Builderscrap.com are looking at the defra 2009 Public attitudes and behaviours towards the environment survey.

The survey also included a number of measures to capture how often people used green spaces and the importance they placed on these in their lives. Around half (48%) of respondents said they used public gardens, parks, commons and other green spaces at least once a week with 10% saying they used these six or seven days a week. A quarter said that they used them either once a fortnight or once a month (26% of all respondents) with the same proportion reporting that they used them less than once a month or never (26%).
A large majority of respondents indicated that having public gardens, parks, commons and other green spaces nearby was important to them. Just 5% of respondents did not think that this was important to them (with the majority of these people saying it was “not very” rather than “not at all” important to them). Table 41 shows the results for these questions for both the current and 2007 Defra survey.

DEFRA September 2009

While the figures appear similar for each response about usage of green spaces, in total the proportion who claimed to use green spaces once a week or more had decreased from 54% in 2007 to 48% in 2009.

Respondents rated the importance of having green spaces nearby very highly and the total proportion rating this as very or fairly important had increased from 91% of respondents in 2007 to 95% in 2009. The biggest difference was in the proportion of respondents who said that having such spaces nearby was very important to them (up from 65% in 2007 to 74% in 2009). There was little variation in response by the type of area the respondent lived in – respondents living in villages were marginally more likely to say that having public gardens, parks, commons and other green spaces was very important to them than those living in cities and towns (80% compared with 75%).
In follow-up to these questions, respondents were asked to pick the three most important reasons for spending time in public gardens, parks, commons and other green spaces (from a list of eight options). As one of these top three reasons, the most frequently cited reason was fresh air (by 57% of respondents). This was followed by open space (44%), plants and wildlife (35%), scenery (30%), tranquillity (26%) and leisure opportunities (26%). There was little variation in response by type of area lived in, although respondents living in villages were more likely to cite plants and wildlife (46%) and scenery (42%) as important reasons for spending time in public gardens, parks and commons than those living in cities and towns (34% and 28% respectively).
An equivalent question was asked on the 2007 Defra omnibus survey to ascertain the most important reasons for respondents visiting open countryside – the top reason given at that time was also fresh air (mentioned by 61% of respondents), followed by scenery (56%), tranquillity (45%), open space (39%), and plants and wildlife (38%) which are the same reasons as those most frequently cited in 2009 though in a different order. Leisure opportunities were cited as a reason for visiting open countryside by around one in ten (11%) respondents.

Public attitudes and behaviours towards the environment – tracker survey DEFRA September 2009

At BuilderScrap.com we like to think we know about carbon offsetting. All respondents in the omnibus survey were asked how much they knew about carbon offsetting. Figure 13 summarises responses to this question compared with data from the 2007 Defra survey.

Respondents’ perceptions of how much they knew about carbon offsetting have decreased since 2007. In the current survey a little over a third (37%) of respondents said they knew at least a little about carbon offsetting’ down from 43% in 2007. The proportion of people saying they knew nothing and had never heard of the term had increased from 35% in 2007 to 40% in 2009. Respondents who said they knew at least a little about carbon offsetting were asked whether they had ever paid into a scheme personally. This question was followed up using a stages of change response scale to assess the extent to which respondents had considered paying into such a scheme. The results for both questions are presented in Table 34.

Of those who knew at least a little about carbon offsetting, 6% said they had paid into a scheme at some point in the past (the equivalent of 2% of all respondents). This represents a statistically significant increase from 3% in 2007.

The second question presented in Table 34 was asked after providing all respondents with a description of what carbon offsetting was, to help assess willingness to act. This suggests a slightly different picture, with 14% of those who knew at least a little about carbon offsetting saying that they were at the maintenance stage of carbon offsetting (having either ‘done this before and intending to do it again’ or ‘done this before though not as much as I’d like’). This may reflect a difference in what is understood by ‘paying into’ a carbon offsetting scheme rather than ‘using’ a carbon offsetting scheme. One third of respondents (33%) were at the pre-contemplative stage (having either never heard of it or thought about it), while around one quarter (27%) had thought about it but rejected it and 17% were contemplating it but had not yet used a scheme. Only 2% of respondents who knew at least a little about offsetting had used a scheme previously but stopped.

As anybody who’s watched the television adverts about climate change knows travel, transport and in-particular car ownership are hot topics.

BuilderScrap.com are continuing to post about the current Defra report on attitudes to environmental issues. As part of the survey, respondents were presented with three statements about travel and transport. Respondents were asked how strongly they agreed or disagreed with each of these. The findings are summarised in Figure 12 and Table 33.

About half (49%) agreed that they would only travel on a bus if they had no choice with 21% strongly agreeing with this. Just over one third (37%) disagreed with the statement.

