Clearing out

Recently, we’ve had to clear out my father’s house. The process was emotional, but also brought the catharsis of getting rid of unwanted things. We gave piles of furniture to local charity shops, filled a skip, and finally relayed several carloads to the tip. Chelmsford recycling centre in Essex is a far cry from council landfills of the past. Tipping in your mixed waste has been replaced by a discipline of sorting into steel containers your metal, plastics, monitors, garden refuse, timber and glass, for example.  It’s now is the place to be! Busy even on a Monday at lunchtime; one man even turned up with a taxi full of plasterboard. The popularity is symptomatic of the way the District Council promotes recycling through local events, education programmes and its comprehensive website, but also via stringent policies on recycling and (formerly) sanctions for rule-breakers.

Even back home in rural Cumbria, local collections of recyclable are regular and convenient. Indeed, data on UK recycling from 2002–2011 shows a dramatic increase in the proportion of household waste recycled instead of sent to landfills, up from around 15% to 40%. This is impressive in isolation, though it should be remembered that the UK was formerly one of the countries in the EU that recycled least. The success is perhaps based on a clear central policy which has no direct cost to consumers. In essence, promoting consumer recycling through local legislation appears to be a genuinely win-win proposal, where consumer costs are minimal and the costs of transport and processing waste can be offset by its resale to scrap dealers, paper companies and the like. It is possible that the recession is responsible and has reduced the amount of consumer waste produced, though recycling itself has been shown to lower consumption with all data being geographically varied.

As recycling has become more routine, basic assumptions about waste have been subtly challenged—“reduce, reuse, recycle” is normal. As with all sustainable approaches, sustainable waste disposal involves taking responsibility for our behaviour, and in the case of waste and recycling, reconnecting with and re-evaluating our “stuff”. While recycling could add to a dangerous idea that limitless consumption can be responsibly managed, relying on consumers to sort waste for recycling, to select items for charity shops, and to hand on items to others (via online fora such as www.freecycle.org) allows them to engage with material things even as they become waste. As you clear out an old home, the irony that you learn about things as you lose them becomes sadly relevant.

David and Alex Jackman

Tour de France

Last weekend, thousands of people lined the roads in Yorkshire and Cambridgeshire to watch the peloton roar through. For only the second time, the Tour de France, cycling’s leading event and perhaps the biggest sporting event in the world, commenced in the UK. Hundreds of cyclists are competing for the famous yellow jersey, travelling across cobbled streets and wind-swept moors.

I know a bit about wind-swept moors, as I was in the Yorkshire Dales recently. The small towns and villages, including  Masham, Leyburn and Hawes, were uncharacteristically colourful, adorned with strings of small woollen yellow jerseys from house to house and lamppost to lamppost. They looked cheerfully quaint and somewhat incongruous. This is evidence of the local enthusiasm for cycling that has developed in northern parts due to the emergence of local heroes, such as Mark Cavendish and Bradley Wiggins. Local knitters have been hard at work decorating the route from the Grand Depart in Leeds, to York and Sheffield. In addition, bright yellow model bicycles adorn shops and public buildings; similar model bicycles have also been seen around Cambridge, where the route continues to London.

Cycling is a very sustainable form of transport. In the UK, CO2 emissions from transport will rise by 35% from 1990-2030, yet much can be done by individuals and communities to reduce that figure. Cycling to school reduces the strain of the school run rush hour. Bicycles can be left at rail stations or carried on trains, and some cities, such as London, have the famous ‘Boris Bikes’.

There is, however, another side. In the UK, 19,000 cyclists are injured or even killed every year. A detailed Welsh survey has just been published, detailing the causes of these injuries and deaths. There are to be 2 billion British pounds of new local growth funds, some of which may go towards cycleways; however, the planning of roads is often prioritised.

In my area a new cycleway will be opened around our local lake; this has involved years of consultation and cost several million pounds. It will be built using local materials and will allow tourists and locals to avoid a busy road, which I would not encourage my children to cycle on right now! The charity, Sustrans, does much to open new routes like this and to promote more sustainable forms of transport. Please visit the website below for useful maps and ways to get involved: www.sustrans.org.uk

Thus, regardless of who rides up to the finish line in the Mall, we should all think about sustainable transport and get pedalling!

Article by David Jackman

New frontiers

Last week I found myself in Toronto, a city that is rapidly growing and attracting new investment and yet is very environmentally aware. There are new initiatives in waste recycling, replacing coal burning with hydro power stations, integrated, low-carbon transport infrastructure and city greening schemes (although the new trees I could see had been bit back by the heavy snowfall of the recent icy cold winter).

I was in Toronto to represent the UK in the latest round of international discussions to produce a template for sustainable, smart and resilient cities. All cities should want to be ‘smart’. Indeed, London and Birmingham are working towards this direction, with the Mayor of London having sent a message of support to the conference. Toronto styles itself as a ‘Smart City’ but we are only now beginning to understand what a huge task that is.

Sustainable development is an unavoidable necessity for most cities (in which 80% of the world’s population will soon live) and yet, as an aim it asks so many questions. We need structures for delineating what sustainability looks like and we need measures to evaluate progress. If we can do this for cities we can most certainly affect the corporate level and assess the contribution of businesses and public organisations.

So in a rather smart and gleaming Toronto office tower, we put the finishing touches on an international framework, with considerable input from the UK, France and China. We also published the first attempt at a list of measures and indicators in a document called ISO 37120. Toronto hosts the Global Cities Indicators Facility (GCIF) which enables cities to compare themselves and benchmark their relative success. The emerging international framework will give this process more rigour and comprehensive coverage. We hope that more cities will then take up the challenge.

