Kinder Essington August 11th, 2010
By Kinder Essington
August 11th, 2010
Articles Contributed: 127Comments Posted: 0Leaderboard Rank: N/A46 Views
comment now!
August 11th, 2010 As electric cars enter the consciousness of today's buyers, we read two kinds of articles. One states that China will be the undisputed King of electrics. Others point to the U.S. Ok. Who will it be? Those rooting for the U.S. point out that the U.S. as a whole seems much more willing to consider electric vehicles. More so than Europe or even China itself. So their feeling is that as a market, we will buy more electric cars per Capita than anywhere else, making us the "leader" in electrics. Those who point to China do so because of their burgeoning electric car industry. For instance, the U.S. currently has four major companies focusing on electric cars. Fisker. Tesla. Ford with the electric Focus and Transit connect. G.M. with the Volt. In China, major manufacturers such as BYD and Chery are either making or developing electric cars. But you ain't seen nothing yet. China also has the following: Shandong Boya New Energy Vehicle, Kent International Trading Co., Zhejiang Tyco Industries, Lianyungang Do Link International, Ningbo Shenjiang Group, Roadmaster Group, Changzhau Credit Interest Trading Group, Wuxi Xufeng Electric Bicycle Co, CMEC Suzhou Co., Jinan Shanglong International Co, Wending Green Home Co, Zhanjiang Kingstae Vehicle Co, Zhejiang BenBao Electric Vehicle Technology Co, ASA Group Asia Ltd., Sonik Holding Group Ltd.. Right now my Spell Check is going nuts. Two things. First, there may be more backyard companies working on electric cars in the U.S. of which we're aware. And there may be more "dirt floor" companies making electric cars in China. But lets just say there is a heck of a lot more ev production activity in China than the U.S. Second, many of the vehicles these Chinese companies make are pretty small and basic. Others aren't. But the point is that China has a lot of ev manufacturing, selling and servicing experience under its belt. So who's going to come out on top? As a manufacturer of ev's, China will probably outstrip the U.S.. The ev's suitable for the U.S. market will have to be sophisticated, upscale and expensive. This added to their limited range and utility will keep the numbers fairly low. For instance, Nissan and G.M. combined will build only 195,000 ev's a year by 2012...about 1.3 percent of the U.S. market. China, on the other hand, can supply all of Asia with small, inexpensive ev's which are more suited to those markets. And be sure that the central Government will have no qualms about choosing winners and losers among the ev makers. If one proves particularly strong, they will receive all kinds of help and funding to expand. And there's nothing stopping any of these makers to enter the U.S. market. In fact, we're pretty confident that someone like BYD and Chery will do just that. Eventually. The U.S. may well become a mature ev market before others if only because of all the Government money being spent to promote same. Of the Department of Energy's $25 billion dollars to promote ev's in the U.S., $8.5 billion has been given to vehicle companies, $2.4 has been given to battery companies, and the money is being used to fund those up-to-$7,500 subsidies for purchase. But then again, Spain's heavily subsidized push to sell ev's has flopped. So we will see. As usual, winning depends on how its defined. The U.S. may win by being accepting of sophisticated ev's. China may win because of their sheet tonnage. One thing in closing. Nobody seems to be thinking about Japan in this mix. They have proven themselves to be voracious consumers of hybrids, and electrics would make a lot of sense as urban vehicles in Japan's congested and polluted cities. Could Japan be the dark horse in this race?
BYD e6 electric crossover, Electric Avenue, 2010 Detroit Auto Show
Enlarge Photo
$10.3 billion is waiting in the wings for the Volt if GM clears the hurdles
Enlarge PhotoAs electric cars enter the consciousness of today's buyers, we read two kinds of articles.
One states that China will be the undisputed King of electrics.
Others point to the U.S.
Ok. Who will it be?
Those rooting for the U.S. point out that the U.S. as a whole seems much more willing to consider electric vehicles. More so than Europe or even China itself.
So their feeling is that as a market, we will buy more electric cars per Capita than anywhere else, making us the "leader" in electrics.
Those who point to China do so because of their burgeoning electric car industry.