Nearly half (44%) of respondents agreed that ‘people who fly should bear the cost of the environmental damage that air travel causes’, with less than one third (27%) disagreeing with this.

In contrast, over half (55%) of respondents disagreed with the statement “for the sake of the environment car users should pay higher taxes” (including just over one quarter, 28%, who strongly disagreed).

The results from the current survey are broadly consistent with those from the 2007 Defra survey, with a small increase in the proportion of respondents who agreed that ‘I would only travel by bus if I had no other choice’ (up by 3%).

More on the Defra Survey from the BuilderScrap.com team.

Respondents were asked what items were collected for recycling or composting from outside their homes by the council. Table 16 shows that respondents were most likely to report that paper, tins and cans, and glass bottles and jars were part of their council‟s collection. Around three quarters of respondents mentioned cardboard and plastics. There was an increase in the proportion of respondents saying that they could recycle these items outside their homes since 2007, with the exception of paper items which was consistently listed by 94% respondents in 2007 and 2009. For some items including tins, glass objects and garden waste this increase was by more than 10 percentage points, whilst for food waste, clothes and shoes the increase was slightly less (by six to eight percentage points).

Levels of use of doorstep recycling facilities tended to reflect reported provision of these facilities (see Table 17). Use of recycling and composting door-step collection facilities had increased for nearly all types of waste since 2007 but most notably for plastic items (increased by 19 percentage points), cardboard (up by 18 percentage points) and tins/cans and glass items (which have increased by 17 percentage points). The only small decrease between 2007 and 2009 was for garden waste. In 2007, 55% of those with a garden said they normally put out garden waste for council collection. This had dropped to 51% in 2009.

Great stuff

I’m sure we all know about recycling. Now let us see how much the general public know about Energy Saving! Here at BuilderScrap.com we want encourage Interdependence and the merits of both.

Respondents to the Defra survey who had bought an appliance in the last twelve months were asked if they had looked for the Energy Saving Recommended logo on it. This logo was developed by the Energy Saving Trust to help consumers identify the most energy efficient products available. Respondents who had bought more than one appliance in the last twelve months were asked this question in relation to one of these which was selected randomly. In the 420 purchases covered by the survey, the purchaser claimed to have looked for the logo in 71% of these, while in 24% the purchaser had not. In the remaining 5% of purchases the respondent did not know whether they had looked for the logo. A tracker survey carried out by the Energy Saving Trust in August 2007 showed that the logo had been looked for in 60% of purchases, showing an increase in the proportion of purchasers reporting that they are looking for the logo.

Respondents who had bought an appliance in the last twelve months were also asked whether the appliance they bought had the Energy Saving Recommended logo on it. In the 420 purchases covered by the survey, 72% of appliances were claimed to carry the logo (1% higher than the 71% of purchasers who had looked for the logo). The results suggest that most purchasers who reported that they had looked for the logo thought that it was on the appliance they bought. The tracker survey in August 2007 showed that the logo was said to be present on 62% of appliances purchased. It is possible that there is some confusion between the EU (A-G) label 8, which was not asked about, and the Energy Saving Recommended label, which only covers the most energy efficient products.

Not sure about you guys think but I’m sure any salesmen worth his salt would have pointed this logo out. The Government could do more to let people know about this label and what it actually means.

More from BuilderScrap.com on the recent Defra Survey. As a Builders Exchange we’re absolutely positive that you guys will know how well insulated your homes are…. check out the responses.

The survey also looked at home insulation. Again responses can be classified using the stages of change response scale. It should be noted that some respondents will have installed insulation or double glazing themselves but in many cases others will have moved into a property that already had insulation or double glazing. The group classified as “maintenance‟ in Table 7 includes both types of case.

It was most common for respondents (for whom it was practicable or relevant) to have already installed double glazing (89%) or loft insulation / top-up loft insulation (82%). Very few people were at the pre-contemplation stage (i.e. had either not heard of it or had not thought about doing this) or the rejection stage (i.e. had thought about it doing but had dismissed the idea). One in ten (10%) indicated that they were contemplating installing loft insulation or top-up loft insulation and 5% indicated that they were contemplating installing double glazing.

In the 2007 Defra survey a slightly higher proportion (94%) of respondents with lofts indicated that they had loft insulation. Similarly in tracker research carried out by the 28 Energy Saving Trust in August 2007, 94% of respondents indicated that they had at least some double-glazing, which is slightly higher than the 2009 survey. However, the question wording on these previous surveys was slightly different which may explain the apparent change – it seems improbable that the prevalence of loft insulation or double-glazing would have decreased over this period. In previous surveys respondents were asked simply whether they had any loft insulation in their home whereas in the current survey respondents were asked to respond using the stages of change scale described in this report.

