Monday, August 04, 2008

The climate change smokescreen

The title of an interesting article in the Sydney Morning Herald, which focuses on the on-going PR campaign to deny climate change that has, at least in part, been funded by the big oil boys.

"There are at least three other reasons the oil companies' PR campaign has had success for climate change deniers. First, the implications of the science are frightening. Shifting to renewable energy will be costly and disruptive. Second, doubt is an easy product to sell. Climate denial tells us what we all secretly want to hear. Third, science is portrayed as political orthodoxy rather than objective knowledge, a curiously postmodern argument."

Interesting to note that Exxon Mobil has announced that it will "cease funding nine groups that had fuelled a global campaign to deny climate change." This piece claims that it took a shareholder revolt to get that decision. I seem to recollect that they denied funding any such organisations a couple of years ago.

Interesting conclusion too .....

"The tide slowly turned on tobacco denial and the science finally was accepted. Some people still choose to smoke and some pay a price for it.

But climate is different. There are no 'smoke-free areas' on the planet. Climate denial may turn out to be the world's most deadly PR campaign."

(Hmmmm ... no smoke free areas? Try a British pub. Mind you, you'd better hurry, at the rate they are closing there will be very few left soon.)

I wonder if the UK press will pick up on this? It could perhaps be the signal for another extremely entrenched and divisive war of words. With the great majority stuck in the middle in no-mans land again!

Addendum: From the International Herald Tribune, a piece entitled 'Convincing the skeptics'.

Rubbish Facts

I have been alerted by Dave of Solarventi to a 'debate' raging on the Jeremy Vine show (actually Matthew Bannister) on R2 regarding fines for bin taxes.

A lot of arguments made (and coming in as I write) are now well recycled (!), but one issue raised by the 'experts' struck me and hence I have written in:

Just listening to the 'debate', where the facts flying around, especially without much context, are worth as much as stats.

If there have been 'only' 1,000 prosecutions so far, one presumes these to have been successful. How many have not been? What have been the costs to the taxpayer of people and systems to generate this deterrent/revenue generator, over and above the ever so slight public negative perception of anything green hued these days (VED anyone?).

I suspect the £70k garnered so far might not have covered the costs of a few Civ. Servants for one year, and hence how much has been wasted that could have gone in much greener and more efficient directions?

Driving Miss, Crazy Thinking?

Just watching a BBC Breakfast News report on a plan to tax folk out of older, less efficient cars into new, more efficient ones.

I'm all for efficiency measures; not sure keen on taxes, to be blunt.

Featuring Tim Yeo MP, it is an interesting situation. Actually, interesting to me was also the fact that I think I heard that of his committee of 17, um, 16 were not in favour (tbc* - it hasn't been repeated in any subsequent slots, oddly), but he was sure 'it would have got though if they hadn't had to rush 'cos they were all off on hols now.' Hmn.

To be sure, he was 'balanced' by a lady from the RAC, but I notice she has been dropped in subsequent clips. Which is a shame, because she is making the fair point that it is hardly fair, or very eco (what is the carbon consequence of a new car's manufacture?), to hit folk who still have the car they bought under available rules a while ago, and then try and force them to buy a new one in the name of green.

Mr. Yeo at least was advocating that revenue generated remained within the eco-pot, but again I think I caught he was talking about paying folk like me to scrap my 11-year old Volvo.

Now, I don't know what he is proposing, but it is currently something like £180 for a junker. But my car is, to all intents and purposes, perfect. Admittedly, it is only worth £2000 at best, but even if they compo'd me that value, just what the heck can I get? There seems to be some odd, dare I say, London pol/chatterati notion, that I happen to have the extra £15,000 on top to buy a Prius, assuming they did an estate that carries what mine does.

For possibly selfish reasons, but also with my eco-eyebrow cranked as well, I am not too thrilled the direction which this one is going, nor with the way our national broadcaster is trying to rather over-enthusiastically push the agenda of those who would claim one thing but possibly not have it all thought out as well as it might. And not for the first time.

Addendum - looks like Mr. Yeo was early morning only. There was a follow-on with a chap from the Society of Motor Traders (who one presumes might have a vested interest in flogging new, but possibly second hand across the board as well) and the point I am making was at least alluded to, namely the cost of the upgrade.

*Links, I am sure, to come...

