Flood warnings

The stream running through our garden flooded for the first time in 10 years. With over 250 flood warnings out in the UK I suspect we’re not alone in worrying about the rising waters. Fortunately our house is situated, sensibly, as old houses tend to be, above the flood plain on the higher ground of the river terrace. Many modern developments are much nearer major rivers, with or without levees, on land that was once supposed to flood. This cheaper flat land seemed a good place to build until recently. The folly of this disregard for nature is clear to see all over the country in TV pictures of homes now under water.

This recent downpour comes after the wettest summer I can remember; following a pretty wet summer last year and the year before. The problem is that the atmosphere has so much more energy to hold moisture meaning that more rain is inevitable. Sometimes the sun breaks through – remember the fear of a drought earlier in the year and the hosepipe bans of spring 2012?

The climate system’s need to disperse more energy also changes wind and pressure patterns so that these can become exaggerated and create more violent events – high winds, blizzards and hurricanes. We have seen some of these in the US recently and forecasters promise cold weather in a few weeks over here. That will bring a new round of meteorological headlines.

I can understand why some have a vested interest in denying climate change or those who want to maintain an air of scientific impartiality until the cause and effect links are proven, or not, beyond doubt. But it does seem likely that something is going on in our skies. Whether man’s activities are the major drivers of instability or this is a cyclical set of events doesn’t matter in principle (although it does limit the actions we take), the facts suggest that we need to be prepared to deal with more extreme climatic conditions. The repeated surprise of the media and the unpreparedness of local authorities will not wash.

It would be ‘nice’ to get away from the ‘climate change doubt’ and get on with joined up, long term strategies rather than piecemeal responses and knee-jerk technologies as we may well have seen in the craze for unsightly onshore wind farms. When I sit and watch the rain stream down the windows, as now, I wonder, may be the climate will be our most eloquent advocate for wholesale change?

David Jackman

Kyoto – rides again!

We should be celebrating the (last minute) revival of the Kyoto Protocol, signed recently by nearly 200 nations in Doha. The UN Convention on Climate Change – the only international agreement that aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions – will now run till 2020 when the Durban Platform should take up the strain. This depends on agreements being in place in time to bind both rich and developing nations in a global effort.

It was close, and talks in Doha over-ran, and still the two main emitters, the US and China did not buy into the process. Now Canada has ducked out and the whole thing is looking more fragile. That’s not to say that the Obama administration has not done a lot of good things on car emissions and funded developing world schemes, but the world is not operating as one – yet.

The statements from the closing session declared it unlikely that, on the current path, the world would be able to keep global temperatures from rising less than 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit from pre-industrial times, a central goal of the UN process.

Some walked away from the talks deeply disappointed, like the Foreign Minister of Nauru whose low-lying country may not get much passed 2020, and who was speaking for Pacific Island nations. Europe has gone further and faster but that is not enough on its own. I suspect that talks will continue behind the scenes in the margins of other debates perhaps. This is not on top of all politicians’ agendas right now – war and economics are in the forefront – but climate change awareness is growing as the issues remain.

It is likely by 2020 the rules of the game we now play by will have to change; meanwhile, we all need to keep the pressure up!

David Jackman

Being green pays!

Corporations often see being green as ‘soft and fluffy’; a cost not a benefit....

For four years now I have been analysing corporate governance with master’s students of Edinburgh University Business School and others universities around the world, including from the US and the Netherlands, for a US consultancy. The reports remain the property of the universities but a summary will be out soon and it makes interesting reading for us at green24.

It is only one element, and I’d be the first to be cautious about any set of data, but one side line of the survey – which looks at everything from compliance with governance codes to senior pay and board behaviour – is worth noting here if it is only in the small print elsewhere.

That is that by measuring data from the public reports and accounts from the FTSE 100 and Eurostoxx 50 Indices we have found a reasonable correlation or statistical relationship between the sustainability parts of the index – environmental responsibility, emissions data, community investment and such – and long term financial performance.

In brief, it appears that being green pays!

It should be noted that the financial return is seen in long-term return on assets, and not immediate profitability, but that is what you might intuitively expect and that is what shareholders often really want to see. We need to do more research in 2013 and extend our reach into Asia, as we are now doing, but it is a glimmer of an important argument that will help put to bed the old ‘business case’ requirement that is often used as a defence.

Correlation is not causation but it gives us a start!

David Jackman

Snowed in

Snow is gently fluttering down passed the window pane. The view is beautiful, the trees and hillsides shining in their white robes. Sheep sit and watch the icy skies, seemingly perplexed.

Somehow snowy weather seems all right in rural areas. Life goes on, pretty much unaffected. A tractor just passed by, as normal, and here 4x4’s are not the incongruous luxury they might be further south. The recycling van may not have made it up the valley, but the postman is made of tougher stuff. We cope.

In cities, however, it seems everything falls apart! The news is chock solid with stories of trains not running, planes not flying, schools closed and chaos on the roads. How can this be? We’ve had about two to three inches in most places. Accepted, South Wales has been badly hit, but for others the fall is not much more than usual at this time of year. I am sure we had more in my youth – and still went to school!

Part of the reason is that many of our support systems we rely on are so highly tuned – a bit like racehorses and not an old packhorse. Nowadays risk is measured to the endth degree so there is no slack, no waste, no unnecessary cost. And we can see why. But the schedule is so tight that if snow comes along at Heathrow beyond the expected norm and planes have to take more time to land, delays and cancellations lead to knock-on chaos.

