www.everythingsgonegreen.co.uk

Last night I went to a climate change consultation with my local Rushmoor Borough Council.

40 local residents were invited down to Aldershot on a cold February night to discuss the borough’s policy and, arranged into small groups, we brainstormed Rushmoor BC’s plans for the environment and the future.

Of course, the number one topic raised was the issue of climate change itself. Currently, if you spend a lot of time in the media, the subject of climate change seems to be getting a real kicking. The Climategate affair, involving the leak of data from the University of East Anglia on the eve of the Copenhagen summit, followed by the controversy over the predictions of retreating Himalayan ice and now Sir David King’s attack on the IPCC mean that a lot of scepticism is creeping in and, last night, a few dissenting voices were heard in the room.

The important consensus though was that climate change is happening. It’s not just global warming or global cooling, but variations in “local” climate all over the world and, whether it’s man-made or natural, it’s best to prepare for it.

So, that first hurdle over, Rushmoor BC presented their plans for the next 20 years. The big issue locally is the Aldershot Urban Extension, meaning that our neighbouring town of Aldershot is to be the subject of a 4,500 home expansion. Whilst brownfield sites are preferable for new builds, it seems inevitable that so many more homes will be needed and the council will have to develop a new “town” of so many houses.

This will surely impact upon on our small Borough which is already a busy commuter area (with great links to London and the south coast via train and motorway). The plans are to lessen the impact of any new development, and Rushmoor BC made bold statements to meet and exceed environmental building standards by an additional 15%.

That prompted questions of “are the current environmental standards stringent enough?” meaning that beating them by 15% is a fairly easy task plus that age old question of “the council says it will meet & beat standards but will it actually do it?”

Many ideas were bandied around in our group with a lot of focus on restoring localisation, creating closer community, water run-off into the River Blackwater etc. Plus there was great interest in the proposed new power plant, powered, presumably, by local waste and providing heat & energy. The notion of creating an “eco town” was popular with the notion that Rushmoor could be as well-regarded as the city of Brighton which is always thought of as one of Britain’s greenest urban places.

The usual topics of individual wind & solar power arose with ground-heat pumps and green roofs being thrown in for good measure.

Overall, a wealth of ideas were explored and there seems to be a consensus that the majority of people were in favour of bold steps in order to make the borough a greener place in terms of planning over the next 20 years or so.

The Natural Environment

The second part of the night revolved around Rushmoor’s natural environment. Surrounded by military land, we are blessed with a fairly natural environment that is protected by its ownership under the MOD.

The consensus was that we should not only protect every single piece of green environment that we have around here but that we should also restore and improve upon it. Natural and man-made attrition of the trees in the borough is something close to my heart as I’ve seen numerous trees come down locally over the years, never to be replaced. Do we get an organisation like the Woodland Trust involved to help us re-green Rushmoor?

Cycle paths were mentioned again as local citizens expressed a desire to expand cycle routes and to encourage more use of cycles in the borough. One resident even complained that where he locked up his cycle in the North Camp part of town they had removed the cycle racks and never replaced them!

Conclusion

There was a very healthy discourse over the evening and a number of people felt as though this was just the first of many discussions regarding the environment in Rushmoor. The many notes that were made were taken away to be digested by the council and they will have much food for thought.

Some great ideas came out of the meeting and, for starters, I would like to see the replacement and replanting of more trees, an extension of cycle tracks and a push to get more people cycling, loft insulation for all, better buses and routes and a green roof initiative.

Every piece of green and MOD land must be fought for and preserved and the inevitable expansion of Aldershot MUST be sustainable, green and a benefit to current residents not a detriment.

Finally, I’d like to see flights to Farnborough Airport capped as they are. I’ve seen no major benefit to the local economy from the planes flying in and, working near the airfield, the avgas fumes are unpleasant and unhealthy, not to mention the M3 motorway and the ridiculous “sound barrier” erected for residents who brought houses right next to the M3 but complained it was too noisy! (irony?) Thanks to them the sound bounces off the wooden fences and pollutes an even greater area.

Let’s hope Rushmoor Borough can only get safer, greener and cleaner.

The Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) has been running a consultation for the regulation of inorganic phosphates in domestic laundry and cleaning products (DLCPs) since October 2009. The closing date of the consultation is 21^st January 2010.

The consultation by DEFRA’s Water Quality Division seeks to gather comments on the banning of inorganic phosphates for forthcoming regulation.