For instance, the U.S. currently has four major companies focusing on electric cars. Fisker. Tesla. Ford with the electric Focus and Transit connect. G.M. with the Volt.
In China, major manufacturers such as BYD and Chery are either making or developing electric cars. But you ain't seen nothing yet.
China also has the following: Shandong Boya New Energy Vehicle, Kent International Trading Co., Zhejiang Tyco Industries, Lianyungang Do Link International, Ningbo Shenjiang Group, Roadmaster Group, Changzhau Credit Interest Trading Group, Wuxi Xufeng Electric Bicycle Co, CMEC Suzhou Co., Jinan Shanglong International Co, Wending Green Home Co, Zhanjiang Kingstae Vehicle Co, Zhejiang BenBao Electric Vehicle Technology Co, ASA Group Asia Ltd., Sonik Holding Group Ltd..
Right now my Spell Check is going nuts.
Two things.
First, there may be more backyard companies working on electric cars in the U.S. of which we're aware. And there may be more "dirt floor" companies making electric cars in China. But lets just say there is a heck of a lot more ev production activity in China than the U.S.
Second, many of the vehicles these Chinese companies make are pretty small and basic. Others aren't. But the point is that China has a lot of ev manufacturing, selling and servicing experience under its belt.
So who's going to come out on top?
As a manufacturer of ev's, China will probably outstrip the U.S.. The ev's suitable for the U.S. market will have to be sophisticated, upscale and expensive. This added to their limited range and utility will keep the numbers fairly low. For instance, Nissan and G.M. combined will build only 195,000 ev's a year by 2012...about 1.3 percent of the U.S. market.
China, on the other hand, can supply all of Asia with small, inexpensive ev's which are more suited to those markets. And be sure that the central Government will have no qualms about choosing winners and losers among the ev makers. If one proves particularly strong, they will receive all kinds of help and funding to expand. And there's nothing stopping any of these makers to enter the U.S. market. In fact, we're pretty confident that someone like BYD and Chery will do just that. Eventually.
The U.S. may well become a mature ev market before others if only because of all the Government money being spent to promote same.
Of the Department of Energy's $25 billion dollars to promote ev's in the U.S., $8.5 billion has been given to vehicle companies, $2.4 has been given to battery companies, and the money is being used to fund those up-to-$7,500 subsidies for purchase.
But then again, Spain's heavily subsidized push to sell ev's has flopped. So we will see.
As usual, winning depends on how its defined. The U.S. may win by being accepting of sophisticated ev's. China may win because of their sheet tonnage.
One thing in closing. Nobody seems to be thinking about Japan in this mix. They have proven themselves to be voracious consumers of hybrids, and electrics would make a lot of sense as urban vehicles in Japan's congested and polluted cities. Could Japan be the dark horse in this race?
Thursday, 12 August 2010
The world's first really green oil deal
Ecuador's $3.6bn scheme to save its rainforest from exploitation could point the way to sparing other threatened landscapes
By Esmé McAvoy
The world's first genuinely green energy deal is about to be sealed. In a plan which could be a blueprint for saving large tracts of the planet from exploitation, a greater value is being put on a pristine wilderness than on the oil that lies beneath.
While the world's industrialised countries are building complex carbon markets to enable them to carry on polluting, Ecuador has come up with a much simpler idea for mitigating climate change: leave the oil underground. It is promising to lock up as much as a fifth of its oil reserves indefinitely, providing rich nations pay out at least half the market value of the oil – some $3.6bn – as compensation.
The trail-blazing proposal was first floated in 2007, but it took a step towards reality last week when the UN Development Programme signed an agreement with the Ecuadorean government to be the independent administrator for the project's trust fund. The accord makes Ecuador the only country in the world offering to leave lucrative oil reserves untapped in an attempt to slow climate change.
Crucially, the oil in question – some 846 million barrels of crude – lies beneath the Yasuni National Park, one of the most bio-diverse swathes of rainforest on the planet. Located in the heart of the Ecuadorean Amazon, one hectare contains more tree species than the whole of the US and Canada combined. It is also home to 105 amphibian species – the UK has six – more than 500 birds, 200 mammals and countless insects and plants. Declared a world biosphere reserve by Unesco in 1989, the park is also the ancestral land of two of the world's last remaining uncontacted indigenous tribes, the Tagaeri and the Taromenane.
