The Coffee House - An Environment Forum

2006-12-29T20:54:00.000Z

The Croc's last laugh!

Steve Irwin died recently doing what he loves. Many people cried, especially females. Many people didn't. They didn't like how he taunted crocodiles for his and others pathetic entertainment. With such a wide gulf in opinion we decided to run a little poll; What do you think when you hear Steve Irwin being claimed as a conservationist?

The results;

Hero: 45%

Fraudster/Nutta/Dipstick: 55%

The people have spoken.

2006-12-12T08:23:00.000Z

One year on ...... and we're moving house!

It has been an amazing year for us at 'The Coffee House'. We continue to inform, debate and learn about all matters 'environment' over at our new home

Please do join us!

2006-12-11T12:34:00.000Z

Jumping On The Hybrid Bandwagon

Nissan has announced a development program aimed at producing its own hybrid vehicle in 2010. For a long time Nissan was sceptical of the advantages of hybrids, and has consequently found itself playing catchup. Nissan's first hybrid, to be launched in the US next year, uses technology from its arch-rival Toyota.

Nissan's U-turn demonstrates the massive demand for hybrid vehicles, particularly in the US, where the appeal of fuel economy has been enhanced by soaring gasolene prices. "We do not deny that from the marketing stand point, at the present point of time customers' needs and values could not be met with what we have," said Chief Operating Officer Toshiyuki Shiga. This is reflected in a 15% drop in Nissan's operating profits, attributable to a general shortage of new models.

Other 'green' developments in the pipeline are:

a vehicle running entirely on bio-ethanol fuel for the Brazilian market by 2009
a car that will travel 100 kilometers on just three litres of petrol to launch in Japan by 2010 with CO2 emissions comparable to a gas-electric hybrid
a "next-generation" fuel cell vehicle
A 7% cut in CO2 emissions from its plants by 2010 from 2005 levels

It would be nice to think that Nissan is doing all this to save the planet. The fact that it's what Nissan's competitors are already doing, even struggling GM, may have more to do with it.

2006-12-10T18:13:00.000Z

Carbon Offsetting - The Devil's Orchard
A provocative article in the Metro of 30th November 2006 suggested that carbon offsetting does not work as currently practised. Oliver Rackham of Cambridge University says "Telling people to plant trees to solve climate change is like telling them to drink more water to keep down rising sea levels". In 2002 Coldplay announced that they would offset their latest album by planting 10,000 mango trees but a couple of years later only a few hundred were still alive.
Often offset tree plantations have often been a single species. In Amazonia some indigenous groups have named these plantations "The Devils Orchards" as they have reduced nearby stream flows by an average of 38 per cent. A spokesman for them, Jocelyn Therese said "We are not only victims of climate change, we are now victims of the carbon market".
So is carbon offsetting just a way to appease our consciences without being prepared to change our lifestyles?

2006-12-10T00:06:00.000Z

The Gordon 'Green' report.

The following summary of 'new' green initiatives from Brown's Pre-budget Report, 2006 have been kindly provided by the author David Thorpe over at The Low Carbon Kid .

'Aviation

From February, air passenger duty on flights to the EU - 75% of all flights - will double from £5 to £10. Duty on long-haul flights for the lowest class of travel will rise from £20 to £40 while business-class trips to destinations outside the EU jump from £40 to £80. The scope of the European rates of air passenger duty will also be widened to include all of the signatories to the European Common Aviation Area Agreement, from 1 February.

Emissions Trading

In parallel with talks with the French Finance Ministry (on economic instruments around climate change, particularly to improve the EU ETS) and the New Zealand Government (on emissions trading), the Government will bring together leading City and international players to examine the accounting, legal and institutional steps needed to support a mature planet-wide emissions trading market.

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)

The Department for Trade and Industry (DTI) is to tender for engineers to evaluate the costs of a CCS demonstration plant, and the best development route - for example a challenge fund. Meanwhile the UK and Norway hope to have completed by July a study into the infrastructure, market framework and value chain are needed to transport and store carbon dioxide below the North Sea.

Microgeneration

The Finance Bill 2007 will excuse from income tax any revenue generated by small scale renewable technologies on homes, in order to support wider uptake.

Climate change levy (CCL)

CCL rates will increase in line with inflation from 1 April to maintain the levy's environmental impact. The new rates will be:• Electricity 0.441p per KWh• Gas 0.154p per KWh• LPG 0.985p per kg• Solid fuels 1.201p per kg.

Energy Efficiency Commitment (EEC)

New investment of £7.5 million goes to Warm Front and the Energy Efficiency Commitment to allow 300,000 more households to receive free insulation and central heating. By the end of 2008, the Chancellor said 2.7m homes would have been insulated through the Warm Front scheme. The Winter Fuel Allowance for pensioners will also be continued, but not increased. Households with somebody aged over 60 will receive £200 and those aged over 80 will receive £300. But consumer champion energywatch expressed disappointment that there are still many fuel poor who "appear to have been ignored".

Energy efficiency in buildings

The Treasury is still investigating whether an energy services model for delivering greater efficiencies can be achieved. So it is looking into ways offinancing energy audits and other energy-saving measures. It hopes, via the Code for Sustainable Homes, that by 2016 all new homes will be 'zero-carbon'. Stamp duty will therefore be abolished for most new zero-carbon homes.For the rented sector, it plans to expand the Landlords Energy Saving Allowance (LESA) to corporate landlords, its sunset clause from 2009 to 2015, and extend its allowance of up to £1,500 for cavity wall and loft insulation to each property rather than each building, including floor insulation in the measures to be compensated for.In the public sector, higher standards are to be explored for new and refurbished schools to reduce their carbon emissions by up to 60% over existing standards, and in some cases up to carbon neutrality.

Road transport

A 1.25p per litre increase in petrol duty for unleaded fuel, in line with inflation, the first increase since 2003. Mr Brown ruled out a return to the fuel duty escalator that used to imposed inflation-beating increases each year, much to the dismay of environmentalists and the Environmental Audit Committee. The differential with LPG is reduced by 1p but compressed natural gas (CNG) keeps its differential.The Treasury is looking at extending the current duty incentive for biogas - equivalent to almost 40p per litre - and will update the position at Budget 2007.Regulations to ensure the widespread availability of sulphur-free diesel and sulphur-free 'super' grades of petrol will enter into force in late 2007. The 20p per litre fuel duty differential for biofuels will be extended to enable a pilot involving the use of biomass in conventional fuel production to go ahead. The definition of biofuels will be amended to include biodiesel that is capable of being blended in excess of 5%.A rate of 7.69p per litre will apply to biofuels used on the railways, as operators are to conduct pilot schemes exploring their use in trains.On company cars, the government is looking at the case for incentivising the take-up of 'flex-fuel' vehicles, capable of using high-blend bioethanol E85.Critics complained that the existing differentials in VED between different categories of cars were not widened. The Environmental Audit Committee pointed out that the Department for Transport does not quantify the carbon emissions resulting from transport as a sector in its PSA. Yet the Department is able to claim credit for being on course to meet the UK's Kyoto target, even while presiding over the worst performing sector of the economy in terms of trends in emissions. This was not changed in the PBR, nor was the fact that airport vehicles are allowed to run on [untaxed] "red diesel".'Chelsea Tractors' escaped the higher tax measures many had expected, in light of falling sales of 4x4 cars, said Mr Brown.

Waste

Landfill Tax is to be increased from 1 April by £3 to £24 per tonne, and may increase more steeply from 2008 onwards, or go beyond the £35 per tonne already committed to for the medium to long-term. The Aggregates Levy will be extended for a further year (2007-08).'

2006-12-05T21:09:00.000Z

'British Energy' -

couldn't organise a piss up in a....... nuclear power station (mine you, that might not be a such a good idea!).

Just listened to a report on BBC Radio 4's File on Four programme that has sent my very core soaring to high temperatures! Two of the nastiest words to be uttered in energy circles for some time now have been......'British Energy'. Mind you right up there would be energy market, Margaret Thatcher, central government and nuclear energy.

British Energy, bailed out by government 4 years ago is on its way to meltdown once again. The recent surge in energy prices had BE and the government smiling. The latter thought they would sell their (our!) 65% stake in BE (bought for £5 billion) on the share market (for £3 billion - a loss note) . Not any more. Energy prices have dropped and only 1 out of 14 (yes, that's 1 of 14) AGR nuclear power stations is operating normally. Four are currently closed due to 'unforseen circumstances'. These stations represent 5% of the UK power supply and if we have a wee cold snape this winter it may well be lights out in Bromley (north London is apparently too important). OK, I know it's still summer out there but the 'experts' are a little nervous.

Hinkley, Hartlepool, Hunterston and Torness are all 'out to lunch' due to maintenance shutdowns. Cracks in boiler tubes has become a familar problem. At Torness alarms signified a fault with gas circulator. Maintenance shift engineers were not on site as they had been removed to an 'on call' status as a cost measure so, the shift operator did what? He ignored the alarm and continued operations! Needless to say further damage was done and Torness has been closed down since. You get the picture.

Who's to blame. The 'energy market' for one, as it doesn't encourage extra capacity investment. The government, as it has no energy policy.........Milton Friedman , Margaret Hatcher oh, and Tony Blah for recently advocating more of the same. Arrrrrrrrrrggghhhhhh!!

2006-12-04T13:56:00.000Z

'Climate change: Citizens Agenda.'

The above title is the name put to a recent Defra (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs ) committee looking at how change in behaviour can mitigate the effects of climate change. There were a number of 'witnesses' called to this 2 1/2 hour long committee; for Ofgem, chief executive Alistair Buchanan and managing director Steve Smith; senior people from the Institution of Civil Engineers and the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors. The committee was chaired by Michael Jack.

There was a wide range of topics covered, with many looking at how the individual could help to speed up the reduction of carbon emissions within the UK. The central concern here was better provision of information for consumers looking to reduce their carbon 'footprint'. Currently there is no one place within the UK that an individual can go to for both price information and technical comparisons or options when looking to invest in efficiency and renewable measures. It was felt that Ofgem (who operates under the direction and governance of the Gas and Electricity Markets Authority) should be playing a central role here. There are plans however for Energywatch to become the full 'consumer interface' by 2008. Currently price comparisons can be obtained from companies such as uSwitch .

Consumers who are looking to invest in energy saving technologies and renewables, including micropower are finding the information gathering task incredibly difficult, especially when trying to weight up the different options increasingly available to them, on a limited budget. Which boiler should they go for? Should they instead use their funds for cavity wall insulation? Is solar going to pay back? Does micro windpower need planning consent? Just a sample of what 'joe public' are wading their way through. This committee mentioned that solar photovoltaics can take up to 46 years to pay back on current technology, even if the panals last that long. Therefore a consumer may want to spend their hard earnt money on cavity wall insulation instead. Might not be as trendy but, a more effective solution to reduce their carbon footprint! More than 300,000 people sort energy efficiency advice during 2004.

Billing information (e.g. your home gas bill) or the lack of it was seen as a major problem because, consumers are unable to track trends in their consumption habits and make carbon reduction investment decisions from those trends. It was mentioned that EDF were making inroads here and that British Gas are investing 100s of millions of pounds in improving their customer information systems. Everyone on the committee thought this amount of money excessive and a running theme was the excessive profits earnt by power companies.

Looking at power generation it was suggested that the most important solution for the UK right now for getting a large and real carbon reduction was to get on stream (connected to the grid) the hugh wind farm investments happening up in the north of Scotland. It will provide a 5GW capacity on a total UK capacity of 61GW. For this to happen a new transmission line needs to be built and the main concern for Ofgem is that planning hearings do not bog down its implementation for many years to come. Off-shore wind is the key, with on-shore just too weighed down by Nimby-ism.

Concerns from the civil engineers and surveyors covered the lack of R&D money for universities for start-ups and encouraging a wider skills base for all the new technologies and systems maintenance. More regulation was needed to improve a shoddy building trade and a better building inspection regime to make sure new regulations are followed by builders. It was noted that some 16th century homes are more energy efficient than new homes, thanks to better building techniques and the use of straw!!

2006-12-02T18:14:00.000Z

Global warming on trial

Last Wednesday the case Massachusetts v. EPA reached the Supreme Court of the USA. A combination of 12 states and many environmental groups are arguing the Clean Air Act gives the Environmental Protction Agency the power to regulate carbon dioxide from motor vehicles. Oil and car industries are denying that global warming is a proven fact. The Bush administration has refused to introduce legislation to regulate CO2 emissions from new motor vehicles. The stakes are huge. See the NRDC website.