In their own words, DEFRA states that:

Many rivers do not meet EU standards for phosphorous content. Phosphorous reduces the oxygen content of water and harms aquatic life. A ban will help to reduce inorganic phosphate pollution and mean the water industry has to use less energy and chemicals to remove phosphorous from sewage effluent.

So, by banning inorganic phosphates:

1. Britain’s rivers will be cleaner as the water quality improves, meeting EU targets at the same time.
2. Our aquatic life will no longer be harmed and
3. By not adding additional chemicals to DCLPs the water companies will not need to purchase and use further chemicals in order to treat waste water to remove the chemicals that were added to it elsewhere in the first place!

Banning inorganic phosphates from DCLPs looks like a win-win-win situation from here. Not only do we clean up our rivers & environment and help our wildlife but we also make huge efficiencies by banning inorganic phosphates. With the water industry using “less energy and chemicals to remove phosphorous from sewage effluent” you would expect their costs to decrease; they would be more energy-efficient, they would have less overhead in having to not purchase and use additional chemicals and their treatment methodologies would be simplified with less processes.

In addition the water industry would be taking another step toward their corporate social responsibility which is good for their conscience and good for their public image. Efficient, clean and green; what could be better?

The only losers in this equation would be the manufacturers of inorganic phosphates but with demand for phosphates increasing, particularly due to the increase in world population and the demand for meat & crops, phosphates will continue to be used in artificial fertilisers. However, as phosphates are a finite resource prices have increased massively, so discontinuing their use is an economic benefit for manufacturers of DLCPs.

The alternatives are plant-based environmentally-friendly products such as the excellent Ecover range of cleaning products (such as their lemon & aloe vera washing-up liquid or non-biological washing powder) which have minimal impact upon the environment.

So, if you have any thoughts on banning inorganic phosphates from domestic laundry and cleaning products then head over to theNetregs “Detergent regulations consultation”, read the details of the consultation and tell them your thoughts on the matter before the 21^st January 2010.

The deadline of 1^st January 2015 for the complete “ban” (with it being an offence to market DLCPs with more than 0.4% inorganic phosphates) has been set up to allow the industries concerned time to change their products and packaging, although with the speed at which they can launch products, this seems far too generous (five years to remove inorganic phosphates and “redesign” the packaging?!)

For further reading about see the Wikipedia entry for phosphates or the excellent SNB phosphate recovery website.

I’ve just been reading the article Stolen e-mails embolden climate change skeptics regarding the Climategate affair where scientists at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit had their emails hacked. Now I’m all for “leaks” of information that may be of public interest but that “thousands of e-mails and other documents made over the course of 13 years” are available is a considerable breach. I just hope it was perpetrated by Americans who hacked into the UEA CRU’s system so that we can horse-trade for Gary McKinnon, although I suspect this is a far cry. But I digress…

The article about the stolen emails pits Sarah Palin, the next Republican Presidential hopeful, versus President Barack Obama and the fact that he is going to Copenhagen to possibly get some sort of deal on the climate talks and that she doesn’t want him to go. This is yet another typical polarisation of opinion that we seem to see everywhere these days; you’re either with us or against us. Agree or disagree. Black or white. Hot or cold? Deal or no deal?

Let’s all, please, STOP FUCKING AROUND by being either red or blue, green or not green and just DO SOMETHING about the environment WHETHER WE BELIEVE IN CLIMATE CHANGE OR NOT.

Now this doesn’t apply so much to the hippies and the tree-huggers who are already well on their way to a sustainable lifestyle, but mainly to the middle and the far right of the spectrum;

This planet we live on is an ecosystem. You hear that? Eco SYSTEM – A system that has developed and evolved over millions of years and has found its own balance. We humans are upsetting that balance. We have chopped down millions of acres of rainforest. We are polluting our seas. Many species are in danger of extinction. We are pumping crap into the air, crap into our rivers and oceans and we’re eating crap, selling crap and consuming crap. Despite our technological breakthroughs and our many human achievements we are still a pretty fucking stupid bunch of primates aren’t we? When I was a kid I laughed at the phrase “Don’t shit on your own doorstep”, but we do, don’t we? All the time.

Now, do yourself, and the rest of us, a favour and start thinking about what’s actually going on and then do something about it. Even something as simple as having this ridiculous “touch effects technology” bullshit and having your clothes smell “nice” every time you brush against stuff is NOT good for the planet. By thinking the latest “fabric softener” is wonderful is a fallacy: it’s just chemicals and advertising. Go out into the countryside and take a deep breath… THAT is fresh. Chemicals with the scent of pine is NOT FRESH.