Didn't take long:

BBC - MPs sceptical over car tax rise

Indy - 'Pay to scrap gas-guzzlers'

Indy - Driven to distraction

Telegraph - Government's green car tax plans in disarray - Courtesy of Dave from Solarventi

BBC - Plans for a graduated car tax

Autoindustry - NEW - Another link from Dave of Solarventi - A light right foot will do more to reduce CO2 than retrospective road tax, says the IAM - this tends to support the logic of more useage-based 'influence', which must translate into fuel tax. But this obviously becomes a political and 'fairness' (since when was that a problem) issue with those for whom driving, and over fair distances, is not really an option.

Gaurdian - NEW - The Mancunian way - Whilst being fine with all sorst of views being expressed, in light of the way media is shaped by what we are first served, I have to have a certain sympathy with the poster who notes this: 'I thought that Dr Huq was an academic specialising in pop music at a London Poly. I don't mean that in a nasty way. It is just that I don't see the connection with Manchester or transportation. Transportation is a complex issue that usually needs post-graduate training in engineering or mathematics to talk about in a sensible way. Some economics would not go astray either.'

Greenbang - NEW - Emissions car tax – a load of hot air? - I've been a bit rude, too. Sorry.

Gaurdian - NEW - Golf's water waste means only the fairways are green - Why here? Read on:

Telegraph - NEW - Anyone for green humbugs? Read to the end:)

Do-do

A bit of Monday philosophy...

There's what's right to do.
There's what I should do.
There's what some want me to do.
There's what others want me to do.
There's what I could do.
There's what I want to do.
There's what I can afford to do.

And, there's what I will do.

It might be worth some remembering those options, especially in terms of the way they present their views to me when seeking to influence my behaviour through cooperation or coercion.

It just might help us all avoid mutual.. do-do.

Weights & measures

European trend to recycling leads to mass shortage of wheelie bins in UK

Just being naughty, but turtle-chocking aside, I wonder how many plastic bags' worth of plastic ends up in a wheelie bin?

And, more importantly, I wonder why I have not heard much on these things being made from recycled plastic, though I guess there may be QC issues under the elements.

Just hope the various designs have been thought through for the best enviROI with the most efficient collection and disposal systems and not just to meet targets or score a profit. What are the odds?

The colour of complexity

I have long claimed that little that's green can only be viewed in black and white.

Perhaps now the time has arrived to work and appreciation of red in to the picture?

Greens: Abandon economic growth to beat CO2 offshoring

Since the first passionate debates in my mid-teens, through Uni and beyond, I have always envied those who latched on to a noble cause, sought and often gained glory (and now nice careers) by being very single minded in (usually) being just against something.

I don't know if it is a curse, but I have always tended to look beyond the core issue, and certainly have got in a tangle as a consequence.

Which can of course also affect the arguments often put forward by some proponents: 'As to how that should be done, Bond was reluctant to give specifics.'

It's all well and good saying 'how awful...' and there is some legitimacy in saying 'this is bad; we need to stop...', but frankly having nice little jobs (involving using a lot of the toys 'progress' has generated, because, well, that's different... it's their jobs. As opposed to the ones we do, apparently) just lurking in these areas without coming up with much by way of credible alternative seems frankly parasitic at best.

And I do wonder at the value of all of this, at least in this form, as it seems to exist in a bubble occupied mainly occupied by the usual suspects from the various extremes who seem to have carved lucrative niches taking each other on, and more often than not way over the head, and hence engagement of the general public.

I am not saying that much of what is being raised doesn't need to be, but do concern myself at the sanctimonious pedestal mounters that think they are the key ones who need to do so.

Indy - NEW - The WMD that really should be worrying us - By way of... I'm not sure what, actually.

Sunday, August 03, 2008

Priorities, Gordon... priorities

Plus a smidge of political savvy, maybe...?

Overfill your bin and you’ll be treated worse than a shoplifter

Another fine mess you've got yourself into, I'd say.

Relative values

Golf's water waste means only the fairways are green

'To ease your emissions that little bit extra, decline the golf cart and get some exercise, and pack some biodegradable golf balls and environmentally friendly tees.'

Yup, that'll do it.

Debateable

One thing so often missing in matters of debate is effective, balanced moderation.

I have just written to the BBC:

I have just watched the 'debate' between the climate activist and the industry representative.

At one point both 'sides' clearly stated totally stated a report stated diametrically opposite things.

Is there any chance of the moderators/interviewers letting us know who was/is right?

I am already fed up with the classic 'twofer' technique serving ratings more, butbeing allowed to mouth off without being checked adds zero value and the media just gives any old tossed off claim credence in this manner.

Tectonic Divides

A worthwhile read: Bridging the divides

Friday, August 01, 2008

Shorter. Cheaper. Greener

Speed Conferences - Ever Been To One?