It’s tempting to think that as countries search for growth, green initiatives slip down the agenda; however, cities like Toronto, Yokohama, Copenhagen, Toledo and Rio, not to mention London, show that both can go hand in hand. The diligent behind-the-scenes work of numerous groups, committees, individuals and companies is building a cumulative stock of creative ways forward, from which we can learn. green24 is, of course, one way of increasing that awareness and sharing experiences and information.

Article by David Jackman

Sentimental, Yet Sustainable - Taking “Reusing” to A Whole New Level with Upcycling

Some rights reserved by Gemma Bou via Flickr

Every year, consumers in North America generate 12 million tonnes of textile waste, with households averaging approximately 30kg of waste each year. The U.K. sees similar issues, with 1.2 tonnes of clothing ending up in British landfills alone. These figures are set to increase, with studies now showing that consumers have begun buying more clothes, up to four times as many as they did in the 1980s. As trends become more short-lived and more people become fashion-conscious, more clothes end up in dumpsters.

Recognizing this, various organizations have developed ways to utilise the millions of tonnes of textiles wasted across the globe. One such organisation is Oxfam, whose joint efforts with British retailer Marks & Spencer have resulted in the conservation of 11 million items that would have otherwise been sent to landfills around the country. Clothes donated to Oxfam are resold, with all proceeds going towards providing livelihood programs to mothers in third-world countries.

For the sentimental that can’t bear to part with old clothes, donating them might not be the most ideal course of action. But these clothes, whether they’re your children’s baby clothes or your prom dress from high school, can still be given a new lease on life by upcycling.

Upcycling has taken off across the world, and now thousands of web pages have popped up, all dedicated to the art of creating new items out of old clothes. If you’re not sure how to start, here are some of the simpler projects you may want to look into.

Project I: Old Clothes into New Clothes

People who like to work with their hands can certainly let their creativity shine with various upcycling projects. Old T-shirts can be sewn with loose fabric to create dresses, and daddy’s old shirts can be altered a bit to create nightshirts for the kids. Harder materials such as denim and leather can be used to create everything from flip-flops to handbags.

Project II: Old Clothes into Household Items

Repurposing old clothes to create potholders and quilts is a no-brainer, but how about creating a lampshade from old ties? A tent or a bed for the family pet with old shirts? You could use old sweaters to create instant gift-wrapping for your wine bottles so you never have to waste fancy paper again. You could even use old jeans to create tables and flower pots!

Project III: New Clothes from Old Materials

A more common theme of upcycling involves creating clothing from various household materials. Civic Duty shoes made out of old FedEx envelopes are on the rise, but clothes made out of various wrappers have always been popular. Nowadays, everything from paper to aluminium cans and even garbage bags have been used to create haute couture. After all, it’s only the right thing to do.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Top 5 Tips:

• Manage your resources and reduce the number of clothing items you purchase per year. Get as much use out of your clothes as possible.
• Go through your closet and fish out the clothes you never wear; separate them into the things you’d like to keep and the things you don’t mind parting with.
• Donate what you can to foundations that specialise in recycling old fabrics. Remember, even though 100% of textiles are recyclable, over 85% still end up in landfills as scraps. Research a foundation before donating to them to see how they treat donations and where proceeds go.
• Look at everything with a fresh eye. Instead of immediately using old shirts as rags, look into using them to create everything from cat tents to curtains.
• Separate your items according to fabric. Tougher fabrics such as denim and leather can be used to create items such as tables and flip-flops; softer fabrics like cotton and silk may be better off being used to create new items of clothing.

Article by Sookie Lioncourt - Follow her @SookieLioncourt

We can adapt to the effects of climate change

In the last few days, one of the most important statements in years was made about global environmental health. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the key body providing and commenting on climate change data, supported by nearly all countries in the world, and it has just issued a report which was finalised in Yokohama, Japan. This is the second report in a series of four; the next two are due later this year.

The main message of the report is that we can adapt to the effects of climate change. This marks a significant change in focus which, until now, has been on methods of slowing or preventing climate change. This is not a message of defeatism but rather one of realism within a much broader strategy that still includes mitigation.

In the same week, the ‘grandfather of green’ and author of The Gaia Hypothesis, Dr James Lovelock, suggested that, as nearly 80 percent of the world’s population lives in cities, this is perhaps the best thing we can do to adapt. Living together and in close proximity to others allows us to be more efficient in sharing our energy use, cutting our travel to work, facing natural hazards and alleviating stress on natural environments. In explaining this, he draws a likeness to termite mounds that recycle air and energy and allow huge insect populations to survive harsh conditions.

Lovelock cites Singapore as an example of a human termite mound. This is believable because it is where I am writing this blog, in a hotel that has the largest atrium in Asia and operates very much in the same way. In fact, it looks and is shaped like a hollow termite mound! Indeed, here is a city state that captures and recycles almost all the water that lands on it, controls pollution, recycles, and conserves land.

The IPCC report is designed to identify upcoming risks, such as the increase in vector-borne diseases, rural poverty and species disruption. It also catalogues excellent advances in Africa and Australasia; this includes planning for change. Finally, this report also shows us the immense amount of work that is being done to manage the environment and give us a reasonable chance of holding Gaia together!

