The Bookkeeper Q&A: Kathryn Frimond, Your Local Bookkeeper
Kathryn Frimond explains why she has niched her bookkeeping practice to focus on sustainability.
Replies (11)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
Is it really that time of year already? April 1st?
Good luck to Kathryn ... but "people within my tribe" ?!?
Hi Hugo - just a turn of phrase. The "sustainable" community is really a place where I feel I fit and can make a small difference
Hello Zoe
I wish you the best with your business, and whilst I am not quite as committed to practical greenness as you, I like your approach to a niche market. Being the best provider of services and support in your chosen market will take you a long way, especially as you really believe in your ethos and your clients will be as enthusiastic about your services as you are.
Personally, I think the biggest threat to Global Warming is the population explosion and the inexorable increase in resource demands of all kinds, from more and more people. Well informed and influential people such as David Attenborough and Chris Packham are not shying away from the facts, but finding a practical solution is possibly the biggest real problem that faces our planet. We hear a lot about what damage cows do to our atmosphere but it is nothing when compared to the damage people do, but who has the right solution?
Good luck with your business Zoe, and stick to your principles as that will ensure your business plan is a success.
Yes indeed.
Concentrating too much on the content and confused the obvious, but the thoughts are still the same.
Thank you for your comments and well wishes.
I totally agree that overpopulation plays a huge part in the climate crisis. It's not un-disputed by scientists that humans have accelerated the changes we now face.
Overpopulation affects everything else. Where do these people live, what do they eat etc - human over consumption and greed is a huge problem.
Quick one on cows - Did you know that the majority of deforestation is create areas to grow crops to feed meat? I'm not sure the exact fact, but if food for human consumption was grown on this land it would feed something like 3 times to world population. The problem isn't eating meat (I am a meat eater) but it is the way in which the meat is raised and the sheer volume we as humans eat that is causing the issue.
If you are interested in learning more, please do follow me on instagram, or I have a few book recommendations I'd be happy to share.
More total claptrap from another hysterical obsessive. Get it straight, we are NOT all going to die. CO2 does not drive climate temperature, it follows it. CO2 is the primary engine of botanical growth.
As Richard Lindzen, widely acknowledged as the World's foremost climatologist, put it:
"The idea of man made global warming is the worthy successor of Lysenkoism, displaying all the same qualities of quackery, bogus data, political bullying, professional blacklisting, leftist sponsorship, damage to science, and economic thuggery. Something to keep in mind the next time Al Gore flies into some city on his private Gulfstream jet to rail against the rest of us for destroying the planet"; and
" What historians will definitely wonder about in future centuries is how deeply flawed logic, obscured by shrewd and unrelenting propaganda, actually enabled a coalition of powerful special interests to convince nearly everyone in the world that CO2 from human industry was a dangerous, planet-destroying toxin. It will be remembered as the greatest mass delusion in the history of the world - that CO2, crucial to the life of plants, was considered for a time to be a deadly poison"; and.
" Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early 21st century's developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally averaged temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to contemplate a roll-back of the industrial age."
I don't personally hold a strident position on either 'side' of the 'warming planet' confrontational opinions espoused by some ... but really ?!?
"Richard Lindzen, widely acknowledged as the World's foremost climatologist" - by whom is he so acknowledged (citing source please ... and I don't care whether that is the FBI or the Flat Earth Society, or points in between)?
Mr. Lindzen has never practiced as (or even claimed to be) a climatologist. He is a retired professor who used to specialise in the dynamics of the middle atmosphere.
So your claim is like saying that a specialist in 'cell division within frog-spawn' is therefore the World's foremost expert in human fertility ... a little overlap but no commonality of expertise (let alone recognition of it).
Oh, and by the way, shock news ... we ARE all going to die (but mostly from other causes because the human body is such a frail vessel prone to debilitation).
Straining to match your proficiency at consulting Google, I found the following:
"Richard S. Lindzen is former Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), a position he held from 1983 until his retirement in 2013. [3], [76], [77]
Lindzen’s academic interests lie within the topics of “climate, planetary waves, monsoon meteorology, planetary atmospheres, and hydrodynamic instability,” according to his faculty profile at MIT. [3]"
Perhaps a little more reading, before commenting, might help you. It might also alter your attitude towards so the called climate "crisis".
The remainder of your reply is so puerile as not to justify comment.
So that's what I've been missing all this time ... intelligent discussion.
You're obviously not in listening mode, so it's probably not worth pointing out that "Lindzen's academic interests" does not equate with his academic career and professional skills ... I have interests in many arcane areas without claiming any expertise in them.
More importantly, the areas listed do not add up to 'climatology' in which you claimed him to be the world's foremost expert ... hence my analogy (because yes I had read his MIT bio) about frog-spawn etc. But you seem to find that puerile for some strange reason - which is not my problem.
I somewhat doubt that this dialogue is heading anywhere fruitful, so I wish you well in the fights ahead of you (as I suspect they'll consume a lot of your time).
Hi - Thank you for taking time to read and respond.
My understanding is that the IPCC which is a group of recognised climate scientists are now confirmed that "“It is unequivocal.” that humans have accelerated the effects of climate change.
Whether you dispute this or not is obviously your choice. I personally believe that if I can create a better, cleaner, and more stable environment for future generations then why wouldn't I try - and if I'm wrong and the climate crisis isn't real, then I haven't lost anything.