The plan, backed by Greenpeace and even the oil-producing Opec countries – applies to a 675sq mile area of Yasuni known as the ITT block after the three oil-fields that lie beneath it. Locking up the oil would not only protect the rainforest and the indigenous tribes, but it would also stop at least 407 million metric tonnes of CO2 being released into the atmosphere, according to Carlos Larrea, the initiative's technical adviser. "That's more than the total annual emissions of France or Brazil," he said.
In return, Ecuador is asking for $3.6bn – roughly half the expected revenue if the oil was extracted and sold at current prices – to be invested in renewable energy developments to help the country further cut its carbon emissions.
If it works, the scheme could be rolled out to countries such as Colombia, Peru and the Philippines which face similarly stark choices between protecting globally significant ecosystems and oil. "Ecuador began exporting oil in 1972, and oil now accounts for over 60 per cent of exports," Mr Larrea said. "Locking away 20 per cent of our oil reserves is a bold decision but we can't do it without international support."
Yet, after three years, securing anything more concrete than praise has proved elusive. At the end of last year, President Rafael Correa embarked on an international tour, including the UK, France, Sweden and Canada, to drum up support for the proposal before December's climate change summit in Copenhagen. But none has offered a firm cash commitment.
The Yasuni-ITT committee was originally poised to sign the agreement at the summit, but Mr Correa, unhappy with the terms, baulked at the 11th hour. His actions, and subsequent statements, led to several resignations from the Yasuni-ITT board. But a new board was assembled, with some original members, and the contentious points in the agreement have been ironed out.
Despite the setbacks, Germany remains a supporter and is likely to contribute around $50m, although no figures are confirmed. Signing up an independent body such as the UN to oversee the trust fund was a key German criterion, along with the support of at least one other country. With the trust fund in place, Mr Larrea is confident the final obstacle will be removed. "Spain and Belgium have expressed support, as have a number of other European countries. We're very optimistic."
Contributions to the fund would be spread over at least 10 years and countries would be issued with Yasuni Guarantee Certificates (CGYs in Spanish) to the value of the non-emitted CO2 their contribution has secured. Should any future Ecuadorean government break the commitment and drill for oil, the certificates entitle their holders to their money back with interest.
From next month, individuals and private companies will also be able to donate via the Yasuni-ITT website. "We hope individuals and environmentally aware companies all over the world will be excited by what we're doing and want to contribute as a gesture of solidarity," Mr Larrea said. "Supporters will be symbolically 'buying' their barrel of oil with the guarantee it will stay underground." Such international "crowd funding" would create an intimidating network of public opposition should any future government try to break the pact.
The $3.6bn will be invested in renewable energy to reduce the country's oil dependency and cut carbon emissions. These investments are expected to generate annual returns of about 7 per cent, which will go into a second pot to fund environmental and social development projects, such as reforestation, social programmes for indigenous groups and eco-tourism. Projects will be decided by a steering committee of representatives from the Ecuadorean government, the donor countries and a nominated public representative.
Reducing illegal logging is the top priority, according to Mr Larrea. Ecuador has one of the highest rates of deforestation in South America, despite protected areas covering over a quarter of the country. Matt Finer of the environmental organisation Save America's Forests has called the Ecuadorean Amazon "a complicated and confusing array of overlapping protected areas, indigenous reserves and crude oil concessions", testament to the way conservation has regularly been sidelined by oil interests. Legal loopholes have permitted oil concessions within national park boundaries and even where areas are protected, they are woefully understaffed.
Ecuador's northern Amazon bears the scars of decades of reckless oil extraction. One of the biggest environmental lawsuits has been raging for 17 years between the oil giant Chevron and 30,000 Ecuadoreans whose land and water are contaminated by oil spills and toxic open waste pits. If found liable, Chevron faces damages of more than $27bn.
However, groundbreaking changes to the constitution in 2008 mean Ecuador is the only country in the world to recognise the rights of nature and ecosystems to survive and flourish, permitting any Ecuadorean citizen to sue on nature's behalf if these rights are infringed.