David Jackman

Green news roundup

There is a lot going on in the ‘green’ space right now. Here are some insights:

A recently published report by the European Wind Energy Association (EWEA) highlights the vast amount of water used by traditional power stations to generate power, i.e., three Olympic-sized swimming pools being consumed every minute. Energy production accounts for 44 percent of the EU’s total water use. For more information please see the following website:  http://www.ewea.org

The UK Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) has produced a specification, known technically as PAS 2030, to set out requirements that installers have to follow in installing new energy efficiency measures within the ‘Green Deal scheme’.  To check that your installer complies with these requirements, consult the the following website: www.gov.uk/green-deal-energy-saving-measures/overview

The offshore wind energy industry could provide £6.7 billion per year to the UK economy as well as providing 150,000 jobs by 2020, according to a new report published recently. The following webside provides further information: http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/analysis/2334094/report-offshore-wind-industry-promises-150-000-jobs-boost

I recently came across the ‘eco congregation’ scheme, which started in Portugal and encourages churches to turn ‘green’. This can be achieved by changing some of the following things; how ancient church buildings are heated and insulated, how congregations travel to church, and how they recycle and come together to support the community schemes more widely. My own local church held a recycling day this week, which enabled members to drop off old clothes, mobile phones etc. To find out more about eco congregations, please view the following website: http://www.ecocongregation.org

Volkswagen is aiming to triple battery life in the 2015 Golf, using Lithium-air batteries. Check out the following website to find out more: http://www.greencarreports.com/news

Negotiators are meeting in Bonn, Germany, this week to make progress on establishing a global climate agreement by 2015. Follow the Agreement on Climate Transformation 2015 (ACT 2015) on the following site: http://www.wri.org/our-work/project/act-2015

I am continuing work on international standards (ISO series) for sustainable and resilient communities and Smart Cities, which will help planners and local authorities to engage with entire communities in order to address what really matters in the local areas. This will come on stream in 2015; however, consultation documents should be available this summer.

Finally, the British Standards Institution (BSI) has just released a free leaflet for any community wanting to be more sustainable. It comes in the form of a guide that contains a user-friendly plan for any group thinking about developing basic sustainable living. As one of the main authors, I am hoping this short leaflet will be distributed widely in the UK in order to spark new schemes as well as shift views. Sustainability is not just a company responsibility or an individual lifestyle choice; it is, however, often best addressed as a village, town or neighbourhood. Please visit the following website to find out more:  http://shop.bsigroup.com

Article by David Jackman 

Ten tips for saving water

The kitchen is the area in the home where we use around 10% of the total household water for cooking, cleaning, washing, and drinking. Of all water used in the home, about 15-20% is used on the laundry, and worst of all, our bathroom habits use nearly 40%!

It is, however, easy to conserve water in the home by making a few simple changes to your daily routines. Just follow the tips below and make changes in your home today.

1. Take short showers, instead of bathing
2. Use your water meter to check for hidden water leaks
3. Install water-saving shower heads and aerators
4. Reduce the amount of water flushed down the toilet
5. Ensure your washing machine and dishwasher are washing full loads only
6. Wash your car with a bucket and water instead of a hosepipe
7. Rinse your razor in the sink
8. Don't leave the water running for washing and rinsing when doing dishes by hand
9. Turn off the water after you wet your toothbrush
10. Insulate your geyser and water pipes 

For more green facts, visit green24.com

Yokohama, the Smart City

I am sitting in Yokohama in the middle of the heaviest snowfall in living memory. ‘It never snows here’ says a resident, yet there have been two snow dumps in a week. As events of this sort don’t usually happen in the Tokyo Bay area, the city simply isn't prepared to deal with all the effects of nearly a foot of snow. Roads are closed, trains are not running and pavements are impassable. This is a city of over 3.7 million people, in one of the richest countries in the world, with an advanced Tsunami response system (there are maps and posters to warn you about this danger everywhere); however, it has been paralysed. I am writing this not far from the central fire station and can hear the sirens going again; sadly, there have been a number of fatalities reported.

I am attending an international conference on ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) to write a set of international standards and guidelines for sustainable and resilient communities and cities. We are here because Yokohama leads the way internationally in sustainable infrastructure and policies; it is the current chair. There are, for example, bike racks at every turn (like the ‘Boris bikes’ in London) and the city uses many advanced techniques to reduce its carbon footprint, control its traffic flow and reduce its energy consumption. Yokohama is one of a new breed of ‘Smart Cities’, using technology to integrate and expedite all of its interdependent utilities and control its energy and resource flow. There is a useful website one can visit to find out more: Click here.

Despite all this focus on sustainability and advanced technology, Yokohama is brought to a standstill by a bout of snowfall. This illustrates why we have placed ‘resilience’ in the title of the new ISO 37101 standard. Sustainability is about having the capability to respond to whatever challenges might emerge. It is about having the capacity to be robust, adaptable and secure. This encompasses both expected threats like Tsunamis and the unexpected, like snow. East coast Japan is not alone; Canada is experiencing unusually cold and stormy conditions right now and Southern England resembles a swamp!

I am here representing the UK because we have pioneered thinking in this area. I have led a British Standard’s initiative, producing frameworks for sustainability in communities, the Olympics, film, construction materials and supply chains. Our interactive and principle-led approach has gained wider attention and is now being translated in an international context. Hopefully our flexible and people-centred style will help build the resilience that is obviously so desperately needed!

David Jackman 

Education and the future

Green24 is for everyone's future. We should never lose sight of the fact that sustainability is for future generations, for our children and our childrens’ children. This is a long-term project and part of everything we do.

We have explained in this column how businesses can and should benefit from being actively involved in sustainable development, both in terms of innovation and implementation. Whether or not we have made the case successfully, it is undeniable that sustainability must be forwarded through the involvement and engagement of young people and education providers.

Schools, both in this country and in many others, have built sustainability into the national curriculum. Although the curriculum is being slimmed down, just now the Sustainability and Environmental Education charity - SEEd - (http://se-ed.co.uk/edu/sustainable-schools/sustainability-curriculum/) is piloting new forms of curricula, working sustainability learning into a wide range of subjects. This includes a scheme to make your school more sustainable! An excellent resource is the ‘world mapper’ that shows countries by size of carbon use. There is also the eco-schools campaign (http://www2.keepbritaintidy.org/ecoschools/), 'Teach Share' for teacher’s materials (http://www.teachshare.org.uk/) and the 'Sustainable Schools Alliance' (http://sustainable-schools-alliance.org.uk/) supporting learning programmes.