2006-12-02T17:47:00.000Z

13% CO2 UK reduction under carbon trading scheme
The EC has accepted Britain's offer to cut industry's CO2 emissions from industry by 13% over the next five years but imposed cuts on nine other EC countries to make the scheme work better - including Germany and Ireland. This follows huge criticisms of the scheme when it was introduced and allowances were set so high that many companies did not have to reduce their outputs. See the report in the Guardian.

2006-11-30T21:42:00.000Z

Steve Irwin in Action

Steve Irwin - Conservationist hero or self-serving egotist?

Give us your opinion in our little 'Steve Irwin' poll (sitting somewhere to the right of here!).

'Thanks mate'

2006-11-30T19:16:00.000Z

A new report from the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) says that livestock generate more greenhouse gas emissions than transport and are also a major source of land and water degradation.

The livestock sector accounts for 9 percent of CO2 deriving from human-related activities, 65 percent of nitrous oxide, 37 percent of methane and 64 percent of ammonia. Meat and dairy animals now account for about 20 percent of all terrestrial animal biomass.

The FAO report, Livestock’s Long Shadow –Environmental Issues and Options, says “The environmental costs per unit of livestock production must be cut by one half, just to avoid the level of damage worsening beyond its present level”.

This is set against a background of accelerating growth in the agricultural sector in general, and livestock in particular, driven by population pressures and rising standards of living around the world. Global meat production is projected to more than double from 229 million tonnes in 1999/2001 to 465 million tonnes in 2050, while milk output is set to climb from 580 to 1043 million tonnes.

The future is vegetarian.

For the full report, click here.

2006-11-30T18:00:00.000Z

Carbon Trading heats up.

Watch this.

2006-11-29T23:22:00.000Z

In October the Zoological Society of London (ZSL) reported on the desperate plight of hippos in the Virunga National Park, on the border between Rwanda and The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). In a two week period, an estimated 400 hippos had been slaughtered by the Mai Mai, a Congolese rebel militia group. The animals are killed for their meat and for the ivory from their tusks. A recent survey sponsored by ZSL reported fewer than 900 remaining hippos in the park, a huge decline from the 22,000 recorded there in 1988. If the killing continues at its present rate, it is feared that hippos will be extinct in the region by the end of this year.

http://sundial.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2410757,00.html

The United Nations Security Council established MONUC (United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo) to enforce the 1999 Lusaka Accord. With a budget exceeding $1 bn, it is the UN's largest and most expensive peacekeeping mission.

More information about MONUC

UNESCO has alerted the Congolese authorities and MONUC on the worrying situation of the hippopotamus populations of Virunga National Park. As a result, UN peacekeepers based in North Kivu agreed to carry out a number of anti-poaching patrols to help reduce the devastating poaching epidemic that has broken out in the World Heritage properties. Without this UN help, the local game wardens are ill-equiped to fight the poachers. More than 100 guards in Virunga have been killed since 1996 while trying to prevent poaching, and one was killed as recently as this May. The guards were being paid only about 55p per month, although this has increased to about £15 per month with funds from UNESCO.

ZSL have launched an appeal to raise desperately need funds to support anti-poaching activities. Your money could buy any of the following items:

Food for a patrol ranger for a day: £1
Army issue water bottle: £3
Sleeping mat: £8
Jungle boots for ranger: £15
Waterproof patrol shelter: £20
Patrol medical kits: £25
Waterproof jacket: £30
Full ranger uniform (trousers, shirt, beret): £35
Patrol bicycle: £50
Medical training course: £250

Or 15 pence will buy you a kilo of black market hippo meat. A bargain.

To find out more about the hippos' desperate plight and to make a donation, click here.

2006-11-29T14:15:00.000Z

Dear No.10

Click on image to read poll results.

Thank you to all who took part in the Climate Change poll here at the Coffee House. We now have over 100 votes in and therefore have closed the poll. The top two are no surprise;

(1st ) more renewables/electric vehicle use
(2nd) targeting of big business.

It’s the next three that are interesting;

(3rd) introduce a personal carbon credits scheme.
(4th) tax cheap airfares so people travel less.
(5th) ban city cars with engines greater than 2000cc (2lt).

This shows I believe that voters are willing to see tough policy measures put in place by government to tackle the causes of climate change. The government would be wise to take note. Of course these poll results are on their way to No.10 and City Hall. We shall see if they bother to reply! Once again, thank you to all who took part.

2006-11-28T13:28:00.000Z

Serving up humble pie.

Caught an Horizon programme today (BBC) looking at how New Orleans is trying to pull itself together again after hurricane Katrina devastated much of the city. The over riding attitude that came from the folk interviewed is that man cannot take on nature and win. This is from the nation that espouses the 'American Dream', with the world's richest economy, that put the man on the moon, that won the last world war. Yet, one hurricane destroyed one major US city in 24hrs. The people of New Orleans know what that means. They have had to eat humble pie. It's not fair that they have had to do that but, nature doesn't pick and choose.

US Army engineers, scientists, town planning consultants and many citizens said time and again that there is no point in taking on nature because you cannot win. There are now plans to redraw the map of New Orleans to take account of the need for natural flood defences along the coast and rivers. This will involve the loss of 30,000 homes, affecting well over 100,000 people. The reclamation projects will take decades and billions of dollars.

There is just one problem. The funds needed for such works are slow in coming. Why? We can only guess but, 'Iraq' is a word that may be central to the answer. Billions upon billions are being swallowed up by that war. Sure, it goes into the US economy for military hardware and support services. Dick Cheney will know something about that. In the meantime 'protecting' New Orleans is just not important to the Bush administration. Bush would rather serve up humble pie to his citizens over thanks giving. That way he keeps them at his feet. And when he's ready........ he'll kick 'em in the guts again.

2006-11-26T11:26:00.000Z

In the latest issue of its quarterly magazine Your Environment, the UK Environment Agency has compiled a list of their top 100 eco-heroes. The list contains some predictable entries and some surprising ones. Charles Darwin (ranked 87), Henry David Thoreau (49), Petra Kelly (45) and Sir Peter Scott (21) will raise few eyebrows. Father Christmas (100), Joe Strummer (98) and G.K. Chesterton (52) may need a little thinking about.

Good to see there's no room for recently deceased blokeish Aussie animal-botherer Steve Irwin. Disappointing that bearded bumbling climate change sceptic David Bellamy charts at number 18 (not "with a bullet", sadly).

Here in reverse order are, or is, the Top Ten:

(10) Gro Harlem Brundtland
(9) Al Gore
(8) William Morris
(7) HRH Prince of Wales
(6) Wangari Maathai
(5) James Lovelock
(4) Sir David Attenborough
(3) Jonathon Porritt
(2) E.F. Schumacher

And the winner is ....

(1) Rachel Carson

Make of that what you will.

For the latest issue of Your Environment, with details of the full list and how it was compiled, click here.

2006-11-22T14:33:00.000Z

Personal Carbon Allowances

Diagram: Aubrey Meyer, Director of The Global Commons Institute.

The UK is looking to reduce its overall carbon emissions by 60% by 2050. This will be difficult to achieve without a highly organised and coordinated approach to carbon reduction within all areas of society, involving all UK citizens. A system that is beginning to gain credence within political and academic circles is something called Personal Carbon Allowance (PCA). Basically all citizens will be allocated an annual carbon allowance to which all carbon based purchased will be deducted from throughout the year. Each time you pay for petrol for example, the carbon will be deducted using your PCA card. The same with your gas and electricity bills, and even no doubt a bag of coal for the BBQ.

Slowly but surely your allowance would be reduced until the desired carbon reduction is achieved overall for the UK. The PCA would operate as part of a carbon trading market so those who don't use all their allocation (e.g. no use of a car) can sell them to people who use more than their PCA limit (e.g. large house & 3 cars) . At the moment energy intensive businesses (e.g. power companies) are part of a similar carbon trading market and eventually no doubt all businesses will be a part of this, as will government and councils.

This appears at least, to be a smart idea designed to tackle the complex problem that is climate change. Obviously the UK would be looking towards other countries to take on a similar system. For more on this please go to the ECI's site.

If you think this is a good idea you can sign a petition on the website for 10 Downing Street to show your support for the scheme.

2006-11-19T18:53:00.000Z

Apocalypse cancelled?

Christopher Monckton published two articles in the Sunday Telegraph on 5.11.2006 and 12.11.2006 challenging much of the science behind global warming. He claims the UN edited out the medieval warm period when temperatures were warmer than today; that they have ignored the fact that the sun has got warmer and have exaggerated the rise in temperature in the 20th century. Has the UN and the IPCC got it wrong or is this just the latest attempt to discredit good science by opponents of global warming?

Decide for yourself by reading the original articles by Christopher Monckton.

and George Monbiot's reply.

For a more scientific analysis read this article

2006-11-17T11:49:00.000Z

Winds of change?

The US has had its mid-term elections. The Democrats are in but, what might this mean for the environment? A lot of negotiation on legislation goes on behind the scenes and particularly through various committees. It's largely out of sight and no doubt pretty tedious but, important none the less for what happens eventually with decisions regards environmental matters.

According to a report from Planetsave.com we could begin to see some positive changes, albeit rather slowly. Their report comments that;

'Democrats will focus on cutting pollution blamed for global warming, accelerating toxic waste cleanups, reversing Bush administration tax and regulatory breaks for energy producers and switching the government's course back to strict protections for endangered species.

Energy companies will likely be put on the defensive. Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., the presumed next speaker of the House, has already promised to repeal oil industry subsidies.

Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., the likely next chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, plans to investigate Republicans' oil subsidies included in the energy bill Bush signed into law last year. Dingell said he also was interested in revisiting Vice President Dick Cheney's secretive energy task force.

Sen. Barbara Boxer, a liberal California Democrat and one of the biggest environmental advocates on Capitol Hill, was named Tuesday to chair the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. She replaces Oklahoma Republican James Inhofe, who says global warming is a hoax and wanted to abolish the Environmental Protection Agency established by President Richard Nixon.'

Do we detect winds of change for the better? More detail from planetsave.com .

2006-11-17T11:05:00.000Z

Nuke Head Rolls At British Energy

The chief nuclear officer at British Energy (BE) has left the company. Roy Anderson, who was responsible for the company's nuclear generating operations, has stepped down with immediate effect. CEO Bill Coley will take direct control of nuclear operations.

The move is part of a major internal reorganisation as the company works to return four of its damaged reactors to service at 70% capacity by the end of January 2007. Problems at six of the group's seven ageing Advanced Gas-cooled Reactors (AGRs) have seriously affected the share price. Although bouncing back from below £4, at £4.60 the share price is well below its 12-month high of £7.60 in August 2006, and has fallen 2% today on the latest news.

The slump in the share price has delayed the UK government's plans to sell off part of its 65% stake in the company. There seems to be no relief in sight; BE predict there will be a “significant impact” on output and financial performance for the rest of the financial year.

How the problems will affect the UK public's attitude towards nuclear power remains to be seen. Perhaps BE's latest PR initiative will make a difference. "The Power Game" is a free game on CD-ROM. As BE's accompanying blurb puts it:

To illustrate the complex interactions between the UK's future electricity options we have developed "The Power Game". "The Power Game" lets you decide the future of the UK's electricity generation industry. As existing power stations close you must chose which new stations to build in order to meet the country's power demands. You could build a mix involving coal, gas, nuclear and a host of renewable technologies. You must choose carefully, however, as you must meet the country's commitment to reduce CO₂ emissions as well as ensuring security of supply and affordable prices.

Anyone who really thinks the long-term future of the UK's, or indeed the world's, power supply is a game, can find out more here.

BE share price
BE Interim results

2006-11-14T09:01:00.000Z

The Votes Are In, The Poll Is Closed

Back at the end of July, I set up a small poll on choices in food purchasing. This was never meant to be a comprehensive scientific survey, just a quick way of highlighting the factors that Joe Public has to consider when choosing from the huge range of goods offered by the typical retailer.

The editorial team has decided that the poll has been cluttering up our site for long enough, so the time has come to shut it down and review the 'results'.

29 vistors to this site have taken part in the poll. Of those, the overwhelming majority (69%) favour buying local goods, even though they're grown inorganically. Another 21% would choose organic, and would find transporting from Eastern Europe acceptable. Only 10% would choose Kenyan Fairtrade organic.

