ban BBC website 31 Jan 2008

EST launch- must innovate harder....

This morning Team MCFly went to the launch of the Energy Savings Trust's “Green Communities” event (essentially their CafE programme rebranded and with more money ponied up by central government). There were some Very Good Bits. But... wait for it, wait for it.. frankly, it did have a whiff of 'let's tick the box marked engagement, get a couple of photos and some positive feedback from reliably effusive people, take a couple more photos and slap it all in the annual report.'

There were approximately 140 people in the room, which is a turnout to be applauded and envied. Much much more could have been done, at minimal/zero cost, and it would have given everyone a warm fuzzy feeling when they heard “Energy Saving Trust” or “Foundation.”

The audience was sat in rows and subjected to your standard death-by-powerpoint series of presentations.

• The chair of the EST Graham Ayling, gave a bit too much detail about the EST, and used a few too many of the words you'd find on a “bullshit bingo” board. He said nothing that anyone in the room would have found objectionable or surprising.
• Two people from “DESP”- Davyhulme Energy Saving Project talked about the work they had done, initially in their local church and then with school children.
  
• Ben Williams from Foundation basically said that although they haven't got the money from the big capitalists that they thought they would get (don't you know there's a credit crunch on), they still want people to send in applications for funding for 'offset' projects.

This was followed by a talk from a “TV personality” called Dick Strawbridge, who was very engaging for 10 minutes, but after 20 minutes or so began to pall a bit. We then had an opportunity to mingle, and browse the stalls of the sponsoring organisations (no other stalls were around) before a nice lunch, with a decent veggie selection for once. Everyone then sloped off, but for those who hopped on a coach to visit an “eco-house.”

So, a certain amount of information was disseminated (tick that box), a certain (but not large) amount of networking facilitated among stakeholders (tick that box) and photos taken (tick that box). But overall, a missed opportunity for genuine beyond-the-silos networking and community(!)-building, and for a species that has been missing opportunities to sort itself out for quite a while now, a bit of a disappointment too.

So, what are the Concrete Suggestions?

• Start with a short welcoming comments from the chair followed by him/her asking people to turn to the person behind them(they probably know the folks sat next to them) and discuss why they've come, what projects they are working on etc (this is an easy and failsafe icebreaker)
• “Enforced mingling” based on where people live, what jobs they do, what they are particularly interested in, what kind of projects they are running, what religion they are, and a random one (month of birth, first letter of the town/city of their birth). Getting groups of 4 or 5 people going, talking about a shared experience etc, even if for a few minutes, gives EVERYONE permission to mingle more. [Without these "permissions", only those determined or bold enough to mingle beyond their known groups will get the most out of a day like this. Sure, there are always a few who want to be left alone to digest or stare into space, and they can keep doing that. But it's the role of hosts to break the ice, and today the ice didn't get broken nearly as much as it could have done.]
  
• Investigate Open Space Technology.
• One of the speakers should ALWAYS be tasked with injecting a little realism- if there is no acknowledgement of the challenges and difficulties that we face then it is frankly dishonest and unhelpful and undermines the credibility of the sponsoring organisaitions. If this stuff - community engagement etc- was easy, then we wouldn't be in the mess we are in. Everybody knows that, but is too afraid of spoiling the jamboree atmosphere to come out and tell the truth.
  

So, really good that the EST and Foundation are doing this work, and it's encouraging to see so many people in attendance. And it WAS useful for those who went, MCFly included. But nonetheless, these sort of events have not created the “stepchange”that is needed, and without a lot more of all the good things they want to promote- partnership, innovation, boldness- then these sorts of meetings will continue to perform significantly less well than they could (while still ticking the boxes around photos and positive comments for annual reports and upbeat newsletters).

Wordy rant over.

MCFly 012- Climate Change Foundation

MCFly spoke to one of its people with the Finger on the Pulse (or legume- we're not really sure) about the very new “Climate Change Foundation (CCF)”, a potential new source of money for climate change action in Greater Manchester.

What is the Climate Change Foundation and where is the money going to come from?
The CCF is conceived as a means by which investment can be generated for substantial and possibly radical work on climate change mitigation and adaptation in the city region. It will be independent of the Association of Greater Manchester Authorities (AGMA) and owned by its investors. This could give the body useful flexibility in terms of what it can fund – and how fast it can do it. It will most likely mix private sector funds with other sources such as endowments and possibly the European Investment Bank. It is possibly best viewed as a vital function of the new work on Climate Change in the city region - which may or may not be separate from the Manchester Climate Change Agency. So basically, it is an idea that is being explored but will not see light of day until well after the Environment Commission and the Manchester Climate Change Agency are open for business, and settled in, early next year. It's unlikely that public funds will be used for running the thing.

What is it supposed to achieve?
Cold Hard Cash for good and substantial Climate Change work - and cash that could be independent of the political processes of AGMA. It is also a way to get past the Town Hall credibility gap that is all too real to many sectors outside of the Town Halls of the region. It will also make real the 'investment proposition' on Climate Change -so the Foundation can say to organisations looking to reduce their emissions 'we enable you to cut your energy use/make your own low carbon energy and that will make you money - which you then use to pay us back.' An oversimplification for sure, but applicable to many circumstances - especially with a longish pay back period.

How might it go Horribly Wrong?
* If energy stays so cheap that the investment in saving it or generating it doesn't pay. At the moment, the Recession will ensure that even cheapish energy will be worth saving [MCFly notes that on Nov 21 oil was below $50 a barrel...] New regulation will also affect this – especially in the realms of planning and Carbon Trading.
* If AGMA don't realise how valuable the Foundation could be and don't engage in it, or don't allow it to be independent.
* If people get so confused about the proliferation of Climate Change bodies that they don't get the rationale.
Watch this space- MCFly will follow the story...