In Scotland, the ‘One Planet Schools’ initiative, backed by government, published the One Planet Schools Report in December 2012, providing a whole-school approach to learning about sustainability. It is a model that many countries would do well to follow.

At a higher tier of education, many universities offer degrees up to Masters level in sustainable development and related subjects. The universities of East Anglia, Exeter, Leeds, Dundee and Aston are prominent in offering a range of courses that attract international students. Some, like Kingston, focus on environmental change, while others like Lancaster make links with business and management. Even my own university, Oxford, has expanded the oldest Geography department in the world to include environmental change in its title. To brag a little, we were, I recall, at the forefront of climate change research in the 1980s!

The international scene is very diverse and rich with opportunities. PhD work is widespread and many universities have research centres. I am connected to Royal Holloway, London, but there are other centres, from Aberdeen and Glasgow to Cambridge and Hertfordshire. There is a wealth of activity, interest and application among the younger generations; perhaps the rest of us need to catch up! Certainly, I have one son studying a sustainability degree and another to follow. It is encouraging that they can see this as a key part of their futures. It is up to us to provide the support we can. This is where Green 24 starts.

David Jackman

Roots

It is hard to ignore the severe weather events in both the US and UK right now. There have been successions of storms piling across the Atlantic, bringing extensive flooding and loss of life. The coastlines of Wales and the West have been worst affected, with the beach becoming almost entirely deposited on the seafront promenade at Aberystwyth. In Canada, a region used to difficult weather, the conditions are described as a ‘polar vortex’.

This reminds us of our deep connection with the environment, a chord we cannot cut. Many of those interviewed on daily TV news reports freely make the connection between the increased frequency of extreme weather events and global warming. As a long-time resident of a village (now an island) in the Somerset Levels remarked, ‘flooding is more common, reaches a higher level and lasts for longer’. That pretty much sums it up.

Perhaps now, as in so many things, commitment to sustainability becomes a matter of belief. There are those who will never have enough evidence to accept that the climate is changing, or that if it is, human agency has any significant role in the change. Others readily see the signs everywhere and are perhaps over-zealous!

So perhaps the argument should move on to different ground? Perhaps it is a sense of inter-connectivity in economic, social and environmental terms that we should be focusing on. We should say, ‘be sustainable because sustainability is mutually beneficial’ rather than rely on the climate change threat. There is a well-founded impact on economic and social cases. I have personally carried out a good deal of international research on this, with Edinburgh Business School and King’s College London, which demonstrates that good sustainability in corporate practices connects to long-term financial performance and improving return on assets.

Perhaps it is easier to talk about the responsibilities we have to each other as part of being reasonable citizens. The strength and resilience of our communities depends on our commitment to each other and indeed, on our faith that communities are worthwhile. Being aware of what we measure as signs of success needs careful examination. That also forms part of the work I am currently engaged in for the International Standards Organisation (ISO).

We owe it to each other to examine the facts and the options more closely. Departing from the climate change debate, there is still much to chew over and many other reasons to accept the sustainability challenge. green24 is here to help.

David Jackman

It’s a Wonderful (Integrated) World

All eyes have been on South Africa recently. We have been sharing in the country’s loss while, it seems to me, wishing the country well for a future, post-Mandela age. I wrote to him once and he was kind enough to send a response. I remain impressed.

The sight of nearly 100 world leaders, together in the pouring rain in the cavernous FNB stadium outside Soweto in Johannesburg, tends to inspire a ‘bigger picture’.  It could be argued that we do too little ‘world thinking’, and yet this week reminded us that the people of the world share similar problems, emotions and aspirations.

Similarly, there is a movement catching on in sustainability which is global in perspective; broadening horizons, and moving away from national concerns and financial obsessions. It is called Integrated Reporting (www.theiirc.org), and it brings together the long term value of creation of all kinds. Unilever, HSBC, Deutsche Bank, Hyundai, Microsoft, PepsiCo, National Australia Bank and Tata Steel are among over 100 businesses in the IR Pilot Programme. I note that Singapore has a board member and a local bank, DBS, which started using the system in 2012.

IR is being pioneered in 25 countries. This includes South Africa, which is taking the lead in writing IR into statutory requirements. Once again, South Africa draws us together.

Supported and launched by Prince Charles in 2009, details of the IR Framework were only released on 9^th December 2013. The benefits for business include:

·         A rise in all forms of capital.

·         More connected departments within corporations, breaking down silos.

·         Improved internal reporting and governance processes.

·         A lower financial capital cost.

Currently, many companies view sustainability and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) as separate from the main business. Such companies may publish partnership reports some months after the main report, or accounts which leave a feeling that they perhaps don’t care. The way sustainability measures are reported is not standardised, and this leads to many comparison problems, particularly for prospective investors.

There is undoubtedly a long way to go in sustainability efforts, but this seems to be the goal; it is of particular interest to those with governance roles in businesses, as well as their accountants and fund managers. For details, download a copy of the easy-to-follow framework from the IIRC website. 

Game of two halves?

The green energy debate is really heating up (please excuse the pun), with both politicians and corporations backing away from earlier commitments to renewable energy schemes. On 26 November, the German energy giant, RWE, announced its plans to stall its 240-turbine Atlantic Array wind farm in the Bristol Channel in the UK. The scheme could have provided hundreds of jobs in the tourism-dependent area, but objectors were concerned about the appearance of the 750 foot high turbines, as well as their possible effects on the delicate marine ecosystems that surround Lundy Island.