It would be completely unreasonable to claim this result as a defeat for those who advocate increased trade with developing countries, or as a victory for those who support localisation of food production. Hopefully, however, it has given some food for thought about the complexity of buying decisions and the issues involved.

2006-11-11T16:52:00.000Z

BREATHE (..............) AIR

We all want, need, to breathe fresh air. Great gulps of delicious fresh air. The oxygen races through our veins, pumped by our heart, feeding every part of our body. Sun, water, food, shelter and fresh air! Many of us take for granted that the air we breathe will stay healthy for our needs but, we shouldn't. As we pump more and more dirty carbon emissions into our fresh air supply we increasingly need our forestry cover to cleanse the air of these dirty emissions. These forests are our lungs. We really should start listening to the growing number of eminent folk who are looking to push the issue of forestry protection up the global political agenda.

Sir Nicholas Stern of The Stern Report recently said that the quickest way to tackle climate change was to halt deforestation of virgin forests. Such activity accounts for 18% of the causes of climate change. The new director of the Royal Botanic Gardens at Kew, Professor Stephen Hopper suggests that there needs to be 'urgent financial incentives to stop land being cleared for farming'.

There are significant difficulties with cross border issues. The Coolearth Project, mentioned in a previous post, has probably run into difficulties before it has even got off the ground because, local governments are rightly suspicious of outside intervention. The Brazilian government is a case in point regards the Amazon. There are some brilliant ideas contained within the Coolearth mission but, its desire to utilize 21st century power (with the use of the internet) comes up against centuries old state controlled systems of governance and ownership. So what do we do? In stead of oil wars are we going to see forest wars? No, of course not! But we are beginning to see a head of steam build on the issue of protecting what many are seeing as global commons, essential to our planet's survival.

So just who is going to pull the parties together on this one? The UN? Probably not. Their grand attempt via the Kyoto Protocol didn't even seriously tackle the issues of deforestation. Initiatives such as the Coolearth project? I think they try to leapfrog government institutions at their peril. No, it has to be something in between. But what!?

2006-11-10T12:21:00.000Z

The N-Club are singing their wicked little tune again. Whispering sweet nothings into the ears of government officials around the world. Promising the world, including solving the intractable N-waste problem. Here is a well written article from the Ecologist; http://www.theecologist.org/archive_detail.asp?content_id=627 .

2006-11-08T20:04:00.000Z

Result! Rummy the dummy is out!

Cartoon: De tekening van Matiz, 26-04-2006.

The lunatic of the wild west has finally fallen ..... taken out by his own Commander in Chief. Sometimes, just sometimes democracy actually works. I know, strange but true and it is probably why victories such as these are even sweeter. Let us raise our glasses and drink to his demise. :-))

2006-11-07T16:32:00.000Z

The 10 Most Polluted Places on the Planet

The Blacksmith Institute has published a report listing the world's ten most polluted places for 2006. And the winners are:

Chernobyl, Ukraine
Dzerzhinsk, Russia
Haina, Dominican Republic
Kabwe, Zambia
La Oroya, Peru
Linfen, China
Maiuu Suu, Kyrgyzstan
Norilsk, Russia
Ranipet, India
Rudnaya Pristan/Dalnegorsk, Russia

I feel another t-shirt design coming on.

For information about the Blacksmith Institute and its anti-pollution work, click here.
For the full report, click here.

2006-11-06T12:40:00.000Z

Decisions, decisions

So you've got £76 billion to spare, and you're wondering how to spend it. The UK government wants to blow the lot on the ultimate box of boys' toys, our nuclear 'deterrent'. Just about everyone else thinks that's a crap idea, and would like to spend it on something useful.
An article in last Saturday's Guardian suggests that it might just possibly be a better idea to spend the money on fighting climate change. For the full text, click here.

£76 billion buys you new Trident missiles, new nuclear submarines and 30 years worth of running costs.
On the other hand, £76 billion spent on good stuff such as energy conservation, public transport and sustainable energy projects will reduce emissions by 60% over the next 25 years.

The UK government has stated repeatedly that climate change is the biggest single problem in the world today, yet spends less than £1 billion per year in addressing it. And emissions are still rising. The UK has also spent billions in waging a war which was 'justified' on the basis of ridding the world of weapons of mass destruction, yet is determined not only to keep its own WMD but to update them.

It's time for governments everywhere, not just in the UK, to wake up to the realities of the world we live in today. Dump nukes, spend a bit of the resulting peace dividend on maintaining appropriate conventional forces if you must, but for God's sake DO SOMETHING about climate change.

2006-11-06T12:36:00.000Z

The evil carbon!

Photo: Penny, our resident protester. (Keith was there to).

Saturday's march/protest in London to highlight the problem of Climate Change was attended by 25,000 people. Apparently it was good humoured and attended by all ages. No 'free radicals' from the anti-globalisation movement in sight and that's the way it should be. Don't believe Blair & Brown attended although I hear a rumour they were spotted having lunch together, somewhere in Islington. This time it was Brown beaming from ear to ear. Lets just hope he means what he says and tackles the problems of climate change head on. First stop.....Ryanair & Easy-what'sit.

2006-11-06T12:18:00.000Z

Welcome to the global consumer circus!

What's the UK's biggest export (drum roll) .......... fresh air! Yip, after all those goods from China have been off-loaded, the shipping companies scratch their heads looking around for something to fill them with. There's not a lot available but, there's not much point in those containers returning to China empty, as they're burning the fuel to go back east anyway.

Problem number two; what to do with the increasing amount of recycled paper and cardboard piling up in the UK? Aha! Lets fill up those empty containers. What do the Chinese do with it? They pulp it and turn it into packaging, ready for all those goods that will make their way back to us again. Hmm, seems like a neat cycle. Or is it?

2006-11-02T21:43:00.000Z

Animal farm.......2006.

Photo: Robert J. Galbraith .

The following quote is taken from the International Herald Tribune, Thursday, Nov 2, 2006 and is not related to the photographer of the above photo except that they are both linked to the war in Iraq;

From a doctor trained to work in battle with the US Army. He is speaking about his training before coming to Iraq:

' The idea is to work with live tissue. You get a pig and you keep it alive. Every time I did something to help him, they would wound him again. So you see what shock does and what happens when more wounds are received by a wounded creature. My pig....they shot him twice in the face with a 9 millimetre pistol, and then 6 times with an AK-47 and then twice with a 12-gauge shotgun. And then he was set on fire. I kept him alive for 15 hours....that was my pig.'

Bloodlust. Mission lost. Get out now.

2006-11-02T20:06:00.000Z

'Icount'........a unique London approach to protest.

Photo; it reads: 'How ironic to live in fear of terrorism and die because of climate change'. Photo provided by 'Prophets of hope'. Click on photo for clearer view.

There are plenty of ironies here. The building to which they have projected their protest message on is the Battersea Power Station, once powered by coal until its closure in 1973. The building is currently playing host to the largest exhibition of contempory Chinese art. Next year the site will be developed into apartments that only the globally rich elite will be able to afford.

2006-10-30T16:49:00.000Z

March For Global Climate Justice
This Saturday, 4th November a demonstration and rally are being held in London just before the next round of UN Climate Talks to be held at Nairobi on 6th-17th November. It begins at 12pm with a rally at Grosvenor Square outside the American Embassy before marching to Trafalgar Square at 2.00pm. Check the details at http://www.icount.org.uk/Default.asp
See you there?

2006-10-30T13:54:00.000Z

The 'Cool Earth' Project.

Are you interested in slowing or even stopping the destruction of the Amazonian rainforest? Would you like to own a piece of the forest while helping the local people at the same time to improve their lives? Well guess what? The Cool Earth Project is looking for your support. Here's some more information, summarised from their site and written by one of the founders Frank Field MP;

'Last March I came across a Sunday Times news report on the wealthy businessman Johan Eliasch. Johan had just bought a part of the Brazilian rainforest larger than the size of London. His goal was to protect the forest from further illegal logging. Johan’s estate consists of over 400,000 acres. I liked the idea and thought I might stretch my resources to buy 40 acres, a sniff in comparison to Johan’s impact. But it occurred to me that there were out there tens of millions of ordinary people like myself who would jump at the opportunity of playing their part in literally saving the planet. I emailed Johan asking if he would be interested in setting up an international trust to protect the rainforest which acts, quite literally, as the world’s lungs. Cool Earth, Johan’s title for our great adventure, was born from that initial meeting.

Cool Earth is about harnessing mass people power, along with big business, to leapfrog the clanking machinery of government. Around such an idea as Cool Earth, and utilising the internet, the political voice of individuals can be heard immediately. Our aim, by the end of the year, is to have launched this international trust which will allow every individual, family, school, university, church, trade union, women’s institute, youth group, to own and protect part of the world’s lungs. Chips will be placed in the trees so that each of us can, by satellite, keep an eye on our part of the forest by calling it up on our laptops.

Recognition of this economic necessity is the second unique aspect of Cool Earth. Our aim is to allow those countries who own the rainforest to draw down its capital value in a positive way. Cool Earth will offer trading arrangements with countries with rainforests, paying up front a capitalised rent for areas of the forest. Protecting the forest from illegal logging will immediately start to reduce these large carbon emissions into the atmosphere. Cool Earth will then sell on to individuals, voluntary organisations and companies and others, the stewardship of plots of this land above its market value. This second payment will be used to build hospitals, schools and environmentally sound transportation networks in participation with local and state governments.

It is time for a new people-based global organisation, one which doesn’t simply talk about saving the planet, but puts it money where its mouth is. I hope you will be part of that solution. '

To register your support for this idea and to get more information please go to; http://www.coolearth.org/ .

2006-10-30T12:52:00.000Z

Stern Report on the Economics of Climate Change

Sir Nicholas Stern's long-awaited report, commissioned by the Treasury during the UK's G8 presidency, has been released from captivity. The full document can be downloaded from here.

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/independent_reviews/
stern_review_economics_climate_change/stern_review_report.cfm

Sir Nicholas, former Chief Economist at the World Bank, says it's a "false economy" to postpone climate change action since costs will only rise, with the impact of global warming costing as much as 20 per cent of the world's GDP.

Climate change risks raising average temperatures by over 5°C from pre-industrial levels, transforming the physical geography of our planet.

All countries will be affected by climate change and the response must be an international one - but it is the poorest countries who will suffer earliest and most.

Sir Nicholas concludes on an optimistic note:

"There is still time to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, if we act now and act internationally. Governments, businesses and individuals all need to work together to respond to the challenge. Strong, deliberate policy choices by governments are essential to motivate change."

Key recommendations include:

Expanding and linking emissions trading schemes around the world
Doubling support for energy research and setting international product standards for energy-efficiency
Fully-integrating climate change adaptation into development policy, so that rich countries honour their pledges to increase support.

2006-10-15T15:58:00.000+01:00

The 'Siberian Time bomb'.

Update 26/10: Most traffic to this site right now is looking for further info on 'The Siberian Timebomb' or, the warming of the Siberian permafrost. I've put in a request to the editors of the BBC to repeat their programme on this topic and are awaiting their response. Until then further information can be found at http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18725124.500 .

Update 27/10: 'The Official Tree' in Geneva, as it's known, traditionally heralds in spring when the chestnut begins to bloom. The locals there could be forgiven for thinking that winter never arrived and that they've found themselves leapfrogging into spring. Yesterday a very confused Official Tree burst into bloom thanks to a very warm Swiss autumn.

There's a lot of scary stuff around at the moment about global warming and its consequences; consequences like here in London, where this year we've had our warmest July, September and probably October on record. My olive tree likes it but, the birds and bees don't. Global warming is misleading. Why? Watch the BBC's 'The Siberian Timebomb' by David Shukman. It's an amazing piece of investigative journalism which has the BBC crew travel up to the Arctic circle in Siberia to look at the rapid melting of the permafrost. They team up with Russian and US scientists who have been studying this area for at least 20 years.

The scariest moment was when they took their readings for CO2 gases being released from the permafrost. As they stuck their instrument into the soil we saw the initial reading of 380ppm quickly rise to nearly 600ppm!!

That's global inferno not warming. Weather turmoil and their consequences are going to hit overdrive. We've already seen this with New Orleans, the Arctic ice retreat, the hole over Antarctica, to name but a few major trends.

