Plus another 20 to discuss on Live! the rights and wrongs of whether the lightbulb was changed in the right way, if the right new lightbulb was fitted and indeed, if it should have been changed at all.
Surely some group of hippies would start protesting about the change, all seven (with megaphone) of them would demand a union EGM claiming the whole student body is against the changing and suggesting a march on parliment. This would involve union president the commitee the 7 hippies, and would annoy the s**t out of everyone else that just doesn't care.
Jaime, I like your thinking, but the reality is this:
There are the facilities (ducts etc) installed in (new) buildings to use super efficient lighting, but then the lighting budget was raided for carpet, so the ducts are in the wall for intelligent lighting, but we end up with the traditional lights, at extra expense. Same applies for equipment to use the waste heat from the CHP. College budgets for energy efficiency and monitoring: ?0, rebranding ~?2m over two years. Hang on, I haven't paid my fees yet, back soon.
The South Ken tube tunnel (Museum subway) isn't maintained by the College and (TTBOMK) has no asbestos.
The maintenance tunnels are only "underused" in that the students aren't allowed down there (although I don't recall ever being officially told this) (and that's not to say that they never go there...)
Unfortunately, I didn't get a chance to read in any detail (or grab a copy of) the document witht the cost proposal. I only saw the front page and the intorduction.
I'll keep my eyes peeled - a couple of the companies I work with have IC as a client, so I'm sure there'll be more exciting and interesting news of how the College is spending the money it gets from tuition fees...
you forgot essex: Five - One to change it, one to hold her handbag whilst she changes it, one to make sure her thong is in clear view of all the surrounding men, and two to leer loudly at passers by, tempting them to