This was announced as a commercial decision, and is likely a result of the growing difficulty in getting long-term financing for such large-scale green projects. RWE reportedly said that it was ‘no longer viable’ to continue with the scheme, which would have provided power to around 1 million homes. There is also a change in background political ideology and support, both in the UK and more widely. This follows reports that the UK Prime Minister, David Cameron, is now less keen on his previously much-vaunted green image, especially if it means increases to the cost of living.

Meanwhile, I have just come back from a series of meetings in Geneva. At the meetings, many countries were co-operating on schemes to help sustainable communities, with considerable enthusiasm among participants. For example, the Chinese delegation was talking about building eco-cities from scratch, and to the highest standards.

The meetings were held at the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP). Here I found a treasure trove of resources about green energy schemes ...and much more. I discovered, among other things, excellent resources from FIDIC (International Federation of Consulting Engineers), Project Sustainability, the TEEB (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity) Global Community, Green Cross International, a Geneva ‘Sustainable Living’ pack for families, and ‘Our Planet’, the UNEP magazine. All were useful for different parties in the sustainable future.

Whether you need to make an argument, build a business case, find case studies, or devise a tool kit, the materials are all here. There is no shortage of good information. Perhaps the inability to decide on how to proceed with the green energy debate is because there are two groups in the ‘room’, talking amongst themselves and not to each other. Surely, if we are to take such large decisions, we should do so on the basis of the best information available. In this, G24 can make a contribution.

David Jackman

What climate change actually means

Most of us have heard politicians, environmentalists and lobby groups drum on about how bad climate change is, sharing their doomsday prophecies with whoever will listen. But what does climate change mean to the person on the street and how will it affect our lives?

At the beginning of October this year, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 5th Assessment report was published, in which it stated that in all likelihood, the rate at which the atmosphere is warming up is due to human influence. So we are doing things that increase the rate of atmospheric warming – a global greenhouse effect.

Many of us will shrug our shoulders and say “so what, I could do with a bit of warmer weather anyway”. Experts have speculated that on average, the world’s temperature will increase by about 2ºC. Now this may not seem like much, but the impact this seemingly insignificant increase will have on global weather patterns and ecosystems will be potentially catastrophic.

With global weather patterns changing, we can expect a lot more severe weather. From hurricanes and cyclones through to forest and bush fires; this means a lot more damage to your homes and offices. Most of us will have insurance to pay for the cleaning and fixing up but the insurance companies won’t want to foot this bill for too long, so it will no doubt increase premiums quite substantially. They may even put levies up on storm damage, or add clauses which exclude severe weather from your policy. This is already happening in some parts of the world!

With bad weather comes terrible traffic. From short-term delays through to entire bridges and roads being washed away due to flooding or mudslides, our daily commute may take a lot longer than it does now. There are cases from around the world where people were stuck in days-long traffic jams due to extreme weather.

Our agriculture will also be affected beyond our current comprehension. Although there are some places benefitting from climate change, the majority of the planet is bracing itself for increased droughts and flooding, longer winters and drier summers. This means that we, as a species, are going to have to reconsider the way we farm and manage our land. In the not-too-distant future you may struggle to get the simplest of fruit and vegetables at your local greengrocer or supermarket due to poor growth in these varietals around the world. Can you imagine your salad without a couple of key ingredients?

The point here is not to make you have sleepless nights but merely to inform you that climate change will affect each and every one of us, even if we see a seemingly insignificant global increase of just 2ºC. It may result in an increased commute to work once or twice a year which some of us can handle, but for others, especially those living in poorer nations, the effects of climate change on their land, food and income streams will be devastating.

So play your part in reducing your impact on the planet. This may be a small change, such as taking public transport or cycling to and from the shops or work, or a larger one, such as limiting the number of flights you take annually. We all need to take responsibility for our actions and start paying more attention to how these actions negatively affect the planet.

Energy

Energy is back in the spotlight; it's right at the centre of political debate in the UK. Firstly, the Labour party announced that if it was elected in 2015, it would apply a price freeze to energy companies until a more effective regulatory and price- fixing system could be established. Unsurprisingly, energy companies pointed out that such a move would leave them vulnerable to raw material hikes with no prospect of recovering their margins; such risk would blight potential investment.

Now, following concern expressed about recent energy bill increases, former Prime Minister John Major has ‘bounced’ the Government to announce energy price reductions. Interestingly this has included cutting the so-called ‘green tariffs’ built into energy bills. This is an indication that green concerns are slipping down the order and is perhaps a clearer reflection of the political mood, namely one of scepticism over climate change and carbon taxes in a time of economic downturn. Obviously, it is neither comfortable nor desirable to find pensioners having to choose between heating and eating over the winter season; nonetheless, there is apparently a latent reluctance to invest in green energy or a low-carbon economy until it seems absolutely necessary. Nuclear power is back on the agenda as a way forward, even if some new power stations seem to be financed by China and France.

Part of the political reluctance must come from conflicting engineering ‘stories’. Most prominent is that early technologies such as on-shore wind farms are inefficient, even counter-productive, as they contain high amounts of embedded carbon. It is often the case that early –adopters are disadvantaged as technology advances, but that is the way.

There have been a lot of press stories recently; the Financial Times ran a full pull-out section with contributions arguing both ways. But public opinion still seems interested in sustainable options. As always, the devil is in the detail; some quick-fix solutions are dubious in the longer view. But the fundamental course we are on does need to be fairly settled. At the moment we are hesitating, with neither the alternative energy sector nor more traditional energy companies having a clear plan on what to do. This does cause difficulties for investment and planning. We have seen how the Australian government who was ‘brave’ and ‘out there’ in carbon reduction terms has now backtracked. The US is feeling energy secure, buoyed by new reserves and using fracking, OPEC has tightened its grip on prices and production and Russia is similarly increasing output and exploring (openly controversially) the deep arctic.

It seems apparent that energy needs and security are driving ever greater carbon production. What no government can afford is for the ‘lights to go out’. To see a shift in this route will require some real determination, international resolve and perhaps some new science.