And what did these scientists show us in their nearby lakes....methane, bubbling up like there was no tomorrow (no pun please!). Yes the global inferno gas of them all. So, will technological break throughs save the day. No they won't. The best we can do is try to forewarn ourselves, adjust as best we can and hope that it ain't our city, our families that bear the brunt of what's coming. You think I'm joking?............. the scientists certainly weren't.

2006-10-14T11:04:00.000+01:00

Monkey puzzle!

Have a laugh! ; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a15KgyXBX24 . The world of human monkeys, or is it monkey humans?

Thanks to Keith for finding this one.

2006-10-13T13:54:00.000+01:00

Chinese eco-city....London to follow.

'The Mayor of London today announced from Shanghai plans for a new zero carbon development in London. The development, which is likely to be situated in the Thames Gateway.... will be up to 1000 units in size.'

Ken Livingston's inspiration comes from seeing a presentation in Shanghai of Shanghai's Dongtan sustainable-city project. He said it 'is breathtaking in scale and ambition and if it works it will be a beacon to the world on how to achieve a low-carbon future.' More on his announcement at http://www.arup.com/newsitem.cfm?pageid=8295 .

For the new Chinese eco-city; 'Ecologically sensitive design will be a key element of the masterplan. The site is mostly agricultural land adjacent to a huge wetland of global importance. This will be a significant opportunity to apply our integrated sustainability and urban planning expertise to the benefit of the eco-city.' .....according to Arup, the project leader.

'Priority projects for phase 1 include capturing and purifying water, waste management recycling, reducing landfills that damage the environment, and creating combined heat and power systems, linked to the use of renewables, that will provide the technology to source clean and reliable energy.' More from Arup at http://www.arup.com/eastasia/project.cfm?pageid=7047 .

Are these one off show projects or 'a beacon to the world on how to achieve a low-carbon future.'?

2006-10-06T07:38:00.000+01:00

The Fat Man gets it.

David Nicholson-Lord has penned an article for the Ecologist called the 'Numbers Game'. As he rightly points out 'trying to discuss human population growth these days is like placing your head on a stand at a coconut shy.' You're caught between a rock and a hard place...'The Right will accuse you of authoritarianism and permissiveness, the Left of being racist, fascistic or neo-Malthusian.'

It's true and utterly ridiculous that the hugely important issue of human population numbers is now skimmed over, avoided, become the elephant in the room, so to speak. All the so-called joined up thinking that is meant to go on with environmental issues is wasted if the population subject is left out of the equation. In fact it is morally irresponsible to do so and I for one cannot take a campaigning organisation seriously if they don't take the issue head on. What we get instead are arguments around the impact of Western countries' 'ecological footprints'. The 'fat man' of the west is consuming more per person than the 'skinny Indian', way more. OK, all true and a very important area to focus on but, population numbers must be part of the discussion.

By 2050 planet earth is expected to have 9 billion human beings competing for its resources, up from the current 6 billion. Some demographers theorize that this number will begin to tail off as we head on towards 2100. Apparently more folk will head into the'middle classes' and have less children, just like in the 'west'.

Tied up with the population issue are other weighty topics like economic wealth , imigration and nationalism. Governments believe their population must continue to grow to help feed such dynamics as pensions growth. Some accept some sort of immigration process to help feed such needs and other countries like Japan would prefer their own women would have more children.

The point is is that the issue of 'population growth' is so explosive, even emotional, that many organisations avoid it altogether for fear of alienating their membership and therefore their funding base. This is wrong, it is morally corrupt and plainly irresponsible. For now it seems.....The Fat Man gets it.

To see an introduction to the article , the Numbers Game from the latest issue of The Ecologist go to; The Numbers Game.

2006-10-02T09:40:00.000+01:00

Jericho Deconstructed
The new drama series from CBS is now two episodes old. It's moderately exciting, nicely photographed, well acted (within the limitations of the script) and I'll keep watching. But this isn't a TV review column, I'm much more interested in what Jericho tells us about contemporary America. What zeitgeist is the show capturing?
It's easy to see Jericho as an allegory of America's geopolitical imagination; for the town, read the USA; for the rest of the world, read, well, the rest of the world. Hemmed in on all sides by violence and uncertainty, the mayor's call for unity might have been penned by a White House scriptwriter; "We can fight all enemies", "Are we going to use our imaginations to cause problems or to solve them?" and best of all "People, don't you break my heart again". All good stuff. Motherhood, apple pie and Geiger counters. Presumably followed by starvation, contaminated water and a lingering death. Or, more likely, an uplifting happy ending laced with tragedy, soundtracked by Hank Williams or, God forbid, Coldplay.
There's another sub-text that suggests itself. Ignore the specifics of nuclear terrorism. The new world of Jericho is one of resource shortages, infrastructure breakdowns and social collapse. Danger lurks just beyond the "Welcome to Jericho" sign at the edge of town. Looking forward into the near future, these are all characteristics of the world of Peak Oil. In his book 'The Long Emergency', James Howard Kunstler depicts the unsustainability of the American suburban settlement model without readily available cheap energy. Jericho, with a population of 5000 people, potentially self-sufficient for food and social infrastructure, is a model for the type of settlement that Kunstler and many others regard as best placed to survive the inevitable upheavals of the new century.
The End Of Suburbia

2006-09-29T10:44:00.000+01:00

Buy our 'TOP 10' T-Shirt!!

It's finally here! We have had so many requests for a T-shirt for our 'TOP 10 Ways to save the world' that we've done just that. You can find various options to buy for yourself or, as a gift for others. There are other photo choices and different T-shirt designs and the range will continue to expand. Remember they're there to spread the word;

1. Walk, cycle, use public transport & lastly, carpool
2. Reduce, reuse, recycle
3. Reduce useage of lights, heating & gadgets
4. Buy Fairtrade & Organic
5. Buy energy efficient products
6. Protect woodlands & green spaces
7. Reduce useage of fossil fuels
8. Conserve water
9. Use more renewables
10. Buy local, reducing product miles

Please note that you will find the 'TOP 10' wording on the back of the T-shirt. Easier for others to read.

Go to;

TOP 10 T-shirts at CafePress!

Have fun!

2006-09-25T15:22:00.000+01:00

100 biggest questions facing the UK environment

Scientists have drawn up a list of the 100 most important questions on the British environment needing answering today. The answers will help decide future policy. They include:

What are the ecological impacts of the ban on hunting with dogs?
What are the ecological impacts of airports?
What are the effects of light pollution on wildlife?
Which habitats and species might we lose completely in the UK because of climate change?
How can we measure natural capital (renewable and non renewable resources) and integrate such a measure into GDP?
How does the ecological impact of UK farming compare internationally?
How long does the seabed take to recover from dredging, wind farm construction and oil and gas extraction?
What impact does plastic litter have on the marine environment?
Why have many woodland birds declined?
How effective as indicators of overall biodiversity are current indicators (especially birds)?

Which 10 questions would you choose from them (see the link for all 100) as the most important ones that need answering? Or do you have questions that are not on the list that are more important and can potentially be answered?

Where do you think research should be concentrated and how much difference do you think answering these questions will make to policy?

The 100 questions

2006-09-20T12:51:00.000+01:00

Valuing Nature
In an eloquent and passionate piece in the journal Nature (Vol 443, 7 September 2006), Douglas J. McCauley argues that conservation strategies based on the market value of ecosystem services are not working to protect our wildlife. He urges a return to the protection of nature for nature's sake, rather than as a life support system for the human species. As conservation tools, ecosystem services have gained an importance that far outweighs their usefulness and ignores their limitations.

We assume that ecosystems are essentially benevolent, and ignore the fact that they work for the benefit of all species not just us.
By incorporating ecosystems into our economic fabric, we leave them vulnerable to the whims of the market, which operate on time scales often too short for the environment to respond.
There is an implicit assumption that nature conservation is only worth doing if it turns a profit.
There is nothing to prevent a "devaluation of nature" if the economic or tecnological climate changes.
Making money and protecting the environment are all too often mutually exclusive.

I wish I'd written this piece. I've made no secret of my dislike of the idea that the only way forward for conservation is to assign an economic value to the 'environment' , whether whole eco-systems or individual species, and then use cost-benefit analysis and market forces to prioritise work and allocate resources. In a previous thread discussing the work of Bjorn Lomborg, I asked why we have no mechanism to assign a monetary value to human beings if it's acceptable to do so for any other living species that might be of use to humans. I was accused of being, amongst other things, a Malthusian and possibly a racist. It seems that however far you extend the reach of economic value, there comes a point at which a leap of faith must occur, that the human race has value which cannot be expressed in monetary terms and should be protected for its own sake. Why is it so difficult to make that call for other living beings as well?

Link to article

2006-09-09T11:01:00.000+01:00

One More Hard Luck Story
An island paradise. An archipelago set in a shining sea. Unique habitats, exotic vegetation, a coastline of rugged rocks and empty golden beaches, a haven for bird and marine life. Of between 100 and 200 islands (depending on whether you count them when the tide is in or out), only 5 are inhabited. Over 90% of economic activity is related to tourism, with a little fishing and agriculture. Most visitors arrive on the daily freight ship, with a few coming in by light plane or helicopter. There are no cars apart from those owned by the 2000 or so locals, making walking and cycling something to be enjoyed rather than endured. And yet this Eden, like many places around the world, is under threat from the effects of climate change. Rising sea levels, projected to increase by 90cm by 2050, are already causing intermittent local flooding. Erosion of cliffs and beaches is increasing. More violent weather and changes to unique, vistor-attracting habitats are putting the all-important tourist trade at risk. This all sounds depressingly familiar. So where is this place, some tiny atoll nation in the Indian Ocean or the Pacific? No, it's quite a bit closer to home.
Lying 40 miles off the coast of Cornwall, the Isles of Scilly are the westernmost outpost of England, one of the UK's best-kept secrets as a holiday destination. The quality of the experience brings visitors back year after year. WIth all Scilly's advantages, it might be forgiven for thinking that climate change could be good for business. A recent report claims that climate change may lead to the traditional package holiday to the Mediterranean becoming "consigned to the scrapbook of history" click. Rising temperatures and sea levels are likely to make summer holidays in Britain and other Northern European destinations a more viable proposition. It's ironic that Scilly is facing similar threats that may destroy everything that makes it attractive to tourists. It's doubly ironic that, while UK citizens remain largely impervious to pleas from low lying island states to reduce greenhouse emissions, a beautiful part of their own country is set to go the way of Tuvalu.

2006-09-09T08:46:00.000+01:00

Where Have I heard That Before?

In a blaze of publicity, Britain's second (or possibly third) largest supermarket chain has announced the introduction of bio-degradable packaging for 500 of its organic food product lines click.
The new material will be made from starch and sugar derived from maize, saving thousands of tons of petroleum-based plastic.
Wonderful! Good old Sainsbury's! we cry. But wait, haven't we been here before? Those of us with longer memories will recall a similar fanfare in 2001 click .
Back then, Sainsbury's announced they would be introducing biodegradable packaging for all their own-label organic fruit and vegetables in all stores from the end of January 2001. So what happened to this project and others like the "starch based netting material for organic oranges"?
Basically, Sainsbury's had other more pressing things to think about, such as its appalling commercial performance, its slide down the pecking order of UK supermarkets and the slump in its share price. Only now, with its fortunes revived under a new management team, have they the time and resources to devote to this initiative. And of course, 5 years down the line we are all much more aware of green issues and have much greater expectations of the companies we do business with. Sainsbury's realise that they can't afford not to do this now, especially with arch-rival Tesco making big noises about issues like bio-degradable carrier bags.
Hopefully this time they'll see it through and not sweep it under the back-burner.

2006-08-31T19:28:00.000+01:00

Drax Attack

Well, the Drax Protest kicked off today with high expectations of plunging much of Britain into darkness. The merry band marched to the Drax Power Station with the intention of storming the gates to close the place down. No surprise to hear that Blair had a few of his own merry men gathered at the gates with the full intention of keeping the station open.

For all the excitement see the Beeb video special on the following page link; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/north_yorkshire/5300560.stm . You'll find the video on the right under Video and Audio News.

2006-08-28T20:14:00.000+01:00

Happy campers!

Photo: The Drax Climate Change protestors HQ.

Drax Protest update.

From the organisers;

'This is an amazing opportunity to actually start making the changes we need to make. No more hot air from politicians and "business solutions" but really doing it now.