So, whether you believe in climate change or not…

• Ditch the gas guzzler
• Drive less
• Walk
• Cycle
• Take public transport, the train, the bus
• Share a car, car pool
• Stay at home, work from home
• Turn the thermostat down
• Insulate your loft
• Get a new efficient gas boiler
• Wear a hat or a jumper rather than crank the heat up
• Buy organic
• Ask for less packaging
• Buy local
• Visit the farmers’ market
• Eat less meat
• Consume less
• Turn off the TV
• Don’t believe the hype
• Reconsider that widescreen TV purchase – do you really actually need it?
• Wake up, open your mind
• Talk
• Discuss
• Listen
• Learn
• Get involved
• Care about your local environment
• Don’t buy nasty chemicals, use environmentally-friendly stuff
• Remind yourself what nature’s really like
• Respect wildlife, take an interest
• Use sustainable materials
• Invest ethically, use an ethical bank
• etc
• ad verbatim
• …

I could go on, there is SO MUCH we can all do and we CAN ALL DO these things. Demand ethics, sustainability and environmentally-friendly goods, services and practices and then they will become the DE FACTO services – all the old unsustainable ways will go the way of the dinosaurs when there is no demand for them and organic will naturally be cheaper than non-organic.

I’ll say it one last time: Whether you believe in climate change or not, whether you think it’s man-made or not, just use your brain and stop being a trash human, stop being so selfish, drop the ego and start being more considerate and work out where you fit in the grand scheme of things.

As the Native American saying goes:

“We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children.”

A one-day climate summit in New York yesterday saw about 100 world leaders attend ahead of the crucial Copenhagen Climate Change Conference in December.

China, now the world’s biggest polluter, taking the shameful crown from the United States, seemed to make the biggest commitment with President Hu Jintao saying that the country would cut carbon emissions by a “notable margin” by 2020.

The United States’ climate change envoy, Todd Stern, was reported to have said that China’s stance was helpful but that they needed to “provide figures”.

US President Barack Obama didn’t provide any figures for his own country nor did he say anything ground-breaking or commital, prompting criticism that the US, producing around 20% of world pollution, is taking too long to act.

Britain’s own Gordon Brown had said, two days before the summit, that the Copenhagen Conference is in danger of collapse if world leaders neither attended nor made committments towards a low-carbon world economy and was understood to have been trying to convince other world leaders to attend Copenhagen. Brown was the first world leader to commit to Copenhagenyet he has been accused of failing to provide strong leadership in Britain’s own green initiatives.

Whilst China stole the headlines, Japan’s new Prime Minister, Yukio Hatoyama, announced the “Hatoyama Initiative”, pledging to cut Japan’s carbon output by 25% by 2020 (compared t 1990 levels).

UN Secretary General, Ban Ki Moon, said the talks had privded fresh impetus for Copenhagen whilst formwr US vice-president and environmental activist Al Gore praised China for its loose committment.

The countdown now ticks until the 7th December although France’s President Nicolas Sarkozy has called for leaders to meet again in mid November. It remains to be seen whether our leaders are prepared to make any tough decisions.

It’s funny how most Brits say that self-sufficiency would help us out in this recent financial crisis and yet half of us admit to lacking the skills our grandparents had in abundance.

According to research commissioned by the Soil Association and conducted by Pollab a massive 92% of Brits polled said that self-sufficiency, being able to “grow your own” and having your own livestock would certainly have been beneficial during this latest recession. The notion has been echoed by recent activity from DEFRA, the Government Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, in their Food 2030 initiative and a lot of interest from the general public in allotment space.

Yet despite the huge majority of people wishing to be self-sufficient the poll also found that:

• 45% of people admitted to lacking in cooking skills
• 47% of those polled say they were less able to grow their own food
• 48% of Brits believe they have lost the rural craft skills to allow them to be self-sufficient and
• 51% said they had no idea how to rear livestock

So, although the will is strong, the skills are weak. But fear not for the Soil Association have picked up on Brits’ lack of confidence and are launching 300 Organic Farm School courses over the next 2 years with help from the Daylesford Foundation. The new Organic Farm School courses cover a range of skills from growing vegetables to bee-keeping and keeping chickens to making bread and cider. Te full list of organic farm courses inlcudes:

• wild food foraging
• hedge laying
• cider making
• bee keeping
• cheese making
• preserving
• butchery and game preparation
• seasonal cookery demonstrations
• willow weaving
• dry stone walling

Patrick Holden, Director of the Soil Association, commented:

The Organic Farm School is about relearning skills which are vital to becoming more self-sufficient. In the recession this will not only be cheaper but it’s healthier for you and the environment too. I think one of life’s greatest pleasures is eating food that you’ve produced yourself.