David Jackman

IPCC

I found the most inspiring statement from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)'s 5th Assessment report, published on 1 October 2013 following its recent meeting in Copenhagen. The document came to the conclusion that ‘it is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century’.

There you have it, as good as you will ever get from scientists (who have to wrap findings up in the language of statistical significance); a conclusion from 209 lead authors and 50 review editors from 39 countries and more than 600 contributing authors from 32 countries: climate change is a result of human activity. That leaves climate change doubters little room to manoeuvre.

And if there was any doubt left, the report concludes that:

‘Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, sea level has risen, and the concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased’. It does not matter that in the last 10 years temperature increases have stabilised; this is probably due to the redistribution of energy within the oceans and biosystems. In the Northern Hemisphere, 1983–2012 was the warmest 30-year period of the last 1400 years. The long-term trend is clear.

Almost the entire globe has experienced surface warming. Some of the evidence is startlingly clear. For example: ‘Over the last two decades, the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have been losing mass, glaciers have continued to shrink almost worldwide, and Arctic sea ice and Northern Hemisphere spring snow cover has continued to decrease in extent.’ Over the period 1901–2010, global mean sea levels rose by 0.19 [0.17 to 0.21] m. Scientists allege that ‘CO2 concentrations have increased by 40% since pre-industrial times’.

What of the future? The headlines are not happy reading. Global surface temperatures are likely to rise by 1.5 – 2 °C by 2100. Heat will penetrate from the surface to the deep ocean and affect ocean circulation and many other aspects of the climate’s climatic patterns. Perhaps most significant is the prediction that temperatures will continue to rise for centuries to come, even if we stop carbon emissions right now.

One aspect also worth mentioning is that the effects of climate change will not affect everyone in the same way or to the same extent. For example, the contrast in precipitation between wet and dry regions and between wet and dry seasons will increase. This is likely to have a relatively harsher impact on fragile environments and render uninhabitable those areas where some of the least wealthy and least resilient communities live such as sub-Saharan Africa and parts of Asia. How will the world's communities react? The IPCC’s report is not designed to answer these sorts of questions, but in light of the evidence, the answers seem pretty self-explanatory.

David Jackman 

Cycling

The cycling ‘Tour of Britain’ hit town on the 186km Cumbria stage; it was the second day of the 8-day event that has been run since 2004. As the cyclists passed by our village, they grouped around a breakaway and large chasing pack. They were cheered on by a huge fanfare and hundreds of onlookers straining to catch a glimpse of Sir Bradley Wiggins or Mark Cavendish. By the time they reached us they looked pretty bedraggled, having already taken on several steep climbs, including the 250 metres straight up at the challenging Honister Pass, in pouring rain no less.

The enthusiasm surrounding this year’s tour reflects how cycling has become very popular since the 2012 Olympics. I don’t recall such coverage on TV or locally before, but following Team GB’s success on the track and road, everyone is much more aware of the sport.

But it’s not just competitive cycling that has responded to the ‘Olympic effect’ as I like to term it. In a report commissioned by British Cycling and Team Sky, 28% of those surveyed had been inspired to acquire bikes or other equipment by the games; moreover, levels of participation have risen amongst both regular and occasional cyclists. Commuting by bike has also risen. As British Cycling states: "10 mph will get you to your workplace 2.5 miles away in 15 minutes. There are no traffic jams. No CO2 emissions”.

As well as the environmental benefits, there are also health benefits. “When you're cruising along steadily at 10mph you're burning fuel at an equivalent rate of 879 miles per gallon.Or to put it another way, for your five mile round trip, you’ll burn around 250 calories per day. That's 1250 calories per week, without going to the gym. Win, win.” The British Cycling website is full of top tips on how to start cycling.

In the London cycle hire scheme (often known as ‘Boris Bikes’), there were 998,755 cycle hires just in July 2013, with 22.6 million hires since the scheme got rolling in December 2010! Roughly half of these are casual users choosing a better way to get around, and the rest are probably commuters. Waterloo station has emerged as the busiest docking station.

This trend shows how attitudes have changed. Being more sustainable has many pay-offs. Widening participation is one thing, maintaining the Olympic legacy is another. As the cyclists found yesterday as they powered up the final stretch of the well-named ‘Beast Banks’ in Kendal, the last lap can be the hardest! The race statistics themselves seemed to confirm this, as leader Thomas Lovkvist was overtaken on the Bank by German rider Gerald Ciolek in the last 20 seconds.

David Jackman

Fracking and Politics – Like Moths to a Gas Flare

I’ve mentioned before how the idea of “green-ness” has fallen out of vogue, in part because as a buzzword it was never going to last, in part because of other distractions in political and media agendas. Global warming has been a footnote in the news, I feel, for at least the last four years, a period dominated by the financial crisis and punctuated in the popular imagination only with the obtuse and inconclusive Copenhagen and Johannesburg talks. The focus of reporting on such individual events cements the idea that environmental degradation is an issue for campaigns rather than system changes. For another example of short-termism in policy-making, consider the Tohoku earthquake and tsunami in 2011. As shocking and tragic this disaster was, panic over the potential for nuclear power to go wrong prompted Germany (and more understandably, Japan) to mothball their nuclear energy programs. Sustainable energy is unlikely to quickly make up the shortfall, so to placate a worried public and keep their power on requires regression to gas, oil or coal – all ‘dirtier’ forms of energy than nuclear. In short, climate change isn’t sexy any more, and renewable energy isn’t a vote winner.

The reason, then, that the current government has fallen so keenly upon the prospect of fracking – the process of fracturing rocks with highly-pressurised water and chemicals to release the gas entombed within - is that it is a political panacea. Fracking produces natural gas, which is touted as the cleanest fossil fuel and so limits the damage to the UK’s green credentials. Anecdotes about flaming tap water and polluted groundwater in fracked areas have failed to fundamentally derail the idea.