Understandably, the Ecuadorean government isn't prepared to wait for ever for international co-operation: "If by December 2011, Ecuador doesn't receive at least $100m, the government has the right to call off the proposal," said Bisrat Aklilu, the executive co-coordinator of the UN's multi-donor trust fund office that will administer the Yasuni fund. "The government will repay contributors the face value of their contribution and then make up their own minds about whether to drill."
For some, the plan amounts to little more than blackmail, with Mr Correa holding the Amazon to ransom; if Ecuador can get funding for Yasuni, what's to stop other countries cashing in? Saudi Arabia made possibly the most audacious bid for financial support yet this week, claiming compensation for the expected loss of oil revenue should climate change agreements result in a drop in production.
Against a backdrop of public outrage at the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, the argument for "post-oil" economies seems stronger than ever. Maria Espinosa, Ecuador's Heritage Minister, agrees. "Ten years from now projects like this will be the rule, not the exception," she said last week.
By Esmé McAvoy
The world's first genuinely green energy deal is about to be sealed. In a plan which could be a blueprint for saving large tracts of the planet from exploitation, a greater value is being put on a pristine wilderness than on the oil that lies beneath.
While the world's industrialised countries are building complex carbon markets to enable them to carry on polluting, Ecuador has come up with a much simpler idea for mitigating climate change: leave the oil underground. It is promising to lock up as much as a fifth of its oil reserves indefinitely, providing rich nations pay out at least half the market value of the oil – some $3.6bn – as compensation.
The trail-blazing proposal was first floated in 2007, but it took a step towards reality last week when the UN Development Programme signed an agreement with the Ecuadorean government to be the independent administrator for the project's trust fund. The accord makes Ecuador the only country in the world offering to leave lucrative oil reserves untapped in an attempt to slow climate change.
Crucially, the oil in question – some 846 million barrels of crude – lies beneath the Yasuni National Park, one of the most bio-diverse swathes of rainforest on the planet. Located in the heart of the Ecuadorean Amazon, one hectare contains more tree species than the whole of the US and Canada combined. It is also home to 105 amphibian species – the UK has six – more than 500 birds, 200 mammals and countless insects and plants. Declared a world biosphere reserve by Unesco in 1989, the park is also the ancestral land of two of the world's last remaining uncontacted indigenous tribes, the Tagaeri and the Taromenane.
The plan, backed by Greenpeace and even the oil-producing Opec countries – applies to a 675sq mile area of Yasuni known as the ITT block after the three oil-fields that lie beneath it. Locking up the oil would not only protect the rainforest and the indigenous tribes, but it would also stop at least 407 million metric tonnes of CO2 being released into the atmosphere, according to Carlos Larrea, the initiative's technical adviser. "That's more than the total annual emissions of France or Brazil," he said.
In return, Ecuador is asking for $3.6bn – roughly half the expected revenue if the oil was extracted and sold at current prices – to be invested in renewable energy developments to help the country further cut its carbon emissions.
If it works, the scheme could be rolled out to countries such as Colombia, Peru and the Philippines which face similarly stark choices between protecting globally significant ecosystems and oil. "Ecuador began exporting oil in 1972, and oil now accounts for over 60 per cent of exports," Mr Larrea said. "Locking away 20 per cent of our oil reserves is a bold decision but we can't do it without international support."
Yet, after three years, securing anything more concrete than praise has proved elusive. At the end of last year, President Rafael Correa embarked on an international tour, including the UK, France, Sweden and Canada, to drum up support for the proposal before December's climate change summit in Copenhagen. But none has offered a firm cash commitment.
The Yasuni-ITT committee was originally poised to sign the agreement at the summit, but Mr Correa, unhappy with the terms, baulked at the 11th hour. His actions, and subsequent statements, led to several resignations from the Yasuni-ITT board. But a new board was assembled, with some original members, and the contentious points in the agreement have been ironed out.
Despite the setbacks, Germany remains a supporter and is likely to contribute around $50m, although no figures are confirmed. Signing up an independent body such as the UN to oversee the trust fund was a key German criterion, along with the support of at least one other country. With the trust fund in place, Mr Larrea is confident the final obstacle will be removed. "Spain and Belgium have expressed support, as have a number of other European countries. We're very optimistic."
