Top Gear Girl
Not A Dude
Sunday Times, September 18, 2005
Author: Jeremy Clarkson
So how's this for an idea? Car makers were told recently that when one of their products reaches the end of its life they are responsible for disposing of it properly. So why can't that idea be widened? If you find a discarded margarine tub, you take it back to Flora, which is then forced to pay you, I'd like to say ?500, but 50p would probably do the trick.
This would have a twofold effect. It would make me staggeringly rich and it would force Flora and Walkers to think very carefully about the advantages of paper and cardboard.
And Coca-Cola? Well what's wrong with glass? It's made from sand, soda ash and limestone, which means it's all completely natural. This means there's no taste transition from the packaging to the product and that's why Coke tastes better from a glass bottle than it does from a plastic one.
What's more, when a glass bottle is dropped into the sea it breaks into tiny pieces, which are then worn smooth by the waves until eventually they wind up in a pretty bowl from Conran on your dining room windowsill.
You probably think the cost would be prohibitive but, in fact, glass soft drink bottles cost about 5.5p, while those made from plastic are around half a penny more. Of course, this saving is offset by the problems of transportation glass breaks. But that's where my money-back scheme comes in. It would price plastic out of the market.
It turns out, however, the biggest problem with glass is that it can be used as a weapon when the pubs shut. Already, Glasgow council has banned all glass bottles from the city centre and now the government is thinking of making it law.
This is idiotic because those who go around at night glassing one another are the sort of fat oafs who are doing the littering. If therefore we switch to glass, they end up dead, and there is less litter on the beach. Everyone wins.
Author: Jeremy Clarkson
So how's this for an idea? Car makers were told recently that when one of their products reaches the end of its life they are responsible for disposing of it properly. So why can't that idea be widened? If you find a discarded margarine tub, you take it back to Flora, which is then forced to pay you, I'd like to say ?500, but 50p would probably do the trick.
This would have a twofold effect. It would make me staggeringly rich and it would force Flora and Walkers to think very carefully about the advantages of paper and cardboard.
And Coca-Cola? Well what's wrong with glass? It's made from sand, soda ash and limestone, which means it's all completely natural. This means there's no taste transition from the packaging to the product and that's why Coke tastes better from a glass bottle than it does from a plastic one.
What's more, when a glass bottle is dropped into the sea it breaks into tiny pieces, which are then worn smooth by the waves until eventually they wind up in a pretty bowl from Conran on your dining room windowsill.
You probably think the cost would be prohibitive but, in fact, glass soft drink bottles cost about 5.5p, while those made from plastic are around half a penny more. Of course, this saving is offset by the problems of transportation glass breaks. But that's where my money-back scheme comes in. It would price plastic out of the market.
It turns out, however, the biggest problem with glass is that it can be used as a weapon when the pubs shut. Already, Glasgow council has banned all glass bottles from the city centre and now the government is thinking of making it law.
This is idiotic because those who go around at night glassing one another are the sort of fat oafs who are doing the littering. If therefore we switch to glass, they end up dead, and there is less litter on the beach. Everyone wins.