 Fracking also reduces, to an extent, the UK’s dependence on Middle Eastern oil and Russian gas (a reduction which could be especially substantial if the tentative explorations in the Falklands bear oily fruit). Energy independence, abundant, cheap power and the prospect of eager private investment in developing the fracking industry (subsidies notwithstanding) seem healthy for the Treasury, and so the taxpayer. The idea of home-made British energy also has the happy side effect of feeding the current enthusiasm for ill-defined “Britishness”, which the state naturally encourages and co-opts as a tool for winning the votes of patriots.

Being less cynical, fracking does sound like a good deal for the UK. It may well offer cheaper power , ideally with well-regulated production, as well as many jobs in, for one, Lancashire, where according to the BGS and energy company Cuadrilla, “1,300 trillion cubic feet of gas lie, which would be enough to supply the country for at least 43 years, even if only 10% of reserves can be extracted” (via The Guardian).

But the problem that this article is trying to point out is that falling back on fossil fuels, while useful in the short-term, reinforces the idea that climate change is a problem to be dealt with in the future, or by someone else. Fracking is an enormously useful tool to side-line the environment in public discourse, and to set back the environmentalist agenda in the time lag in which new legislation and regulation is developed. The only other opponents are the nimbyists – and perhaps the fundamental question is that in a time when everything is infused with economics, can anything prevent a return to fossil fuels?

Alex Jackman

Why bother with green? - A young person’s perspective

I confess: I’m at best cynical, at worst apathetic when it comes to green issues. This might not be the expected position of a geography student, less one who is supposed to be a green officer in the Geography Society. My teenage years came at the height of the green craze; the ink was still drying on the Kyoto agreements, “global warming” was always a valid answer, and the cool kids pored over atlases to work out which major cities would end up underwater. My teaching was saturated with green issues, especially global warming. I was disappointed to learn that drawing diagrams of the greenhouse effect is not a recognised skill on LinkedIn, as this renders useless ten years of sitting through geography and double science.

But after years of indoctrination, I still don’t feel particularly engaged and energised by these problems, important though they are. Why? To make this article work, we’ll have to both assume that I convey the true feelings of my age group, and ignore the point that my disengagement is merely the natural apathy of the privileged polluter – this is itself a symptom of other problems. With that out the way, I’ll get on with my excuses.

Firstly, the hype surrounding “greenness”, the shorthand for environmental responsibility and awareness, has died down. The media machine has ground onwards to other topics, and now we discuss the economy rather than the environment. Why, as a student, do I care about the long-term environment when they’re raising my tuition fees and I’ll need a job? This is in response to, and supports, a changed political agenda and public discourse. Both have lurched from environmental crisis to security crisis to financial crisis.  I’ll try to resist being a typical student and referring to “a book that I read at uni”, but in each case the discourse of crisis has enabled governments to pass drastic legislation, and has normalised a state of crisis in the public imagination.

Secondly, the flaws in the entire project of limiting environmental degradation have become increasingly apparent. Carbon trading lets major polluters continue polluting, while geopolitical manoeuvring (the US at Kyoto, China at Copenhagen) makes global agreement on global issues seem impossible. I feel unable to influence policy at any scale, yet my personal contributions seem so small as to be meaningless. Who cares if I recycle that pizza box? The Chinese just opened another coal-fired power station!

The total effect is that green issues become less relevant, fading into the hum of the newsroom or buried in the cabinets of Whitehall. Despite more and more evidence of climate change (not the only, but the most dramatic, green issue), fatalism, cynicism and short-term outlooks prevail. Immediately, financial viability (read: cost-cutting) and marketisation are more relevant than sustainability. There is no easy cure. There needs to be a mature restatement of the absolute and crucial relevance of our environment, and the fact of our relationship with it. But even if this is already on-going, mature statements do not get attention – increasingly, larger debates about the environment take place only after crises. Public and politicians addressed nuclear fuel after Fukushima, industrial pollution and regulation after the Deepwater Horizon, climate change after Hurricane Katrina.
Meanwhile I, young person, am disengaged from the political power needed to make substantial changes, see green issues become irrelevant and ignored, and I am distracted by problems which are closer to home and easier to grasp. And, (to predict another crisis) it is my cynicism that could be the killing blow for attempts to sustain environmental debate and protection in the years to come.

World Environment Day, and what followed!

World Environment Day (WED) passed a few days ago, on the 5^th of June; did you notice? Not even the often-meaningful Google icon for that day recognised this global event; instead we were reminded of the 295^th birthday of the (undoubtedly highly skillful) furniture maker, Thomas Chippendale.

Nevertheless, things did happen. A glance at the WED website shows that events took place as far afield as Mongolia (the ‘host’ country celebrating its first wind farm) and Somalia (one of the world’s poorest countries). The slogan for the awareness-raising campaign this year, organised by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) was: THINK-EAT-SAVE; REDUCING YOUR FOOTPRINT; this made reference to the fact that a third of the world’s food production, 1.3 billion tons, is wasted and thrown away each year. This is a tragedy of monumental proportions when you consider that 1 in 7 of us go hungry.

The spotlight was on the unnecessary pressure this creates on the areas of land under cultivation and the demand on fresh water supplies. Did you know that it takes 1,000 litres of water to produce 1 litre of milk? I didn't.

How effective campaigns like this are is hard to say. I suspect that it is their cumulative effect that has an impact, not just one event. This shows in so many different ways. In Singapore, where regular readers will know I spend part of my year, they have been celebrating 25 years of ‘going green’. In particular, the growing of trees and opening of public spaces is important in an island crammed with people and a growing industry. The aim is for 85% of the population to be less than 400 metres from a public park by 2030. Lee Kuan Yew, the country’s founding prime minister, has planted a tree symbolically every year since 1963 and did so again this year.

