A new government policy document proposes that the low carbon sector will continue to grow despite the recession.

The number of people employed in the sector could rise to more than 1 million people by 2015, compared to 880,000 today.

The government is promoting the expansion of Britain’s nuclear programme and the use of such renewable energy sources as wind, solar and tidal power.

According to the United Nations, many simple things can be done to reduce a person’s carbon footprint, the measure of the impact human activities have on the environment.

A carbon footprint is a measurement in tonnes (or kilograms) of carbon dioxide equivalent of all greenhouse gases we produce by burning fossil fuels for such activities as electricity, heating and transportation.

Just under half of personal emissions come from things under an individuals’ control, according to the United Nations, which recommends some simple steps to cut your footprint:

* Use a traditional wind-up alarm clock, not an electronic one: save almost 48 grams (g) of carbon dioxide (CO2) each day.

* Brush with a non-electric toothbrush: avoid nearly 48 g of CO2 emissions.

* Replace a 45-minute workout on a treadmill with a jog in a nearby park: save nearly 1 kilogram of carbon.

* Heat bread rolls in a toaster, not an oven, for 15 minutes: save nearly 170 g of CO2.

* Take the train rather than the car to the office: a distance of as little as 8 km (5 miles) can save 1.7 kg of CO2.

* Shut down your computer and flat screen during the lunch break and when you leave work: this cuts CO2 emissions generated by these appliances by one-third.

* Install a water-saving shower head. This will save 10 liters of water per minute and halve CO2 emissions of a three-minute hot shower.

* Switch from regular 60-Watt light bulbs to energy-saving compact fluorescent lamps.

* Dry clothes on a washing line instead of a tumble dryer: knock 2.3 kg of CO2 off your total.

* Pack a light suitcase: world savings of 2 million tonnes of CO2 a year are possible if every airline passenger cuts their baggage to below 20 kg and buys duty free goods on arrival.

The residents of Bundanoon in Australia, a picturesque tourist destination southwest of Sydney, have voted to rid their town of bottled water to reduce their carbon footprint. Tap’s good enough, they say.

Organizations like conservation group WWF have long campaigned against bottled water, saying resources are wasted in packaging and transporting a product which may be no safer or healthier than tap water while selling for up to a thousand times the price.

But the industry, not surprisingly, disagrees. A ban would reduce consumer choice and possibly tempt the thirsty masses to start drinking less healthy alternatives if all they could buy in the chilled cabinet of their local shop was sugary stuff like colas.   

“The environmental footprint of one bottle of locally produced water is much smaller than a tin of canned tomatoes imported from overseas, some imported cheese, or French champagne,” says a spokesman. “We need to keep it in perspective.”

Do you think a ban would work, or be desirable, in Britain?

No longer do little boys and girls dream of being doctors, nurses, firefighters and solicitors — commendable jobs that command a steady income and offer a career for life. These days, it seems, being famous is far more desirable.

The most desired careers among young people include being a musician, famous singer or band member, working in the media, and being a “celebrity or socialite”, according to research by Alliance & Leicester. Its poll of 1,077 people aged 16 to 21 showed that 25 percent want to be a famous musician, 24 percent desire a job in the media and 14 percent want to be famous for, well, being famous. Being a fashion designer (13 percent) or a teacher/ lecturer (13 percent) completes the top five most popular careers.

In contrast, just 8 percent fancy nursing and 5 percent want to be a vet, as today’s generation of young people move away from careers that involve years of study and are designed to last a lifetime to those where fame and fortune are achievable in the blink of an eye.

This desire for fame — and the apparent ability to rake it in for doing nothing other than being a well-known face — is a sad reflection of today’s society, and is epitomised by this year’s bunch of Big Brother housemates. When the show started nine years ago, it was billed as an experiment in psychology and sociology. Now, it is little more than a platform for wannabe pop stars and TV presenters.

“Even though BB bosses promised ‘real people’ this year, we can reveal that Mario and Lisa are serial wannabes who have been trying to become famous for 12 YEARS,” reports today’s Daily Star newspaper in a five-page Big Brother special, which features a picture of presenter Davina McCall waving an “Unleash the Freaks” sign.

With such role models, it’s perhaps unsurprising that young people crave celebrity status and the trappings that apparently come with it. Jade Goody, who became famous after appearing on the Channel 4 reality TV show in 2002, might have been voted the third most pointless celebrity (behind Celebrity BB 2006 winner Chantelle Houghton and Paris Hilton) in a December 2007 poll by Now magazine, but she is believed to have accumulated a personal fortune of around 3 million pounds from TV appearances, book deals, promotional work and a perfume line.

Her “career”, however, took a turn of the worse in the wake of a racism row stemming from the very show that made her. And for every one who “makes it”, countless others don’t. As many former Big Brother contestants prove, such “fame” can prove incredibly short-lived – and the dole queue can soon beckon.

Onto another form of entertainment now… and while England’s failure to qualify for Euro 2008 has shattered the dreams of fans across the country, there are some benefits. Britian will potentially save the equivalent of 30 double decker buses-worth of carbon dioxide emissions, as up to 70 million televisions remain switched off come kick-off time, according to utility provider E.ON.

That will not only make England’s carbon footprint considerably smaller, but should save fans a tidy sum in electricity costs — not to mention money on those match-time refreshments. A silver lining if ever there was one.