Contributions to the fund would be spread over at least 10 years and countries would be issued with Yasuni Guarantee Certificates (CGYs in Spanish) to the value of the non-emitted CO2 their contribution has secured. Should any future Ecuadorean government break the commitment and drill for oil, the certificates entitle their holders to their money back with interest.
From next month, individuals and private companies will also be able to donate via the Yasuni-ITT website. "We hope individuals and environmentally aware companies all over the world will be excited by what we're doing and want to contribute as a gesture of solidarity," Mr Larrea said. "Supporters will be symbolically 'buying' their barrel of oil with the guarantee it will stay underground." Such international "crowd funding" would create an intimidating network of public opposition should any future government try to break the pact.
The $3.6bn will be invested in renewable energy to reduce the country's oil dependency and cut carbon emissions. These investments are expected to generate annual returns of about 7 per cent, which will go into a second pot to fund environmental and social development projects, such as reforestation, social programmes for indigenous groups and eco-tourism. Projects will be decided by a steering committee of representatives from the Ecuadorean government, the donor countries and a nominated public representative.
Reducing illegal logging is the top priority, according to Mr Larrea. Ecuador has one of the highest rates of deforestation in South America, despite protected areas covering over a quarter of the country. Matt Finer of the environmental organisation Save America's Forests has called the Ecuadorean Amazon "a complicated and confusing array of overlapping protected areas, indigenous reserves and crude oil concessions", testament to the way conservation has regularly been sidelined by oil interests. Legal loopholes have permitted oil concessions within national park boundaries and even where areas are protected, they are woefully understaffed.
Ecuador's northern Amazon bears the scars of decades of reckless oil extraction. One of the biggest environmental lawsuits has been raging for 17 years between the oil giant Chevron and 30,000 Ecuadoreans whose land and water are contaminated by oil spills and toxic open waste pits. If found liable, Chevron faces damages of more than $27bn.
However, groundbreaking changes to the constitution in 2008 mean Ecuador is the only country in the world to recognise the rights of nature and ecosystems to survive and flourish, permitting any Ecuadorean citizen to sue on nature's behalf if these rights are infringed.
Understandably, the Ecuadorean government isn't prepared to wait for ever for international co-operation: "If by December 2011, Ecuador doesn't receive at least $100m, the government has the right to call off the proposal," said Bisrat Aklilu, the executive co-coordinator of the UN's multi-donor trust fund office that will administer the Yasuni fund. "The government will repay contributors the face value of their contribution and then make up their own minds about whether to drill."
For some, the plan amounts to little more than blackmail, with Mr Correa holding the Amazon to ransom; if Ecuador can get funding for Yasuni, what's to stop other countries cashing in? Saudi Arabia made possibly the most audacious bid for financial support yet this week, claiming compensation for the expected loss of oil revenue should climate change agreements result in a drop in production.
Against a backdrop of public outrage at the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, the argument for "post-oil" economies seems stronger than ever. Maria Espinosa, Ecuador's Heritage Minister, agrees. "Ten years from now projects like this will be the rule, not the exception," she said last week.
Energy efficiency ratings to be compulsory for home sales
EU legislation means that from 2012 all homes for sale will require an energy efficiency rating to be carried out upfront
Mark King guardian.co.uk, Thursday 12 August 2010 10.40 BST
EU legislation will make it compulsory for energy efficiency ratings to be published in all UK homes for sale advertisements from 2012.
At the moment homeowners are required to commission an energy performance certificate (EPC) before putting a property on the market, but the results may not be available when potential purchasers first view it. From 2012 the EU Directive will make it compulsory for the ratings to be published upfront giving buyers vital "green" information.
The legislation will effectively put a green, amber or red energy efficiency grading on every For Sale board in the UK. It will also help the government to deliver its ambitious plans of reducing household carbon emissions by 29% by 2020.
Non-profit energy supplier Ebico is urging potential house sellers to start making their homes more energy efficient sooner rather than later. Founder, Phil Levermore, said: "There has never been a better time. Not only could it make a property more saleable in the future, but people will also reap rewards from lower energy bills and a warmer, more comfortable home in the meantime."