Slightly more than half (57%) of those whose homes were constructed with cavity walls, had cavity wall insulation and around half of all respondents had draught exclusion for doors and or windows installed (46%). These levels are consistent with findings from previous research. The 2007 Defra survey showed that 59% of people in England who lived in homes with cavity walls had at least some cavity wall insulation. Research carried out by the Energy Saving Trust showed that 46% of people in England had draught exclusion in their homes. A relatively high proportion (19%) of respondents were at the pre-contemplation stage of installing draught exclusion suggesting that for many this was not something that they had considered.

Slightly more than one in ten (12%) of those whose homes were constructed with solid walls had solid wall insulation. Respondents were much more likely to be at the pre-contemplation stage for this behaviour – 31% were at this stage, indicating that a high proportion of those whose homes were constructed with solid walls “hadn’t really considered‟ this type of insulation. A relatively high proportion (21%) of respondents had rejected solid wall insulation as an option. There was also a high proportion of unclassified respondents due to people saying that this question was “not applicable‟ to them or because they did not know (31% of whose homes were constructed with solid walls).

Do you know about the construction of your own home?

This Defra survey looked at the types of actions that respondents said they were doing that directly reduce the amount of energy they were using in the home – for example, turning the heating down or boiling the kettle with a limited amount of water. Table 6 summarises the extent to which people had thought about, or tried each of these behaviours (using the stages of change response scale).  Here at BuilderScrap.com we look more at the reducing waste and energy on worldwide scale. Sharing, recycling and reclaiming building materials that otherwise would be sent to landfill…. therefore reducing costs.

Building Materials

The results show that most people said they were doing each of the five energy saving behaviours and intended to keep these up – few had tried the behaviours and later relapsed. Respondents were most likely to be doing and intending to keep doing the following behaviours:

• Only boiling the kettle with as much water as you need (84% said they had done this and intended to keep it up)
• Washing clothes at 40 degrees or less (77%)
• Cutting down on the use of gas and electricity at home (76%)

There had been a significant increase in those respondents who reported cutting down on the use of gas and electricity at home from 58% in the 2007 Defra survey to 76% in 2009. Fewer respondents reported turning down thermostats or cutting down on the use of hot water, though it was still a majority of respondents at 66% and 64% respectively.

For all five of the behaviours shown in Table 6, relatively small numbers of respondents reported relapsing (having tried the behaviour but stopped doing it) – 5% or less of respondents for each behaviour. Similarly, a relatively small proportion of respondents had rejected each behaviour before ever trying (between 3% and 9% of all respondents had rejected each of the five behaviours).

The majority of respondents had at least thought about adopting each of the five behaviours with only a small proportion being classified at the pre-contemplation stage (where they had either not heard of the behaviour or not thought about it). Just 6% of respondents were at the pre-contemplation stage for the first three behaviours shown (boiling the kettle with only as much water as you need, washing clothes at 40 degrees or less, and cutting down on the use of gas and electricity at home).

A larger proportion of respondents were either at the pre-contemplation stage (i.e. had either never heard of it or had not thought about doing it) or rejection stage (i.e. had thought about doing it but had dismissed the idea) for cutting down on the use of hot water at home (25% in total for both stages) and turning down thermostats (19% in total for both stages).

Here at BuilderScrap.com we’ve been looking at some interesting information from Defra. This is an older press release from April, but we think is still relevant… Low carbon economy.   The Secretary of State for Environment Hilary Benn today welcomed the measures in the 2009 Budget which encourage investment in low carbon jobs and energy generation using organic waste.

The Chancellor announced additional funding of £10 million for anaerobic digestion and waste infrastructure and a continued increase of £8 per tonne per year to the standard rate of landfill tax up to 2013. These measures will encourage investment in sustainable waste management and will enable over 850,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent savings to be made each year, which will help towards achieving the Government’s carbon budget.

Following the Budget statement Hilary Benn said:

“The Government is committed to reducing the amount of waste sent to landfill and finding alternative sources of energy. The £10 million for food waste reprocessing will play a vital role in providing alternative energy, diverting a further 316,000 tonnes of food waste from landfill and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

“In the UK we produce over 100 million tonnes of organic material every year that, through anaerobic digestion, could be used to create enough energy to heat and power over two million homes.

“And it’s not only the environment that will benefit. Increasing our anaerobic digestion capability will also stimulate a greener economy by creating skilled jobs in construction, collection and reprocessing of organic waste.”

Anaerobic digestion is the process of breaking down organic material such as food waste and farm manures and slurries to create heat and power and transport fuel.

In February Defra announced the UK’s goal to become a world leader in this innovative technology. Businesses ranging from the energy sector, water, retail and agriculture support this goal and a task group is working on a programme to implement the plans of Government and industry. The £10 million funding package announced in the budget today is in addition to the £10 million already earmarked in 2008 to build demonstration plants. From April 1 2009 Government has doubled the level of support for anaerobic digestion through the Renewable Obligation.