Ban Ki-moon, the UN Secretary General, has also launched an initiative this month to implement a seamless transition from the Millennium Development Goals that expire in 2015 to new Sustainable Development Goals for 2015 to 2030. These goals will be partly informed by a recently published Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) agenda which aims to tackle poverty alongside promoting environmental protection.

There is environmental action taking place everywhere, both co-ordinated toward a common global goal and informal or commercially driven. For example, I happened upon an interview yesterday featuring the Head of Sustainability of Procter and Gamble. Therein he explained how the improving technologies in cleaning products, allowing for 30 degrees Celsius washes and using less packaging, lessened resource usage for families and the environment. This is one of countless steps improving the situation; check company sustainability reports if you are interested.

But then the real world bites back. Despite all the good news, who would have thought that just a few days later in Singapore we would be heading for the greatest environmental crisis the city-state has faced so far? I usually submit this blog from under a palm tree in the sun. I am now sitting inside my hotel room with no sun visible because I am advised it is unsafe to go outdoors. The smog is so dense that I can barely see across the road. It is like a vision of the apocalypse. Unless you can remember the London smog of the 1930s and 1950s, you would have to see pictures on the news or web to believe it.

Most people in the street (and some inside) are now wearing masks if they can get one; I have failed so far, as the shops here are sold out! There is a possibility that all outside workers will be told to stay at home. The psi index of pollution is currently 400, near the highest point ever reached. To give you some perspective, anything above 300 is considered hazardous!

The choking haze comes from the very problem WED was trying to highlight. Clearing forest areas on the Indonesian island of Sumatra for agricultural plantations and grazing. Both large corporations and small holders start fires in the dry season and let them run riot across the indigenous forest only a few miles away across The Straits. There has been no rain for days. The authorities are considering cloud seeding but the problem could last for weeks.

This is having a real economic impact. Tourists are staying away, businesses cannot function properly, people are falling ill and hospitals are filling. It is expected to cost the economy millions, not to mention the cost in terms of health provision and the impact on individuals' health. Long-term, it will have an effect on business reputation, as well as place a strain on diplomatic relations between Indonesia and its neighbours.

This is a huge and harsh reminder of the reality of sustainability. It is far more pressing on the imagination and conscience than any number of special events and global agreements. One aspect of food pressure and deforestation is being brought sharply into focus in a developed economic hub: No one is immune; we are all on the same planet.

Is this a view of things to come? If so, I suggest we work together to do all we can.

David Jackman

Sustainability?

Undeniably sustainability is a word used to mean long lasting. However, it dawns on me that at the age of 17, long lasting reaches as far as applying for a job. Sustainability is a choice more than a necessity; one doesn’t have to think long-term because, simply, there is no immediate benefit from doing something that doesn’t aid the present. Why is it that, currently, recycling seems like a superfluous undertaking when it should be recognised as a responsibility to society? Why is it that energy saving weeks (in school) act as novelty token gestures to satisfy our green awareness? Essentially there is no tangible perceptible reward for being sustainable. There is no instantaneous change because the effects are for the long-term. Yes, the occasional recycled pencil case or recycling bin might cross my path, yet it provides no real motivation to endlessly sort rubbish, prohibit 4x4’s and deter me from my nearest goal. Absolutely, sustainability doesn’t appeal.

I use sustainability as a word to assuage my guilt or promote an argument and I fail to put sustainability in the present. Sustainability is the capacity to endure, yet to endure we must begin (being sustainable). All too often the assumption is that all sustainability is positive, and to an extent there can be no flaw in thinking about future generations, but, when this detracts from the richness of life that each of us desires than surely this is cause to presuppose that sustainability is time wasting and thinning our limited time on earth. Obviously sustainability means different things in different mediums, but the question remains the same (whether it is business sustainability or ones carbon footprint): why is sustainability worth fighting for?

I too ‘endorse the idea of starting small’[1] but where is the impetus. Essentially, when thinking of sustainability in ‘green’ terms, it is fighting a losing battle. The polluting world we have constructed is far too developed to deconstruct and reverse its corrosive effects. We can slow effects admittedly, but inevitably one must accept that with growing population, whatever we do the quell pollution in, for instance, Britain or our own homes; energy consumption elsewhere is increasing quicker, so there is no improvement. Why should I recycle two cans of beans when GlaxoSmithKline is building a new factory in Ulverston? It seems to be like disarmament in the 1920’s; unless everyone universally disarms then no one will do it. Yes we agree it’s a fine idea, nonetheless we don’t want to move first, and thus we keep arming (or negating sustainability). If I don’t feel that everyone is making the same efforts as me and giving as much time as I am, why bother? To assuage guilt by means of ‘five minutes a day’ [2] doing ‘something green’? Well not if GlaxoSmithKline feels no culpability.  Yes, this case isn't immediately transferable to business, but arguably, why would a business reduce short-term profits to maintain smaller profits over 100 years, when bluntly the people working there won’t receive the award. This raises moral questions about how much we value the future over our own personal gain but essentially it brings me back to my first point: why doesn't sustainability appeal, and now ,more importantly, how can we make it appeal?

There is no easy way to make people aid something they will never experience and will never know about, but inherently there is a desire to leave a legacy. What should be promoted is the power of legacy and the prospect of people in 2120 admiring the ’17-year-old boy who recycled his whole life, so that we could live in a better world’. Thus, sustainability should be passed down, recycled through generations, so that despite it not being universal, it becomes tradition or your inheritance. Legacy appeals!

Matthew David Llewellyn Jackman

---

[1] http://green24.com/aboutus.php

[2] Ibid