Hold 'em on 2nd Life for free and I'm in.

I'm still plotting my revolutionary new conference format:)

Something stinks

And I think it is this:

Auctioning off the right to emit carbon dioxide is likely to net the UK government nearly €2.5bn (£2bn) over the next four years, under plans to be announced today.

Telegraph - Green light for carbon credit sale

And now I know why: 'The Government, which has said the money raised will go to the Exchequer, remains on a collision course with the EU, which has insisted that any monies raised from carbon permit trading should be used to fund projects designed to combat climate change.'

Telegraph - A windfall tax will not solve our energy crisis - 'The Treasury perennially refuses to ring-fence revenues from "green" taxes - thereby undermining its credibility.'
Just thought it was worth repeating for effect:)

Times - NEW - Gordon Brown plans ‘green tax’ on energy firms to help poor

Look out Kermit!

These are early days PR punts I'm guessing, so I won't accord them fully fledged category status as yet, but looks like your pond is a teeming fuel dump:

Indy - How to turn water into rocket fuel – scientists unlock power of the sun

Guardian - 'Oil from algae' promises climate friendly fuel

Both interesting, but also sort of focusing still on our desire to still combust, ultimately, rather than doing it less and less.

Still, it's nice to get a space story in without it being a major green eyebrow crank.

And the good news is...

'Reports'... in the BBC... about the UK government and its handling of emissions:

UK in 'delusion' over emissions

Three of my most trusted sources of objective information. At least the sources of the 'reports' are 'most trusted', but it's not clear by whom. If it is by the BBC, then that's a wee problem, as I do believe I have read their trust factor is down to single figures. As for HMG...

What on earth is a boy to make of it all?

PETITION - A lot fewer allotment spaces if we are not careful

As just received:

Please help protect green sites and request they are included in urban design. They help build community cohesion and provide a welcome retreat for wildlife habitat. Please sign and forward to fellow citizens. The petition below to the Government has only got 850 signatures and closes on 2 August - please sign and forward to all your friends - to demonstrate the breadth of support for allotments and land for growing more generally. It takes 2 seconds!

'We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Make it compulsory that local authorities and developers make provision for allotments and community gardens on every new development. Waiting lists are huge we need more allotment sites.'

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/moreallotments/

I wish em luck. Shame the deadline means this will probably miss our next newsletter.

These petitions can be pretty hit or miss (look at my last few), and it's amazing how the deadline comes round.

AFFRONT TO NATURE - Electric Wheelbarrow


Now I know it's good to stay at home and garden.

And I know some need a little help to assist in getting out and about and around.

But this really does seem to be pushing it (sorry). £200 for a small motor that might help with pulling a tad but still needs lifting (it also looks to be about as far from the axis as it can get, too). And really, how big are most gardens and who uses a wheelbarrow that far?

Frankly beefing up the footprint of the wheel would look like it would help more for most situations I have been in.

Let the flames be... switched off?

Energy to burn

The boss of e.on. Guardian CiF posters. Who needs the Olympics?

Gaurdian - NEW - A dangerous untruth

Eastern Promise?

China can lead the way to a low-carbon economy

Thursday, July 31, 2008

A must read (if you have time)

Well, it does have the word 'sustainable' in it

(DEFRA) Sustainable development indicators in your pocket 2008

A free little book published by Defra provides a statistical overview of the country's progress in tackling key economic, social and environmental issues, by bringing together an extensive range of indicators that can literally fit in your pocket. They cover a wide range of topics of everyday concern such as health, housing, jobs, crime, education, and our environment, all of which may affect whether we can live more sustainably in the future.

The aim of this booklet is to make indicators easily accessible to a wide audience and to enable everyone to judge where change for the better or worse is occurring and where the challenges are. It should be a useful reference to experts but also to others less familiar with the concept of sustainable development or indicators. Around 60,000 copies of the booklet are distributed annually and they are particularly popular with schools and colleges.

This edition includes as new contextual information:

* An update to the life satisfaction wellbeing measure, showing how people rate their lives [page 118 of publication]

* An extension of the wellbeing measures to now include child wellbeing [pages 129 to 135].

* Estimates of carbon dioxide emissions associated with the UK's consumption of goods and services, whether or not the emissions occur within the UK i.e. including through the production of imported goods (often referred to as embedded emissions) [page 24 of publication]

Key results

The 68 indicators comprise 126 measures and using these it is possible to get an overview of change compared with earlier years, based on the number of measures showing improvement, little change or deterioration. However it is essential to look at the individual indicators too as this does not take account of the relative importance of particular indicators.