The government's proposed "green deal" scheme, to be detailed this autumn, is expected to offer loans of up to £6,500 for home energy efficiency improvements repayable, over 20 years or more, out of savings on fuel bills.
The Energy Saving Trust recently said that the majority of the UK's least energy-efficient homes could be brought up to near-average green standards for less than £3,000; older homes needing major modernisation, including a new central heating system, would need at least £5,000 to bring them into line
More on this story
Switching tariff: how to reduce your energy bills
Carbon cutting measures will add just £13 to household energy bills
Compare gas and electricity suppliers
More Money stories
Ebico, along with the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors and the Energy Saving Trust, recommend the following energy efficiency home improvements, some of which can be carried out by homeowners at a relatively low cost (prices are based on a three-bed semi-detached house):
• Protect hot water pipes with insulating material to reduce the amount of heat that escapes. This will cost about £10 and save approximately £10 a year.
• Insulate the loft with blankets known as quilts. This is a simple DIY job that costs about £250 and can rake in savings of up to £150 a year.
• Seal badly fitting doors and windows with draught-proofing strips or draught excluders. This can cost up to £200 and save up to £25 a year.
• Change your boiler to a high efficiency condensing boiler. These convert 86% or more of their fuel into heat, compared to 65% for old G-rated boilers. Although the boiler and insulation could cost approximately £2,500 it could reap annual savings of £235 a year.
• Install thermostatic valves on radiators. This will cost about £150 and save about £30 a year.
Mark King guardian.co.uk, Thursday 12 August 2010 10.40 BST
EU legislation will make it compulsory for energy efficiency ratings to be published in all UK homes for sale advertisements from 2012.
At the moment homeowners are required to commission an energy performance certificate (EPC) before putting a property on the market, but the results may not be available when potential purchasers first view it. From 2012 the EU Directive will make it compulsory for the ratings to be published upfront giving buyers vital "green" information.
The legislation will effectively put a green, amber or red energy efficiency grading on every For Sale board in the UK. It will also help the government to deliver its ambitious plans of reducing household carbon emissions by 29% by 2020.
Non-profit energy supplier Ebico is urging potential house sellers to start making their homes more energy efficient sooner rather than later. Founder, Phil Levermore, said: "There has never been a better time. Not only could it make a property more saleable in the future, but people will also reap rewards from lower energy bills and a warmer, more comfortable home in the meantime."
The government's proposed "green deal" scheme, to be detailed this autumn, is expected to offer loans of up to £6,500 for home energy efficiency improvements repayable, over 20 years or more, out of savings on fuel bills.
The Energy Saving Trust recently said that the majority of the UK's least energy-efficient homes could be brought up to near-average green standards for less than £3,000; older homes needing major modernisation, including a new central heating system, would need at least £5,000 to bring them into line
Switching tariff: how to reduce your energy bills
Carbon cutting measures will add just £13 to household energy bills
Compare gas and electricity suppliers
More Money stories
Ebico, along with the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors and the Energy Saving Trust, recommend the following energy efficiency home improvements, some of which can be carried out by homeowners at a relatively low cost (prices are based on a three-bed semi-detached house):
• Protect hot water pipes with insulating material to reduce the amount of heat that escapes. This will cost about £10 and save approximately £10 a year.
• Insulate the loft with blankets known as quilts. This is a simple DIY job that costs about £250 and can rake in savings of up to £150 a year.
• Seal badly fitting doors and windows with draught-proofing strips or draught excluders. This can cost up to £200 and save up to £25 a year.
• Change your boiler to a high efficiency condensing boiler. These convert 86% or more of their fuel into heat, compared to 65% for old G-rated boilers. Although the boiler and insulation could cost approximately £2,500 it could reap annual savings of £235 a year.
• Install thermostatic valves on radiators. This will cost about £150 and save about £30 a year.