I am currently working for the UK on new International Standards (ISOs) for ‘Smart City infrastructure’ to help manage all this stress and make cities more sustainable. We call this making cities ‘smarter’. These Smart City standards will aid planners and city mangers to cope with new crises, including climatic events, and reduce their emissions and energy needs. Standards involve countries coming together and this in itself is a good thing in tackling global problems. They are also designed to reduce risks and provide comparable, standardised indicators so we can measure what is going on.

There is a long way to go and the UK is playing its full part. Maybe we will not collapse under the weight of a few inches of snow forever.

This initiative is being led by France and Canada. Any input is always welcome.

David Jackman

Chair of BSI TC 268 mirror committee (sustainable communities)

Trees

I was inspired to write this blog by a ‘Big Issue’ seller in a doorway of Edinburgh’s Waverley railway station. The Big Issue is a magazine sold by and for the homeless. This particular man looked so forlorn; it was such a dank, dreek and cold evening, even by Scottish standards, that I could not walk by on the other side. It is, I am very afraid to say, a long time since I have bought a Big Issue and I offered up a pound. It’s now £2.50, but a good read.

The cover attracted my attention: ‘What are we without our trees?’ What indeed? We are facing in the UK and in Europe the rapid spread of a withering disease of ash trees called Ash dieback. I did not realise that 30% of our trees in Britain are ash. To lose that proportion of our trees would be as disastrous as Dutch Elm disease that I recall from my 1970s childhood.

The UK government has called meetings of its crisis emergency committee, more used to combating threats of terrorism, to consider what can be done. Very little it seems, so trees with genetic modifications survive, but most do not.

I went out into the wood in our garden and found that we do have a much higher number of ash than I imagined. They all seem fine at the moment and as we are isolated, may be spared. We used to live in a delightfully wooded area called Ashridge, which as the name suggests, might be sadly and severely affected by the impending disease.

There have been heroic protests in the past, sometimes to save a single, prominent tree or a much-loved wood. The Pollok M77 protest was one such stand. As the Big Issue says, and I agree, quite apart from their commercial and environmental value, trees are a part of our sense of place and being. They feed our soul. To punch such a big hole in the fabric of everyday landscapes drains our spirits and lowers the mood. In a time where resilience and confidence is needed so much, this blow may have an even more disheartening result than we may now realise. We must do what we can, even if it is re-planting other species in the gaps that are left.

We need to do this for all of us, not least for the magazine seller in the doorway who may just now be homeless. We need as much hope as we can get.

David Jackman

Gardens - revisited

A few months ago I blogged about a forthcoming new attraction in Singapore—the Gardens by the Bay—a biodiversity exhibition under domes such as those that have become familiar through the UK’s Eden Project. The expansive confidence of the enterprise in Singapore’s downtown is undeniable, including a cloud dome and a flower garden boasting blooms from every continent.  Just opened now, I have been able to walk around the first phase and wonder at the engineering feats as well as the splendour of the natural flora on show.

The striking centre-piece of the gardens are some false super-trees constructed out of steel, like something from a fantasy movie and intertwined with a variety of real trees and saprophytes. The engineering is awesome, just as the giant framework of the skeletal domes also stretch into the sky. They seem to be straining at the very limit of human endeavour, holding up immense structures that protect the biospheres.  It is a metaphor, I thought, for the decisions we are making right now about sustainability. Either we are straining at the edges but will be able to extend technology so that it can protect and enhance the environment or we have reached the limits of what is humanly possible (typified by these super-rich city states of Singapore and the Gulf) and will find ourselves soon falling back, overcome by the strain. I wonder which it will be?

The really interesting aspect of the Gardens is the highly educational presentations and displays that every visitor has to pass through setting out the facts of global warming and explaining what each person can do. I did not know, for example, that human beings breath in 0.8 kg of oxygen per day on average, while we breathe out 1 kg of carbon dioxide per day—so we are on a losing wicket right from the start! While nature’s carbon cycles potentially balance out, man’s additions to greenhouse gasses could add up to 5'C this century cumulatively and exponentially. We can argue projections but there’s no doubting the power of the overall story being told.

Great efforts have been made to make these gardens carbon neutral (let’s not ask about the embedded carbon in the physical structures) but like our planet, what we do next and how the many thousands of visitors respond make the difference to the outcome, or at least the next pages, of that crucial story.

David Jackman

The uneven space of green ideas

When visiting friends or relatives, one notices much more little qualities of everyday life. The water can be harder, the house hotter or colder, and all the kitchen utensils are in the wrong place! But, of course, these qualities become familiar and eventually comforting. There is one difference, however, which is becoming more and more marked – the local recycling customs. In rural Cumbria, you can bung your empty cans and jars into a crate by the road and think little more of it. When visiting London, I’m almost surprised that councils don’t provide on-call chemists to ascertain whether the empty bag of Weetos goes in the bin for biodegradable/compostable packaging or “General Waste” (who I like to think is ranked below Field Marshal Rubbish but above Colonel Littering). The serious point here is that green solutions to potential environmental problems differ widely between different areas, which can limit the effectiveness of central policies. Indeed, delegating such solutions as recycling and limiting emissions to councils suggests the government is not particularly interested in a centralised approach, or in making environmental concern a common theme in its policy more generally.

This too is a microcosm of environmental policy on a global scale. Consider, for example, the failure of the summits at Kyoto and Copenhagen to deliver unified and powerful environmental policy with global influence. Emissions targets are all very well, but there must either be apparatus to enforce targets (a solution which seems too unilateral), or a process to educate people, councils and governments to secure and apply useful ideas consistently.