LIMITED parking is available near the site but will be prioritised to those that need it. Other wise people will have to "drop and go" and park in Selby (ask on site for parking).'

OK. So, 'really doing it now'.....hang on a minute, did they say parking?! Do they mean cars!! But isn't this about a protest against climate change and don't cars contribute to this......... . Damn, those protesters have just shot themselves in the foot and just when I was thinking they might at least be adding a bit of spice to the energy debate. Oh well. :-(

2006-08-27T10:24:00.000+01:00

The Drax Effect.

Photo: http://risingtide.org.uk/node/83

Drax Power Station is coal fired and said to supply approximately 7% of the UK's energy needs. The protesters want it closed down because it is a major contributor to climate change. This station was in administration 3 years ago but refinancing and listing on the London Stock Exchange has helped to turn the station around. More info from the company at; http://www.draxgroup.plc.uk/ .

Here's some information from the site 'Rising Tide' with a quote from one of the protest organisers;

The camp will be held from 26th August - 4th September. Powered by alternative energy, the camp will demonstrate practical solutions inaction. The camp will offer information, education and space for debate on the science and politics of tackling climate change. There will bepractical skills to learn, from ideas for sustainable living to strategiesfor taking action.
Activist Zoe Armstrong said: "Climate change casts a huge shadow over oursociety. Governments and corporations cannot solve this problem for us,it’s up to us to act now. The Camp for Climate Action will be a key momentin kick-starting the radical action that is needed to tackle climatechange."

These two parties are obviously poles apart. The Drax Power Station must adhere to stricter carbon emission criteria via EU legislation. This is not good enough for the protesters who want to see it completely closed down. The protestors believe the answer lies in less power consumption and 'greener' energy options. Interestingly the Drax Power Station has begun to feed biomass into one of its power units and plans to increase this part of their operation.

Once again we have two parties facing each other across a fence who come from completely different positions. One looks to educate on climate change by camping outside a carbon emitter and the other looks to turn around a major UK power station so that it continues to supply a major part of UK power needs, meets stricter environmental controls and provides a return for investors. The energy debate continues and one thing is for sure.......it won't go away.

2006-08-18T09:23:00.000+01:00

CHINA

The main discourse about the 'environment' today is the increasing impact of the use of resources by human beings and the resulting degradation of the natural environment. We know that China is fast becoming a global economic superpower with an appetite for resources to match. What few of us realise is that China is also expanding its influence globally on the diplomatic front, whilst building an increasingly stronger military machine. No surprise here as all major powers have done this. What is interesting is the growing number of countries in Africa, Central Asia and South America who are taken in by Chinese diplomacy and offers of business. A number of such governments are impressed that the Chinese do not come with a long list (or any list!) of prerequisites, such as the American's demands for democratic institutions. This Chinese approach to diplomacy and doing business is called 'soft power'. It involves seducing other parties to 'want what you have'.

What does this mean for the environment? It means that all negotiations at the global level for conventions on environmental law must involve the Chinese. It means, as I say, negotiation rather than trying to tell China what's best, as this obviously will not work. It means helping China to start by looking at it's own back yard (as must all countries) and to look for solutions to their pollution problems/water shortages/housing needs (for example).

It is time that the World Bank stepped into trade policy, via its GEF (Global Environment Facility) organisation, (the WTO has proved ineffective). Trade policy needs environmental law linked into it and who better than the World Bank and the GEF to strengthen this process. As China will continue to expand it's global resource reach and its diplomatic approach implies that rules of democracy do not matter, therefore environmental law probably won't either, there is more urgency to try and bring environmental law into the centre of trade policy. After all, Sudan makes up 7% of China's oil imports but, it's a country with no democracy, extreme poverty and an environment that needs protecting for its agricultural food needs. We may not need regime change but, the world's environment surely needs protection and care as resource extraction speeds up.

2006-08-17T07:58:00.002+01:00

BP's Alternative Energy investments; $8 billion over next 10 years.

Environmentalists hate 'big business'. True or not? I don't know but, I do see a significant number of blogs ranting on about big business not being a part of the greener world vision. This they do as they tap away at their keyboard, made possible by a multitude of big business ventures. Hypocritical is a word that comes to mind. Yes of course we want businesses to have an ethical approach to their operations, personnel and communities. We also like businesses that are directly investing in systems and technologies that will better our interaction with our environment; such as more efficient use of resources and better ways of dealing with waste. Even better if a business puts some money into environment related projects (e.g. protecting an area of rain forest).

It is extremely important that a large company such as BP has set up their Alternative Energy Investments vehicle because, it lifts these technologies and businesses into the 'big(ger) time' and presents them as more serious players within the energy sector. BP continues to invest, with a recent purchase of Greenlight Energy, a US wind power generation company. To check out what BP Alternative Energy is up to go to; http://www.bpalternativenergy.com/liveassets/bp_internet/alternativenergy/index.html .

2006-08-13T10:28:00.000+01:00

Our 'T-shirt' TOP 10 ways to Save The World.

1. Walk, cycle, use public transport & lastly, carpool

2. Reduce, reuse, recycle

3. Reduce useage of lights, heating & gadgets

4. Buy Fairtrade & Organic

5. Buy energy efficient products

6. Protect woodlands & green spaces

7. Reduce useage of fossil fuels

8. Conserve water

9. Use more renewables

10. Buy local, reducing product miles

Our blog started off a debate recently in another posting that looked at condensing ways individuals could lessen their impact upon our environment down to a 'TOP 10'. Little did we know that this idea and it's ensuing debate would spread around the world! Some have felt that our TOP 10 was too top heavy on consumer related points. Unfortunately that's what humans do most of the time; consume goods and services. This is therefore the impact(s) that need urgent attention and to ignore this fact is simply pulling the wool over ones eyes and hoping for the best. We have kept the wording in our TOP 10 brief as eventually it will make its way onto T-shirts so as to spread the good word (as the pilgrims used to say!!).

2006-08-10T10:27:00.000+01:00

'New nuclear clean-up centre opens'

Photo: BBC online.

With up to 20 nuclear power stations to decommission in the UK over the next 20 years it seems a good idea to look at how this will be done. With this in mind a new centre has just opened to allow research into methods of disposal. Hmmm, can't help thinking that they should already have a good idea how this will and should be carried out. Do we get the feeling the government and the nuclear industry are playing catchup here?! More info; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/highlands_and_islands/4777367.stm .

I seem to recall Mr Blair is keen to build even more nuclear power stations. If only I had confidence in all concerned to run the industry without mishap. Right now, ..... I don't.

2006-08-07T08:48:00.000+01:00

The Environmental

Consequences of

War.

The latest war raging across the Lebanese/Israeli border is no exception to environmental disasters that come with conflict. Of main concern is an oil slick stretching up to 80km up the coast of Lebanon (near Beirut) and into Syria. This spill happened as a result of an Israeli air strike on a power station 30km south of Beruit on the 14th & 15th July. The oil tanks feeding the station were targeted in the attack. The UNEP is hoping to support the Lebanese in dealing with the crisis, although this is obviously not easy while the country is under air attack. More on this at; http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,,19959467-5001028,00.html .

There are less obvious environmental concerns such as the hugh amount of reconstruction that will have to go on once this conflict dies down. Somewhere will have to be found to dump the twisted steel and concrete resulting from the bombed out apartments and bridges. Then millions of tonnes of new concrete and steel have to be produced to rebuild homes and amenities. All of this, along with the tragedy of lives lost and families pulled apart, need never have happened. The costs of the destruction, the tragedy and the environmental disasters should be borne by the arms industry. Of course ideally their businesses should be closed down. Yeah I know, fat chance....... all those jobs.

2006-08-02T14:12:00.000+01:00

Energy Review
Each summer BP publishes a ‘Facts and figures’ document covering global trends in energy production, consumption and reserves. It is considered by some in the industry to be the best and most easily accessible overview of the state of our energy resources. Here are some quotes from the ‘BP Statistical Review of World Energy June 2006’:

Oil:
‘Global oil consumption grew by 1.3% in 2005, below the 10-year average and a marked slowdown from the strong growth (+3.6%) seen in 2004.’
Despite this reduced increase in consumption and an increase in proved reserves as new oil fields came online the ratio of reserves to consumption declined for the second year running, from 40.7 years in 2004, to 40.6 years in 2005. The ratio has been essentially flat over the past 20 years at around the 41 year level.

Natural Gas:
“World natural gas consumption grew by 2.3% in 2005, more slowly than in 2004 but close to the 10-year average. North America was the only region to see consumption decline’
For natural gas the ratio of reserves to consumption in 2005 was 65.1 years, down from around 70years in 2001.

Coal:
“Coal was again the world’s fastest-growing fuel, with global consumption rising by 5% or twice the 10-year average’.
Consumption in China, the world’s largest consumer, rose by 11%. China accounted for 80% of global growth. Consumption growth in the USA was also above average, while growth in the rest of the world was close to the 10-year average. The ratio of reserves to consumption in 2005 was 155 years.

Other:
‘Nuclear power consumption stagnated in 2005, rising by 0.6%, below the 10-year average of 1.8%. Output remains near capacity and few new plants have come on line. Global hydroelectric generation rose by 4.2%, the second consecutive above-average year. Growth was boosted by new capacity in China, where output rose by 13.7%. Elsewhere, growth in northern Europe, Brazil and Canada offset declines owing to low rainfall across southern Europe and parts of the USA’.

Overall:
‘World primary energy consumption increased by 2.7% in 2005, below the previous year’s strong growth of 4.4% but still above the 10-yearaverage. Growth slowed from 2004 in every region and for every fuel. The strongest increase was again in the Asia Pacific region, which rose by 5.8%, while North America once more recorded the weakest growth, at 0.3%. US consumption fell slightly, while China accounted for more than half of global energy consumption growth.’

2006-07-31T10:36:00.001+01:00

Introducing.........'Ecological Economics'

Do we want to consume ourselves to death? (Consumption obesity disorder!)

Thanks to Robert Metcalfe for the following. Check out his blog at http://www.environ-econ.blogspot.com/ .

Consumption in ecological economics.

Entry prepared for the Internet Encyclopedia of Ecological Economics

by Inge Ropke
Department for Manufacturing Engineering and Management
Technical University of Denmark
Denmark

April 2005

Introducing.........'sufficiency';

'The core idea of ecological economics is that the human economy is embedded in nature and that economic processes are simultaneously natural processes in the sense that they can be described as biological, physical and chemical processes. Thus society can be seen as an 'organism' with a 'social metabolism' based on flows of energy and matter, and this organism can take up more or less 'space' in the geo-biosphere of the earth. The greater the size or scale of the human economy, the greater the risk of destroying the conditions for human life on earth in the long run, and as humans will never know the exact limits, margins must be left. The researchers who gathered in ecological economics agreed that the scale of the economy was now so large that nature's basic life support systems for humans are threatened. In other words, there are limits to the material growth of the economy, and these limits have already been reached or exceeded. This is all the more so, since most ecological economists add a consideration for the living conditions of species other than humans.

As the scale of the economy has to be limited in the interest of future generations and in the interest of other species, the global problems of poverty cannot be solved through economic growth. To increase the environmental space for improving the living standards of the poor, the affluent have to reduce their appropriation of natural resources and pollution absorption capacity. Although technological change can be managed in ways that increase the flow of services achieved from a given throughput of energy and matter, such efficiency increases will not be sufficient to meet the challenge. Therefore, the sufficiency revolution has to be accompanied by a sufficiency revolution among the richest fifth of the world population. Accordingly, living standards and consumption had to appear on the agenda of ecological economics.'

Taken from an article by Inge Ropke presented at http://www.ecoeco.org/publica/encyc.htm

2006-07-30T12:40:00.000+01:00

The Amazon is a donna......

Photo: destruction of the Amazon for agriculture

Next time you stumble into a kebab shop after the pub for your chicken donna or, serve up chicken at home for dinner, visualize the wasteland above. Each year an area of the Amazon rainforest equalling the size of Wales or, 20,000 sq. km is razed to the ground. Much of this is for agricultural use and the predominant crop is soyabeans. The main market for these beans is Europe using the port of Liverpool for redistribution. The main end use for the beans is for mixing in as part of chicken feed. Even if you buy organic fed, locally reared chickens you won't escape the fact that your purchase contributes to the destruction of the rainforest.