All indicators1

Compared with the position in 1999, 53 measures show improvement (representing over half of those for which it is possible to make an assessment), and 11 show a deterioration.

A wide range of measures show improvement including:

* renewable electricity
* emissions of air pollutants
* waste recycling
* agricultural emissions and land stewardship
* river water quality
* land recycling for development
* crime and fear of crime
* childhood and pensioner poverty
* death rates from circulatory disease, cancer and suicides
* people killed or seriously injured in road accidents
* housing conditions, fuel poverty and rough sleepers
* local environmental quality.

The eleven measures showing deterioration since 1999 are specifically:

* aviation emissions of greenhouse gases
* fossil fuels used for electricity generation
* nitrogen oxide emissions from electricity generation
* carbon dioxide emissions from the service sector
* energy supply (consumption exceeding UK production)
* household waste arisings
* wintering wetland bird populations
* range of life expectancy between local authorities
* walking and cycling
* ozone pollution in urban areas
* households living in temporary accommodation

UK Framework Indicators

Twenty of the 68 indicators are also 'UK Framework indicators' covering key impacts and outcomes that reflect the priorities shared by the UK Government and the devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
[page 16 of publication]

These include:

Greenhouse gas emissions: emissions of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, were about 8 per cent lower than in 1990. Emissions decreased by about 3 per cent between 2006 and 2007 as a result of switching from coal to natural gas for electricity generation.
[page 23 of publication]

River water quality: between 1990 and 2006 the percentage of rivers of good biological quality in England rose from 60 to 71 per cent and in 2006, 54 per cent of rivers in Northern Ireland and 82 per cent of rivers in Wales were of good biological quality. In 2006, 66 per cent of English rivers were of good chemical quality (up from 43 per cent in 1990), this figure was 74 per cent in Northern Ireland (up from 44 per cent in 1991). In all years since 1993 over 90 per cent of rivers in Wales have been of good chemical quality. In Scotland, the percentage of rivers of good quality has remained stable at around 87 per cent between 2000 and 2006, based on a combined chemical, biological and aesthetic assessment.
[page 59 of publication]

Bird populations: Farmland bird populations fell by 42 per cent between 1970 and 1993, but remained fairly stable thereafter. Woodland bird populations in 2006 were about 30 per cent lower than the peak of the early 1970s and about 16 per cent lower than 1990. The UK's breeding seabird populations increased between 1970 and 1987 by 37 per cent but have fallen again since 1999.
[page 46 of publication]

Crime: In England and Wales, from the British Crime Survey (BCS), vehicle thefts fell by 61 per cent and burglary fell by 47 per cent between 1991 and 2007-8. Violent crime has fallen by 30 per cent since 1999.
[page 68 of publication]

Health inequality: In 1991-3 the difference in average life expectancy for men between local authority areas in the UK with the highest and lowest average life expectancy was 9.7 years. This widened to 12.6 years in 2004-6. For women the difference was 7.5 years in 1991-3 and widened to 10.2 years in 2004-6.
[page 82 of publication]

Theme summaries

The 68 indicators can provide an overview of change for four themes as set out in the UK Government's Sustainable Development Strategy, Securing the Future (though there is some overlap in the messages where some indicators support more than one of the themes). The four themes are:

* Sustainable consumption and production
* Climate change and energy
* Natural resource protection and environmental enhancement
* Creating sustainable communities

Sustainable consumption and production

Indicators1 for sustainable consumption and production mainly cover emissions, resource use and waste.

Twenty measures (over half) show improvement compared with 1999. Those showing improvement include emissions of air pollutants, waste recycling, agricultural emissions, and land recycling.

Measures showing deterioration since 1999 are greenhouse gases from aviation, service sector carbon dioxide emissions and household waste arisings.

Climate change and energy

Indicators1 for climate change and energy mainly cover greenhouse gas emissions, electricity generation and energy supply.

Six measures show improvement since 1999 and five show deterioration.

Those showing improvement since 1999 are renewable electricity, greenhouse gas emissions from shipping, sulphur dioxide emissions from electricity generation, carbon dioxide emissions from manufacturing and the public sector, and methane emissions associated with agriculture.

Those showing deterioration are aviation emissions of greenhouse gases, energy supply, fossil fuels used in electricity generation, nitrogen oxide emissions from electricity generation and service sector carbon dioxide emissions.

Natural resource protection and enhancing the environment

Indicators1 for natural resource protection mainly cover wildlife and biodiversity, farming, land use, fish stocks, air pollution and rivers.

Sixteen measures show improvement since 1999 and one shows deterioration.