An increase in the UK’s anaerobic digestion capability will also help to deliver landfill targets. This was bolstered in the Budget that will continue the increase in Landfill Tax in increments of eight pounds a year up to 2013.

Mr Benn continued:

“The Landfill Tax has really helped to reduce the amount of waste sent to landfill and encouraging businesses and local authorities to move towards a more sustainable approach to handling waste. In the last year alone efforts by local authorities have reduced their landfill from 18 million tonnes in 2006 to 15 tonnes in 2008, and by encouraging greater recycling, carbon emissions have fallen by 11 million tonnes– the same as taking 3.6 million cars off the road overnight.”

Notes

1. ‘Anaerobic Digestion – Shared Goals’ sets shared national ambitions for anaerobic digestion, both nationally and within individual sectors.  The document and the list of organisations which have endorsed it so far are available at: www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/ad/government.htm

2. Anaerobic digestion breaks down organic matter, such as animal manure and food waste, to produce biogas which can be used as a renewable energy source for heat and power, and as a transport fuel.  It produces a nutrient-rich digestate which can be used as fertiliser, and importantly it keeps organic waste out of landfill, which cuts greenhouse gas emissions.

3. Electricity from anaerobic digestion is eligible for support in the form of ROCs (Renewable Obligation Certificates).  On 1 April 2009, the Government introduced differentiated support levels for different renewables technologies (known as “banding”).  Anaerobic digestion is among the technologies that receive additional support in the form of multiple ROCs.  Anaerobic digestion now receives 2 ROCs/MWh (Renewable Obligation Certificates per Megawatt hour).

4. In-Vessel Composting (IVC) is a process that breaks down organic matter to produce a compost while contained in a closed environment. Food Waste is subject to the Animal By-Products Regulations that require composting to take place in closed containers or buildings with no access by vermin, and meet stringent requirements for temperature and pasteurisation to kill disease causing organisms. All food waste must be processed by IVC or AD facilities.

5. Landfill targets set by the European Union are:

* By 2010 to reduce the amount of Biodegradable Municipal Waste (BMW) going to landfill to 75% of that produced in 1995.
* By 2013 to reduce the amount of BMW going to landfill to 50% of that produced in 1995.
* By 2020 to reduce the amount of BMW going to landfill to 35% of that produced in 1995.

6. The £10 million additional funding for anaerobic digestion projects is expected to deliver around 178,500 tonnes per year in CO2 savings.

7. Increases in Landfill Tax up to 2013 are expected to deliver around 700,000 tonnes per year in CO2 savings.

Why should I bother?

Ok, so we all know that we need to start changing our attitude towards the environment, and are constantly being bombarded with words like ‘eco-friendly’ and ‘global warming’. You don’t have to be a sandal wearing, tree hugging eco-warrior to care about green issues. In fact, a 2007 survey commissioned by Hyder Consulting shows that 86% of people in the UK worry about the environment.

DEFRA figures show that the construction industry is responsible for 20% of UK waste, the equivalent of 90 million tonnes. BuilderScrap aims to reduce this by encouraging a culture of reuse and of diverting tonnage form landfill.

As well as the warm, fuzzy feeling you get from helping protect our little island from turning into a huge landfill site, there are several benefits using this system can have to your business.

Skips cost a fortune, and the bad news is they are going up! Landfill tax is increasing every year, and when you consider the cost of the labour to fill them, and the cost of goods being thrown away, you might as well start lighting cigars with wads of fifties. Ok, maybe that’s an exaggeration but you get the jist!

Even if you don’t charge for the items you upload to the site, you are saving costs. If you do make some money off the goods, it’s a bonus for you and goes straight on the bottom line.

One of the big benefits to an organisation improving its environmental performance is the associated improvement in company perception. Clients are becoming increasingly concerned with the green credentials of their suppliers, and are often requesting to see environmental policies along with Health and Safety and Quality Assurance documents.

How does it Work?

Once you have registered on the site, you can upload items via MMS from your mobile, email or through the website. It’s dead easy and the best news is – its free! The only charge is for sending an MMS. Items go live within a few minutes, and people can then contact you directly if they are interested in your products.

Is it really free?

Yep! It certainly is. The only cost is for sending an MMS message, if you use this. It doesn’t cost a penny to upload by email or online.

Sounds fantastic! When can I start saving money and the planet?!

We are currently testing the site with some local, friendly companies who are helping us make sure it is perfect for when we launch. We are hoping to launch a pilot scheme in the North West in September, and launch to the industry whole later in the year.

How Can I Find Out More?

Email your contact details to support@builderscrap.comand we will contact you with further information, or visit us at Interbuild this October at stand 05-F146.