Last year the Amazon suffered its worst drought on record. Major rivers slowed to a muddy trickle and fish died in their millions. Alarm bells rang throughout the world, as well as in Brazil .....'the Amazon is dieing'. If the Amazon dies so will we as a species. It's that simple. It may take a few generations but it will happen none the less. This is because the Amazon rainforest constitutes half of the world's remaining rainforest cover and serves as a huge sponge soaking up CO2 emissions. This is particularly important as the world continues apace burning up fossil fuels. To do this, as well as speed up the destruction of these carbon sinks is suicidal and plain daft.

The Brazillian Ministry of Environment is seeking international finance in return for protecting the Amazon as an internationally recognized natural asset for the world at large. At the same time they are looking to the world to reduce fossil fuel consumption. It is noted here though that Brazil's main oil company is rapidly investing in overseas oil exploration. These contradictions need to be dealt with by a combined effort from the UNDP and UNEP, protecting rainforests such as the Amazon, its indigenous peoples and funding alternative programmes for wealth creation. More on the Amazon can be found at; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_rainforest .

2006-07-27T09:05:00.000+01:00

Top 10.

Found this Top 10 list for reducing our impact upon the environment. Some of it is repetitive;

1. Carpool
2. Recycle
3. Turn off lights
4. Regulate thermostat
5. Conserve energy
6. Plant trees
7. Stop burning fossil fuels
8. Conserve water
9. Go solar
10. Zero population growth

Are there adjustments to this Top 10 list that we could make? Please do suggest any point you would like added but remember, you must also suggest which point from the list must subtracted or adjusted. Expect some good input from the flood of OU students visiting us!

Of course you may think that such a Top 10 list is futile and you maybe right however, educating the masses often involves a very focused message and then one builds from there. The Top 10 came from here; http://www.cafepress.com/buy/water+conservation . It appears to be a 'publish your ideas/photos on products (e.g. T-shirts and mugs) type of site. People then have the opportunity to purchase if they wish. Maybe we could aim to do the same thing as this could be a more 'populist' (effective?) way of spreading good environmental practice!

Changes so far

1. Walk, cycle, use public transport & lastly, carpool
2. Reduce, reuse, recycle
3. Reduce useage of lights, heating & gadgets
4. Buy Fairtrade & Organic
5. Buy energy efficient products
6. Protect woodlands & green spaces
7. Reduce useage of fossil fuels
8. Conserve water
9. Use more renewables
10. Buy local, reducing product miles

2006-07-25T15:52:00.000+01:00

The gadget is god.

Yes folks, here we go again. The government has just published its Energy Review after assuring us it has consulted widely (and listened narrowly!). OK, there are noises about dealing with Nimby-ism during the planning process under the heading, 'renewables' but, let us not forget such a relaxation of planning procedures will also benefit the nuclear industry. We all know no.10 is keen to see a new generation of nuclear power stations and we all know that thus far it looks as though UK gas and oil reserves are running down. How did this happen in 30 odd years? We sold it overseas! I know, not terribly bright in hindsight. Still, there it is and we also all know I suspect, that with the 'gadget is god' culture we currently live in, energy consumption isn't about to drop off anytime soon.

So where does this leave us? We can conserve a lot more energy at source and with end use. This option does get mentioned but never elaborated on because it just ain't sexy (ie. loads-o-money for fatcats). There's the renewables option but we now realize this can't plug the gap alone. We can import gas from unstable regimes hence needing in invest heavily in the military in order to defend supply. Or, ........we can renew the nuclear stock. Maybe we should do all of the above. With nuclear there's the small issue however of the unresolved waste storage problem. Any ideas? Nah, let's follow successive governments on this matter and quietly sweep it under the carpet. Don't mind if it glows!

Difficult for us mere mortals to work this one out really. Hang on a minute, what about a car keys amnesty .........modeled on the recent knives amnesty? What do think? I know, .........you go first. ;-)

2006-07-19T17:56:00.000+01:00

Whaling
The International Whaling Commission this year voted in favour of a return to commercial whaling. It will not happen yet because the decision needs the support of three quarters of the members and fell well short. The Commission agreed a moratorium on whaling from 1985 because many species were in danger of extinction. Yet 2,500 whales are likely to be caught this year mostly by Norway who have put in a legal objection and by Japan for "scientific" study. Should a compromise be reached and whaling legitimised or are whales special?
See
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5100936.stm
http://www.iwcoffice.org/commission/iwcmain.htm

2006-07-16T12:51:00.000+01:00

They can't be serious!

The world is in the middle of an energy crisis with oil nearing $80 a barrel and the flashpoints in the Middle East are flaring up once again. Step up the world's leaders at the G8 summit in St. Petersburg. We hold our breath in anticipation that the most powerful people on this planet will rally around to come up with a credible plan to pull us back from the brink. And here it is (drum roll) ;

The 4 point energy saving programme (!)

1. Use more energy saving lightbulbs

2. Stop leaving electrical appliances on standby

3. Manufacturers should produce more energy efficient set-top boxes (for TVs)

4. Motorists should keep their tyres fully inflated

There you have it! That's it. The energy/environment-saving crisis plan.

They have got to be taking the piss.

What do we say; ...........'sack the lot of them.'

2006-07-07T20:38:00.000+01:00

Return Of The Bean Counter

Bjorn Lomborg, publicity-shy economist, statistician and climate change sceptic, is busy pushing his new book "How To Spend $50 Billion To Make The World A Better Place". The number-crunching Peter Schmeichel lookalike has written up the findings of his Copenhagen Consensus think-tank in a format that we mere mortals may find more accessible. In a Comment article in last Sunday's Observer ("Climate Change Can Wait. World Health Can't") he continues his campaign to persuade us that money spent on combating climate change is wasted. Following on from his 1998 best-seller "The Skeptikal Environmentalist", his core message is that we will get much better value from investing in the areas of human health and economic development than in measures aimed at reducing or mitigating the impacts of human-induced climate change. But still missing from his work is any idea that the environment has value in its own right, rather than as a life support system for the human race.

Lomborg is the master of the misleading book title. In "The Skeptikal Environmentalist", he proved that he is by no stretch of the imagination an environmentalist. His new book should be called "How To Spend $50 Billion To Make The World A Better Place For The Human Race, And Stuff Every Other Species".
For the full text of the Observer article, go to observer.guardian.co.uk
To add your comments to the debate on how to give the planet a $50bn makeover, go to
www.observer.co.uk/blog

2006-07-07T10:04:00.000+01:00

Interview With The Dubya
In a ground-breaking interview to mark his 60th birthday, President George W. Bush was quizzed by Larry King of CNN.
His comments on environmental issues were particularly enlightening; here's a snip of the transcript:

KING: Al Gore was on recently on this program and concerning the environment he said, "President Bush and Vice President Cheney have anointed to any key position that has anything to do with climate change special interest spokesmen for the oil companies, coal companies, and this is no secret." How do you respond to that?

G. BUSH: Um.

KING: Have you seen his film?

G. BUSH: No I haven't seen it but I guess politics never stops. We have done a lot to deal with greenhouse gases by advancing new technologies. I campaigned against Al Gore. I said we're going to spend money for clean coal technologies and we're in the process of doing that and one of these days people are going to look back and say, well, thank goodness the Bush administration made these investments because we'll be able to have electricity from coal that won't pollute.

KING: Why do you think he put a bad rap on you?

G. BUSH: I don't know why. Politics, I guess. But we're the ones -- my administration started the hydrogen initiative. Spent over a billion dollars for research in the hopes that we'll be able to power our automobiles by hydrogen, which would be an amazing advance in -- in -- in -- in -- in cleaning the environment. We've done more on ethanol that any administration. We've got a great record and -- but this town is full of politics. People just say what they want to say.

In other words:

Bush doesn't care enough about the environment to even consider viewing Al Gore's widely acclaimed movie 'An Inconvenient Truth'

He thinks that investment in 'pie in the sky' alternative technologies like hydrogen is a valid substitute for reducing energy consumption

He doesn't give a fuck what anyone says about his administration's environmental record.

Nuff said.

Read the full transcript of the interview at www.cnn.com
But be quick. CNN say "THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED".
Why an update might be required, and what form it might take, we can only speculate.

2006-06-26T12:39:00.000+01:00

The Art of Burning Waste

Photo: The rather eccentric looking incinerator on the Isle of Man!

In the UK we currently deal with every 10 bags of rubbish in the following way: 6 landfill; 2 recycle ; 2 burnt in incinerator. We are struggling to recycle fast enough in order to avoid more landfilling so, the government is pushing for more incineration-to-power plants. Trouble is, as usual, no wants an incinerator in their back yard. In the Bexley area of Kent for example residents have been fighting such a proposal for 13 years. A smaller plant has now been given the go ahead. To be fair new EU legislation has meant all incinerators have had to improve their filter technology on their stacks so as to emit fewer pollutants. A site in North London was closed for a number of months just so these new filters could be installed.

The interesting part of the rubbish debate is the NIMBY effect, where the selfish gene of the human psyche rears its ugly head. Everyone contributes to the weekly rubbish pickup from their front gate but, obviously no-one wants to see it dumped at the end of their road! Still, it has to be dealt with somehow and somewhere. It is also grossly unfair that poorer neighbourhoods take the rubbish from the 'leafy' suburbs. OK, maybe building these incinerators out in the countryside is one solution. Apart from country folk objecting there is the problem of getting waste to the plant. River transport is one way that will be used to get rubbish from London to the new Bexley incinerator. A mature debate is necessary on each and every incinerator proposal but it must not be allowed to be hijacked NIMBY-ism!

2006-06-20T14:59:00.000+01:00

Scadbury Park

Photo: Old moat house

This picture and more like it of Scadbury Park in south London can be found at http://www.jbutler.org.uk/London/Bromley/index.shtml and by clicking on 'The London loop in Bromley'. Here you'll find some information about a wonderful part of Bromley, with its calves, horses and working farm, as well as ancient woods. Our lot were down there in the weekend doing biodiversity mapping of the hedge rows.

2006-06-13T14:19:00.000+01:00

Go hug a tree this week!

photo: www.planetdave.com/ article.php3?aid=34

London is in the middle of London Sustainability Weeks, which is promoting many local events around the city on the themes of community and sustainability. Info at; http://www.lsw2006.org/final/about/ . Make it real!

2006-06-04T16:40:00.000+01:00

Road turbines

Driving along the A13 out of London yesterday I almost drove off the road. Suddenly out of nowhere appeared two huge wind turbines. I obviously hadn't been down this way for some time as these lovely beasts have been on the skyline for 2 years now. They looked so graceful as their blades swished through the relatively calm day.

They were commissioned by Ford's Dagenham site to power their diesel engine plant. More detail from the installers Ecotricity can be found at http://www.ecotricity.co.uk/projects/Ford/plan_ford.html .

Of course no objections to the installation of the turbines could have been made on the grounds of turbine noise thanks to the road noise nearby. Not so sure the same could be said about traffic safety however!

Photo: view from one of the turbines, over East London. http://www.ecotricity.co.uk/assets/Planning/ford/erection/fri23/ariel9.jpg .

2006-05-26T12:35:00.000+01:00

Nuclear.....going out with a bang!

2006-05-21T08:49:00.000+01:00

Supporting the rural environment

The Affordable Rural Housing Commission has recently suggested that more tax is raised on second home owners as a way of funding homes for first time buyers in rural areas. First time buyers have been priced out of their village by second home buyers and by rural home owners frustrating the planning process for new build. This shows the selfish aspect of the capitalist system failing the system as a whole. Rural first time buyers are important for filling rural job vacancies which in turn supports the rural economy, which in itself supports and supplies the cities with goods and services. Such a tax on second home owners is way overdue. More information from;
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/mortgages/article.html?in_article_id=409149&in_page_id=8

2006-05-18T13:17:00.000+01:00

The struggle for 'green' politics in Africa

Photo; http://www.gorilla-haven.org/ghpinkie.htm

The following link has an article about the struggle within a number of African countries to centralize the issue of the environment by forming 'green' parties or groups. This is a fairly new movement for some and is seen as a way to promote more democracy without the tribal bias. See; http://www.global.greens.org.au/cameroon.html . Apart from intimidation from the authorities their main problem is funding. Western agencies and NGOs could do more to link up and help these groups. It would help them tackle problems on the ground within their countries in their own manner and design.

2006-05-15T14:52:00.000+01:00

Nuclear or renewables........a local example.