Those showing improvement since 1999 include river water quality, farming management and emissions, land recycling, air pollution, and the impact of acidification from air pollution.

Compared with 1990, wintering wetland birds show a decline. Farmland and woodland bird populations show a decline since 1990.

Creating sustainable communities and a fairer world

Indicators1 for creating sustainable communities mainly cover poverty, health, crime, access, mobility, and local and domestic environments.

Twenty-four measures show improvement since 1999, nineteen show little or no change, and four show deterioration.

Those showing improvement include poverty and housing conditions, local environment quality, crime and fear of crime, mortality rates, and road accidents.

Those showing deterioration are the difference in life expectancy between local authority areas, the number of households in temporary accommodation, walking and cycling, and ozone pollution in urban areas.

International indicators

Some international data have been compiled to enable some comparisons to be made for the UK and other countries. International data are available for 32 of the 68 national indicators, consisting of 45 component measures. The indicators are presented on the UK Government sustainable development website (see notes.)

International data are presented for the UK and twelve other countries: France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Canada, Japan, Australia and the United States of America. However owing to data availability not all countries are included in every international measure. The choice of countries was partly driven by data availability but also assumptions about comparative levels of development.

It should be noted that the international data have been used as provided by the originating organisation (for example Eurostat for the European Union, the Organisation for Economic Development and Cooperation (OECD), and others) and reliance has been placed upon these organisations' efforts to ensure that the data are as comparable as possible. Defra statisticians are not responsible for reliability or comparability of the international data, and the international indicators are not National Statistics.

International data are in many cases much older than data available nationally. So the position in the UK and other countries may well have changed compared with the situation presented by the international data.

International comparisons should be always treated with extreme caution as definitions and measurement methods differ between countries (despite considerable efforts by Eurostat and OECD in particular, to ensure consistency in coverage between countries).

The measures presented are the nearest available international equivalent measure to that included in the national indicators. However definitions and coverage may different from the national measure.

An attempt has been made to summarise the international data and to do so a number of criteria have been applied:

(i) Data should be available for the UK and all the 12 other selected countries.

(ii) For assessing the position for the latest year, data should be available for 2002 or later.

(iii) For assessing the recent change, data need to be available for the mid to late 1990s and for 2002 or later.

Applying these criteria, for only 20 of 45 measures for which there are international data are there data for 2002 or later for the UK and all 12 other countries.

Similarly for only 15 of the 45 measures are there sufficient data to assess progress from a year in the mid to late 1990s to 2002 or later.

Summaries are presented below based on the measures that meet the criteria. The measures that are included do cover a wide range of issues related to sustainable development, but they are inevitably extremely limited in the extent to which they present a representative summary of the UK or any other country.

UK's levels compared with 12 other countries in latest available year *

* Out of 20 measures for which data were available for all 13 compared countries and for 2002 or later, 4 measures showed the UK positioned as one of the 4 countries with the most favourable conditions. These measures were: energy consumption, water abstractions, carbon monoxide emissions and road fatalities. The UK's highest position was second, for water abstractions.

* For 6 measures the UK was positioned as one of the bottom 4 countries with the least favourable conditions. These were: renewable energy production, infant deaths per 1,000 live births, average life expectancy, deaths from cardio-vascular disease and cancer and incidences of obesity. Of these measures the UK was positioned 13th for renewable energy production and 12th for incidences of obesity.

* For the remaining 10 measures the UK was in the middle range (5th to 9th position) in relative terms. These measures were greenhouse gas emissions, carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels, emissions of air pollutants from nitrogen oxides, sulphur dioxide and volatile organic compounds, bird species threatened, protected land, Gross Domestic Production per capita, public social expenditure and percentage of adults with tertiary (higher) level educational qualifications.

Change since mid to late 1990s for UK and 12 other countries

* For the 15 measures for which comparisons of progress can be made from the mid to late 1990s with 2003 or later, the UK showed an improvement for 11 measures (73 per cent).

* Both the United States of America and Denmark showed an improvement for 12 measures (80 per cent). Of the compared countries Canada, France, Japan and Australia had the fewest measures showing improvement with 8 (53 per cent). However these assessments of change do not take account of the different baselines for each country, only the extent to which a change has occurred relative to the individual country's status in the mid to late 1990s.

Games... and fun

...and maybe a little education?

electrocity.co.nz - 'ElectroCity is a new online computer game that lets players manage their own virtual towns and cities. It’s great fun to play and also teaches players all about energy, sustainability and environmental management in New Zealand.'

I like the bit about popping nuclear in there even though they don't have any.