Dream kitchen of the future is green, survey finds
Ikea research reveals householders in UK and Ireland want a kitchen that combines advanced technology with the ability to grow food
Rebecca Smithers, consumer affairs correspondent guardian.co.uk, Thursday 12 August 2010 07.00 BST
It is likely to boast the kind of advanced technology seen in Star Trek voyages; but new research into what consumers expect from their dream kitchen in 30 years' time also indicates a strong desire for a "return to nature".
New research carried out by the retailer Ikea into consumers' "must-have" features in their 2040 kitchen reveals that the room will remain the hub of the family.
But householders in the UK and Ireland also say they want a kitchen with built-in energy efficiency that is inherently a "green" space in which the garden and kitchen merge, allowing food to be grown in both areas. Consumers also say they want reclaimed and recycled materials as standard for their kitchen products.
A report based on the research, and due to be discussed at a debate at the Barbican today, explores the factors that will power the transformation of the kitchen. "The kitchen will come to embody a move towards sustainable living and be a measure of how people adapt to changes in society," it says.
The survey, conducted in June this year, questioned 1,895 respondents in the UK and an additional 751 in the Republic of Ireland. It predicts a gradual and sustained move towards conscientious – rather than conspicuous – consumption.
Consumers said they wanted a kitchen which will galvanise the home production of organic, natural food and promote the grow-your-own movement in homes and communities.
Gardens or mini-allotments would be standard as an extension of the kitchen, the report suggests. Concepts like Hyundai's Kitchen Nano Garden – a fridge designed to grow food instead of just storing it – will be a standard amenity. Using hydroponics and controlable water and nutrient supplies, growing food indoors will become more common in the home as the pressure of space means fewer people will have the luxury of a garden.
Elevated gardens will also no longer be limited to rooftops – they will also grow vertically on the sides of walls.
Healthy eating and health maintenance will be a primary goal for consumers, the authors predict. The report says the kitchen will be "the wellbeing hub of the home, and will be dedicated to enhancing and bettering the inhabitant."
The report concludes: "Scarcity is on the consumer agenda as the major factor driving the depiction of the future kitchen. Water and land scarcity, climate change and urbanisation will make excessive lifestyles extinct not only out of necessity, but a collective outlook on living within means."
Rebecca Smithers, consumer affairs correspondent guardian.co.uk, Thursday 12 August 2010 07.00 BST
It is likely to boast the kind of advanced technology seen in Star Trek voyages; but new research into what consumers expect from their dream kitchen in 30 years' time also indicates a strong desire for a "return to nature".
New research carried out by the retailer Ikea into consumers' "must-have" features in their 2040 kitchen reveals that the room will remain the hub of the family.
But householders in the UK and Ireland also say they want a kitchen with built-in energy efficiency that is inherently a "green" space in which the garden and kitchen merge, allowing food to be grown in both areas. Consumers also say they want reclaimed and recycled materials as standard for their kitchen products.
A report based on the research, and due to be discussed at a debate at the Barbican today, explores the factors that will power the transformation of the kitchen. "The kitchen will come to embody a move towards sustainable living and be a measure of how people adapt to changes in society," it says.
The survey, conducted in June this year, questioned 1,895 respondents in the UK and an additional 751 in the Republic of Ireland. It predicts a gradual and sustained move towards conscientious – rather than conspicuous – consumption.
Consumers said they wanted a kitchen which will galvanise the home production of organic, natural food and promote the grow-your-own movement in homes and communities.
Gardens or mini-allotments would be standard as an extension of the kitchen, the report suggests. Concepts like Hyundai's Kitchen Nano Garden – a fridge designed to grow food instead of just storing it – will be a standard amenity. Using hydroponics and controlable water and nutrient supplies, growing food indoors will become more common in the home as the pressure of space means fewer people will have the luxury of a garden.
Elevated gardens will also no longer be limited to rooftops – they will also grow vertically on the sides of walls.
Healthy eating and health maintenance will be a primary goal for consumers, the authors predict. The report says the kitchen will be "the wellbeing hub of the home, and will be dedicated to enhancing and bettering the inhabitant."
The report concludes: "Scarcity is on the consumer agenda as the major factor driving the depiction of the future kitchen. Water and land scarcity, climate change and urbanisation will make excessive lifestyles extinct not only out of necessity, but a collective outlook on living within means."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
