Stew2 wrote:
No, the point of them is to buy off enviro-mentalists who don't like to see progress.
I expect a cost-benefit analysis of "rainwater harvesting" for example has not been done. These devices are best utilised on a large scale to benefit from existing terrain, local climate and economies of scale - and are usually called reservoirs. As a club we can't be throwing money on expensive sops to lobbyist groups
You really haven't got a clue have you? Many stadiums and new stands around the country have installed rainwater harvesting and the energy saving measures I mentioned without even publicising it (hence not to pander to the greens) because the measures save them money. Last time I checked, neither water nor electricity were free. I did some work with a league two football team recently and they were desperate to reduce the bill for irrigating the stadium pitch and two training pitches, but they'd worked out that due to the topography of the stadium site it would cost an arm and a leg to retrofit rain gathering facilities to an existing sand, but if they were to replace the stand, it would barely cost any different - hence new builds being the ideal opportunity to work this sort of thing in.
As for the "enviro-mentalists who don't like to see progress" comment - that's wonderful irony from a post arguing against utilising new technology.