An interesting live example of a battle between local residents, who are against a wind farm being planned for their quiet rural area and national energy policy, which is looking to increase renewables within the UK as part of carbon emissions reduction targets. The residents' website is here http://www.bradwell.info/ . Please note that more information is available from their 'old' website link at the bottom of their new webpage, which is currently being added to.

For the view from the company proposing the development see; http://www.natwindpower.co.uk/bradwell/index.asp . The debate is real and current. The area is amazingly quiet and the little church within the area very important. These are only too points of course. Residents have been happy it would seem to have had the Bradwell nuclear power station in their midst (now closed).

2006-04-30T14:14:00.000+01:00

A shining example

Good news from the world of solar photovoltaics. General Electric is to invest $75 million in what will be the world's biggest solar energy plant in Portugal. There will be 52,000 solar panels with a capacity of 11 megawatts, to be based on a farm in Serpa. A company called Powerlight will install the panels, http://www.powerlight.com/company/press-releases/index.shtml . This company already runs significant installations in Bavaria and the Vegas area. It has been made possible by legislation forcing utilities to pay 31 euros cents a kilowatt hour for solar energy. The Portuguese government is seeking to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and its reliance on fossil fuels.

2006-04-19T08:47:00.000+01:00

Solar-powered gas platform makes North Sea debut

Royal Dutch Shell has started pumping gas from its new "Cutter" gas platform. The new platform, powered solely by two wind turbines and two solar panels, measures just eight metres square, half the size (and half the cost) of conventional installations.

Tom Botts, Shell's European VP for exploration and production, says it shows the company's commitment to environmentally sustainable design.

An alternative view is that it demonstrates Shell's desperation to keep pumping gas from rapidly declining fields. The smaller, more flexible platform design is key to Shell's ability to exploit increasingly marginal fields.

http://news.independent.co.uk/business/news/article358600.ece

2006-04-17T14:24:00.000+01:00

All for a stag

For all those 1000s of devoted fans of our e-blog you will be fascinated to learn that our group is about to tear itself away from its PCs to get real and dirty. For a day we will migrate to the woods of Chislehurst in south London to carry out conservation work for Britain's fiercest species..........the Stag beetle. More courageous than a humvee, stronger than a sumo wrestler the stag beetle is The UKs last line of defence against enemy invasion. A worthy cause I'm sure you will agree. We will keep you informed as always.

2006-04-11T22:12:00.000+01:00

Society needs to change; not just the individual.

There is a skip at my workplace full of very useful wood. Our site does not really have the space to store the wood hence the need for the skip. I have assumed anyway that the wood would be passed on for recycling. It appears this is largely not the case. And this with all the problems we have with virgin forest being cut down all over the world. In the UK there is an organisation looking into this; http://www.globaltrees.org/proj.asp?id=4 . They have a report out about the recycling of waste wood. What it shows is that an individual may want to recycle some wood but, that at the moment they will have a very hard time doing this because recycling operations are few and those that exist are too centralised. Often an individual can't do something until society catches up, until the systems are in place.

2006-04-01T20:51:00.000+01:00

Carbon emissions rise again
The Government claims to be committed to fighting global warming and cutting greenhouse gas emissions. But the latest figures show a rise in CO2 emissions in 2005 of 0.25%. Not a big rise but this Government is committed to cutting them and lecturing the world on the need to do so. Scientists overwhelmingly agree on the need to drastically cut emissions and to allow them to rise is grossly irresponsible. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4861800.stm.
How can we prevent a huge rise in the world's temperature with catastrophic results while we do so little to prevent it?

2006-03-28T16:57:00.000+01:00

Australia-just another pawn on the barbie?

News from downunder tells us that Australian politicians are ready once again to sell their copious mineral wealth to anyone for anything.; http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=2&ObjectID=10374822 . Of course there is little consideration for the indigenous peoples who use the land (that gets mined) for other reasons. For example;
http://www.whoseland.com/event3/paged.html .

2006-03-21T17:37:00.000Z

VEGOS BEWARE
Warning! All vegetarians might like to move on to the posting above or below this one now - this is for meat eaters only!

For those of us who like our protein in concentrated easy to digest portions - and that's an ever more rapidly growing constituency - crunch time (or was that lunchtime) is here. In the West animal feed technologies and animal husbandry practices mean that for every 2.5 kg of plant proteins we feed to our livestock (we are talking beef here), we get 1kg of high quality protein for human consumption. A lot of what the livestock is eating is made up of proteins and other nutrients that wouldn't available to us if they didn't process it for us first (not without a lot of mechanical or chemical processing, and who wants that?). The amount of vegetable protein verses the resulting meat protein is called the conversion ratio i.e. 2.5:1.

The crunch comes where it almost always does these days and that's from developing nations. As affluence has spread so has meat consumption; however, the typical conversion ratio in developing countries is around 8.5:1! To put this into perspective, if all of us were to eat the same amount of meat as the average person from a developed country but grown at a developing country's conversion rates, nearly third of the Earth's land surface would need to be put over the production animal feed stuffs.

We need to 'grasp the nettle' and come up with an equitable solution that will allow us to 'have our c(ste)ak(e) and eat it'. Maybe GMOs are the way to go (higher yields, more protein), or maybe its technology transfer (show developing countries how to do more with less). Any ideas?

(And for all those NEO-CONS out there - 'leaving it to market forces' is how we got into this mess in the first place).

2006-03-18T22:53:00.000Z

Woking is at the frontline

The above public baths in Woking uses a fuel cell CHP system. Woking is working more than anywhere within the UK to reduce its carbon emissions. See http://www.theclimategroup.org/index.php?pid=548 .

2006-03-18T14:19:00.002Z

Fuel Cell-abration

Pictured above is a laptop powered by hydrogen; one of many applications being designed to fit into the new 'hydrogen economy'. That is at least the hope of many who are looking for the next big sustainable energy market. Many countries and cities are claiming to be leading the pack with investment into the ideas and products needed to make the hydrgen economy a reality. The London Hydrogen Partnership is just one such organisation; http://www.lhp.org.uk/ .

More information on fuel cells at; http://www.fuelcelltoday.com/FuelCellToday/EducationCentre/EducationCentreExternal/EduCentreDisplay/0,1741,PressKitHome,00.html .

Dr Francis “Tom” Bacon developed the first practical working fuel cell that was used in the Apollo space programme. He was concerned about the impact of fossil fuels on the environment and wanted to modify this technology for use as a clean, efficient source of electricity and heat.

Many companies are looking to make the hydrogen economy at reality. One such company is http://www.hydrogenics.com/ . This is the future of energy.

2006-03-14T13:56:00.000Z

Energy Amplification at CERN.

Very interesting energy developments at the CERN research centre in Switzerland. Something known as 'energy amplification' could deal with our growing energy needs as well as the nuclear waste problem;

http://public.web.cern.ch/Public/Content/Chapters/AboutCERN/ResearchUseful/Future/Future-en.html .

2006-03-10T12:14:00.000Z

Poor in the USA

Poverty lies at the heart of the current debates about globalisation, climate change and other environmental issues. The USA is held up as the prime example of a rich economy, something to which all others can aspire and work towards. Following the US model will reap inevitable rewards. But exactly how rich is the US? Or, to put it another way, just how much poverty exists there?

The statistical methods used to calculate poverty in the US today are based on 40-year-old thresholds that set a poverty line at three times the annual cost of feeding a family of three or more. Many of the key assumptions were derived from Department of Agriculture surveys from the mid-1950s.
The joke is that these thresholds are still in use today. The only significant change has been the introduction of index linking. The official number of Americans in poverty grew slightly in 2004 to 12.7 percent from the 12.5 percent recorded the previous year, representing about 37 million Americans. Since 2000, the number of people living in official poverty has increased by 5.4 million. All this is bad enough, and starkly at odds with the robust, optimistic image of the US economy projected in George W. Bush’s State of the Union address. However, there is widespread concern over inadequacies in the system.

Food doesn’t account for one-third of a family’s budget today, making it an unrealistic cost-of-living measure.
The model fails to take into account housing, transportation or health care—which together can amount to more than triple the average cost of food.
The model also ignores regional variations, childcare costs and the growth of single-parent families.

There are fears that the Census Bureau is deliberately undercounting the number of poor Americans for political purposes, with significant implications for future budget policy. Alternative ‘realistic’ calculations arrive at real numbers between 18 percent (48 million) and 25 percent, or more than 70 million Americans currently unable to afford the most basic necessities.

With Peak Oil almost upon us, the outlook can only get bleaker for the United States’ forgotten underclass.

2006-03-08T17:07:00.000Z

I have always been a big fan of the US space programme and its ability to deliver on spectacular missions like the Mars Rovers, Cassini, Galileo Stardust and NEAR to name but a few. Not so high profile have been the earth monitoring satellites that have played a significant if not pivotal roll in alerting us the effects of climate change, ozone depletion, deforestation and natural disasters.

Last year President Bush set out his new vision for NASA; a manned space program based around the permanent return to the moon before 2020, and then on to Mars. These are laudable goals, and in my opinion will certainly bring huge technological, cultural and scientific benefits.

However, NASA’s annual funding has only increased a few percent and by no where near enough to achieve the new vision without other programmes having to suffer.

At a time when we need as much reliable and accurate data from ‘our eyes in the sky’ and the current space-based network is due for replacement almost all of the new programmes are being delayed or cancelled.

Even the Deep Space Climate Observatory has been cancelled, a satellite that would have provided valuable information about how clouds, snow cover, airborne dust and other phenomena affect the balance between the amount of sunlight Earth absorbs and the amount of heat energy it emits. It would have been able to observe the entire sunlit surface of the planet constantly. Such observations could greatly enhance scientists' understanding how much the planet has warmed in recent years and help them predict how much warmer it will get in the future.

Surely the US has the resources and the wisdom and the vision to pursue both types of programme. Or is this just another example of the Bush administration’s lack of ability to grasp the seriousness of the environmental crises that looms just a few years ahead of us for the sake of national prestigue on the cheep.

Didn’t a former President once say something along the lines of “we choose to go to the moon, and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard…” come on Mr Bush do the hard but right thing, give us back our eyes.

2006-03-08T13:06:00.000Z

Race you to the FINISH.

Photo: http://lijiangsong.blogbus.com/files/1128568470.jpg

An article in a recent hardcopy edition of the IHT http://www.iht.com/ reported an impending deal between Aluminum Corp. ( or Chalco) of China and the Queensland government of Australia to mine a 650 million metric ton Aurukin bauxite deposit. It will be the single largest investment in Australia and secure much needed material used to make aircraft and car bodies.

The Chinese government owns 70% of Chalco and it is companies like this that have been ordered by their government to scour the world for raw materials in order to meet the nation's demand for cars, homes and appliances. The Queensland bauxite deposit could produce enough aluminum for 2.5 million Boeing 747-400 aircraft.

Photograph: Charles Dharapak/AP

Bush has just left India, leaving the Indians in no doubt that the US is keen to speed up business and trade between the two countries, even throwing the nuclear question into the wind. This has been read as an attempt to counter-balance the growing Chinese power in the region, even though it is largely the Americans who have courted business dealings with China over the last 20 years.

The race is on to snap up the resources of the world for the big development push of the 21st Century....the race to the finish. Concerns over climate change will not be allowed to get in the way of this orgy of power and struggle for supremacy.

2006-02-28T16:53:00.000Z

Shit Happens

Animal faeces comprise nearly 4 percent of San Francisco's residential waste, almost as much as disposable nappies. Local authorities are keen to develop new approaches to disposing of animal waste and so reduce the 40 million tons of waste going to landfill each year
San Francisco has become the first city in the United States to consider converting pet faeces into methane that can be used for fuel, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.
"American dogs and cats produce 10 million tons of waste a year, and no one knows where it's going," said Will Brinton, a scientist in Mount Vernon, Maine, and one of the world's leading authorities on waste reduction and composting. Pet faeces that avoids landfill is left on the ground, where it dissolves and flows untreated into the water table. Some is inadvertently collected along with garden waste and tossed into compost bins, a dangerous practice because animal waste is full of pathogens.
Sunset Scavenger, a subsidiary of Norcal Waste, has plans to collect and process the waste in a methane digester—a low-tech machine that uses bacteria to convert organic matter to methane in about two weeks.
"Poop power? Yes, it's possible to produce electricity, natural gas and even fuel from Rover's poop and other waste material," said Robert Reed, a spokesman for Norcal Waste. "There are a lot of bugs to work out, steps to figure out, costs to be considered, but we are beginning to talk to the city about it and look into this area more actively."

2006-02-25T09:06:00.000Z

A world of contrasts, but do we care?

Above is a recent picture from the Angolan Times, archive.wn.com/2005/ 09/19/1400/angolatimes/ . Below is a photo from a university picnic somewhere in the developed world. He is obviously enjoying his food.

No doubt he would share some of his food with the person dieing in Angola if he had the chance. Why is it that international food politics, in the shape of subsidies and comparative costs in trade, allow food mountains in the west while the best land in poorer countries is used to produce export crops. The food mountains in western countries come from crop production within. The best land in poorer countries used for export crops to western supermarkets should be feeding the local population.

These anomolies produce these contrasting photos above, but do we care?

2006-02-23T13:19:00.000Z

Global dimming.

Congratulations to the BBC for putting together a 'Climate Change' series on BBC4. As part of this the BBC are helping to recruit your PCs for a climate change data analysis exercise; http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/hottopics/climatechange/ . A recent programme from the Horizon team called 'Global Dimming' (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/dimming_prog_summary.shtml ) makes the lay persons discussion about global warming even more confusing. We are now being told that the warming effects of CO2 emissions are being cancelled out to a certain extent by the cooling affects of particulates. Basically, particulate pollution encourages more cloud cover and less sunshine. In London this winter we have seen very little sunshine.

Interestingly, they are blaming the 1985 famine of Ethiopia on the effects of global dimming. It has had the affect of moving the seasonal rains away from central Africa and down to the south. This has been blamed on particlate pollution from Europe and Northern America. There is more on the above link.

The main point from this programme for the general public is that climate change prediction is highly complex and the 'experts' themselves are working hard to get a clearer picture. The solutions to the negative affects of climate change will certainly dominate our actions and thoughts for generations to come.

2006-02-22T17:06:00.000Z

Our decisions to buy or not to buy give us enormous potential power. It is not simply a question of cutting the environmental impact of the products we purchase, but also of creating, though the choices we make, a commercial climate in which manufacturers and retailers see new market opportunities in ‘green’ goods and are encouraged to invest in new products and services.

(Elkinton, J. and Hailes, J. (1989) The Green Consumers Supermarket Shopping Guide.

2006-02-19T09:52:00.000Z

Taking to the air - the subsidizing of air travel.

There is talk again within the EU of looking into the tax exemption on airplane fuel as concerns over climate change hot up. While other forms of transport pay tax on fuel, airlines are exempt and are of course resisting any change in any way. See the following by the European Low Fares Airline Association; http://www.elfaa.com/documents/press%20release%20re%20aviation%20and%20ETS%20280905.pdf .

Airlines have always quoted job creation as a prime reason to keep their tax exemption status. Increasingly they are also asking whether the travelling public would be happy to forego cheap airfares that they currently enjoy. An effective defence! Environmental campaigners are however locking their sites on airlines as they see them as an increasing contributor to carbon emissions. Are they killjoys? After all, forcing higher airfares through tax changes will mean only the rich can afford the luxury to fly.

For a detailed study on the effect of subsidies on fuel emissions go to;
http://www.feasta.org/documents/energy/DHealyFossilFuelresearch.pdf

2006-02-17T18:14:00.000Z

Goodbye to the Carterets!

In November last year an article from the Reuters News Service marked the beginning of what might be considered as a significant milestone in our transition to a warmer world. A community of around 2000 islanders from Papua New Guinea's Carteret Islands have become the first to begin a permanent evacuation as a result of rising sea levels and storm surges. They had spent the past 20 years trying to preserve their traditional way of life by building sea walls and planting mangroves to protect their homes and crops from the seas.
The islanders are to be relocated ten families at a time to the larger nearby Bougainville Island, four hours' boat ride to the southwest. "It's a pretty hard life out there on the islands. Some of the homes have been washed away," Joe Kaipu, the senior district co-ordinator of Bougainville, told Reuters. "The only action now is to resettle them," he said.
The Reuters article warns that this could be first of many such evacuations and quotes a recent UN study forecast that some 50 million people could become environmental refugees by 2010, driven from their homes by desertification, rising sea levels, flooding and storms linked to climate change.
Last month NEW SCIENTIST did an article on the discovery of the islands by British navigator Philip Carteret in 1767 to coincide with the commencement of the evacuation http://www.newscientist.com/channel/earth/mg18925381.800. It’s ironic that we should be rediscovering one of our adventurer ancestors as a result of the loss of the islands (baring his name) due to climate change, an event possibly brought about in part by the trade links forged during that great age of discovery.

2006-02-12T10:57:00.000Z

Capitalism loves global warming.

The article linked below tells us how Norway's push towards the Arctic circle is just the beginning for new oil and gas exploration opportunities brought on by global warming. Here we are seeing how runaway global warming will happen in practice. Capitalism, as a system loves global warming because it presents new money making opportunities. If one party steps back from oil and gas exploration within the Arctic circle for moral reasons, another will simply walk on through and take the booty.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-2034643,00.html

The only way to stop such a free-for-all is to set up a treaty such as the Antarctic Treaty. This has been extremely important in negotiating terms of protection for all aspects of the territory. See http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/About_Antarctica/Treaty/ . But it is probably too late.

There appears to have been little discussion by international NGOs about Norway's new oil and gas exploration moves. Yet they have been happy to sound the alarm about US intentions within Northern Alaska. Does this show an anti-American bias or is the (Nobel) Norway simply good at staying out of the limelight?

2006-02-10T13:05:00.000Z

Climate 'warmest for millennium'

Yet another article out regarding warming climates and climate change today. See, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4698652.stm .

We as individuals can of course do our bit to answer this threat. See, http://www.cat.org.uk/information/catinfo.tmpl?command=search&db=catinfo.db&eqSKUdatarq=InfoSheet_EnergyEfficiency . While this site is mainly aimed at UK readers, it is still of use to those of you overesas.

2006-02-09T18:59:00.000Z

FoE In Image Shake-up Shock

Tired of their musty, middle-aged image, Friends Of The Earth have given the green light to issuing their 'activists' with high-powered sports cars with personalised number plates.

2006-02-07T23:38:00.000Z

Another Paradise To Trash

A international team of scientists has discovered a isolated region of extraordinary biodiversity that has remained untouched by the presence of man.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4688000.stm

In less than a month the team identified new species of frogs, plants, birds and butterflies, and discovered the breeding grounds of the 'lost' Six-wired Bird of Paradise (see photo).

The area lies within a 'protected zone' in North-Western New Guinea, and its short term future is considered to be secure. However, now that the secret is out, and with further expeditions planned, how long will this new Eden survive?

'Eco' tourism, global biodiversity prospecting and local subsistence farming will be slugging it out. Those old-fashioned souls who still believe that the environment has a value beyond money, and should be preserved for its own sake rather than for the uses we can put it to, should look away now. It won't be pretty.

2006-02-05T14:09:00.000Z

The future is now?

There is much talk this week of the runaway effects of climate change or global warming. James Lovelock has been warning of this for some time and speaks about this in his interview with Hardtalk (BBC News24, July, 2004) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/3937609.stm . The Geological Society has also got its forecast out for the human race, (if you've got children, look away now.....); http://www.geolsoc.org.uk/template.cfm?name=Global_Warming_Essay .

None of the above makes for easy reading (or listening). In fact, it all seems extremely surreal. These people are however eminent scientists in their field, not nutters! ....Or are they?

2006-02-03T12:04:00.000Z

Faking it.

The Kyoto Protocol, signed about a year ago, (with Russia finally on board) is a fake. It misleads the citizens of the world into believing that some sort of progress is being made towards curbing CO2 emissions. It misleads people into believing that the causes of climate change are being taken seriously. They are not. The governments of the United States, India and China are not on board. They probably never will be. They are pitched instead in a race for economic supremacy that will continue throughout the 21st century. The US doesn't want to lose its top slot; China wants to win it and India does not want to miss out. To enter into this race they are going to need energy resources and plenty of them. As a result they (and many other countries) are becoming increasingly ambitious and some might say, increasingly reckless, in their pursuit of energy resources such as oil and gas.

Lets look at China who thinks nothing of dealing with countries such as Sudan in the pursuit of oil deposits. Their latest drive is out west, not just within China but, also beyond its borders. They are doing deals with a number of Central Asian countries. They are building pipelines that will carry much needed gas back into Chinese cities, factories and power stations. Within China, whole towns are turning into cities almost overnight on the back on oil exploration. China is now the second largest user of oil after the United States. For further background on China's energy sector see http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/china.html .

The race for oil is getting so intense that even oil shale is being talked about in the United States again; see http://www.energybulletin.net/11779.html . In another development India and China have recently become oil bidding partners. In December they acquired PetroCanada's Syrian oil and natural gas assets.

The point here is that government officials and business people are tied up with their strategic energy resource maneuverings. For their countries to stay ahead economically they need to secure their energy needs. Is the Kyoto Protocol on their radar? I doubt it. It should be, even if it is for nothing less than the incentives it gives to become more energy efficient. However, as history has shown, the rush west 200 years ago within the USA was unstoppable. Business, migration and population drove it. Now China has its Wild, Wild West. It too is unstoppable and for the very same reasons. Kyoto, noble as it is, is dead in the water.

2006-02-01T21:20:00.000Z

World Bank breaks wind

The World Bank has had a certain amount flack from anti-globalisation protestors over recent years. Some of this has been from protestors concerned about the environment and particularly the banks involvement with large scale hydro dams. Probably very few of these protesters realise that the bank is now the largest funder of environmental projects within the developing world. It does this through the Global Environment Facility (G.E.F.). See http://www.gefweb.org/ .

The GEF has recently announced more funding for enabling the development of renewables technologies. See their press release at http://www.gefweb.org/Documents/mexico_re_release_020106.pdf . Surely such developments by the World Bank need to be encouraged and just possibly the protesters need to move on or find another cause.

2006-02-01T14:10:00.000Z

Sugar rush

George Bush spoke in his State of the Union address last night of dealing with America's 'addiction to oil'. One idea mooted was for an increased use of ethanol as an energy source. Brazil is one country increasingly using ethanol to power its vehicles. All this interest in ethanol is not new but it is gathering pace with the commodity market prices for sugar at a 25 year high according to an article in the Gulf Daily News http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/Story.asp?Article=134033&Sn=BUSI&IssueID=28317 .

For more information on ethanol use in the United States go to http://www.michigan.gov/mda/0,1607,7-125-1566_1733_23370-38575--,00.html . For more information on ethanol use in Brazil try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel_in_Brazil .

2006-01-31T12:02:00.000Z

Invading the icebox

Photo: http://www.synthstuff.com/

The above picture is taken from the USS Honolulu, a Los Angeles Class, Fast Attack Submarine. The pictures reportedly were taken approximately 280 miles from the North Pole. This is another example of human insistence on exploring all the uninhabitable parts of our planet. This is possible thanks to incredible technologies. Many people are hoping that technologies will also provide solutions to our increasing energy and food supply problems. But as some technologies get us into trouble with our environment (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/climate/) it is hoped others will save us. Are we running simply to stand still?

For a more philosophical debate on the impacts of technology read the lecture by Professor David Newland of Cambridge University, 'Technology-saviour or servant?' at http://www2.eng.cam.ac.uk/~den/CHRIST_AND_THE_COSMOS.pdf .

2006-01-29T14:51:00.000Z

What price for oil?

Photo: IsraelAloja

http://www.waado.org/Environment/OilFires_2000/ElumeRiverFire/FireImages.html

It has been reported by Reuters Thursday that the Nigerian army has moved extra troops into the Niger Delta to try and counter recent attacks by militia on foreign oil companies. The most recent was on the headquarters of Italian oil company Agip where nine locals were killed. A five week campaign by the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta has included sabotage and kidnapping, helping to push oil prices to a four month high.

Such militia have many reasons for doing what they do. Overall, they are tired of having their people walked over by their government and foreigners, all for sake of oil. One tribe that is affected by oil exploration within the delta are the Urhobo people. There is plenty of information about their culture and history at http://www.waado.org/Contents.html . Here you can find their 'environment' link, which documents various environmental disasters caused by oil exploration and a reckless disregard for the local peoples.

As we fill up at the local petrol/gas station we need to be far more aware of how our oil purchase is affecting other peoples and their environments. We are not innocent.