My vision for the Organic Farm School is that it enables and inspires a whole generation of young people to acquire these vitally important skills from the very best practitioners – the farmers and growers themselves.

The Soil Association is aiming to strike a chord with over 3000 people with their Organic Farm Schools initiative, the intention being to pass on practical skills from farmers, growers and producers to reinstate modern urban people with the skills of their forebears.

Monty Don, President of the Soil Association, concluded:

The Soil Association’s Organic Farm School is a fantastic opportunity for anyone to come and learn skills from the experts. Each course is an enjoyable day out on an organic farm and a chance to experience the rich satisfaction of country life.

So, if you think you need to brush up on your bread, cider & cheese-making skills, then take a look at the Organic Farm School courses to see which ones appeal to you.

A report today from Britain’s Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) has tipped “Cleantech and renewables… to become two of the most important sectors of the economy.”

The encouraging news comes from a survey of British business leaders who have also tipped technology and media to be growth sectors in the UK over the next decade.

43% of the business leaders questioned considered that cleantech will grow at the fastest pace by 2020, followed by science & technology (20%) then media & entertainment (15%).

Whilst the UK government is mainly interested in the economic aspect that new growth areas will have on the country, in order to pull us out of recession and keep us competitive in the world marketplace, it’s very encouraging for the population at large; if Britain is to see growth in cleantech & renewables then there will be investment in green research and green jobs will be created. Although why the Vestas wind turbine plant in the Isle of Wight was allowed to close with a loss of around 700 jobs still remains a mystery (and a crying shame) when Number 10 are touting the benefits of a green future for this country.

The government have also recently launched their iawards competition for British companies to compete in, demonstrating their skills and innovations. Aswell as combating aspects such as terrorism and an ageing population, the green aspects of the iawards include

Preserving finite natural resources in the face of population growth and climate change

So let’s hope that the government puts its money where its mouth is and pushes the green agenda so that we can go to Cop 15, the United Nations Climate Change Conference (7-18 December 2009) with a genuinely green direction that can contribute to cutting carbon emissions. 80% by 2030? Let’s hope so!

Lobbying firm sends ant-climate change bill letters from “old peole’s homes”.

After last week’s news that big oil are against a better environment it seems that the lobbyists who oppose any moves to limit climate change (incase it dents the profits of big business) have stooped to a new low point.

The Guardian reports that a U.S. Congressional hearing has uncovered over a dozen forged letters to members of congress opposing the climate change bill. The house select committee on energy independence and global warming has confirmed 13 forged letters and is still investigating a further 45 written correspondences.

Bonner & Associates, a lobbying firm, was hired to fight against the climate bill proposed by President Barack Obama. The bill, if passed, aims to reduce America’s carbon emissions by 17% by 2020 and by as much as 83% by 2050. That’s an aggressive and staggeringly brilliant cut in CO2 if it can be accomplished but Bonner & Associates and their paymasters, PR firm Hawthorn Group in turn bankrolled by the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, are against cuts in emissions.

The forged letters so far have supposedly been sent from ethnic groups and even old people’s homes.

If America put all its heart & soul into renewal energy and green technology then it would be able to create new job opportunities in these environmental industries. But as long as the corporations are short-sighted enough to fail to see beyond the current status quo then they will attempt to derail any attempts forAmerica to go green.

A few weeks ago I went to the local Army Show in Aldershot, The Home of the British Army. I posted a quick tweet on twitter to say I was there and one friend made an interesting comment;

kind of feel being green and supporting an army event is a little wrong?

I’d not really thought of that, as considerate and conscientious as I normally am about all matters. It was a fair point. What is not green about the British Army? Well, there’s the use of depleted-uranium warheads, armoured vehicles are not renowned for their fuel-economy, natural and human resources are used to research & develop ever more effective ways of killing people defending the nation. We could stray well into the world of ethics here in many ways, but Dave had a point.

However, apart from those simple issues that come to mind, and there could well be many more, there’s no reason not to support the British Army from a green point of view. Let me explain;

I live within 50 yards of a forest with a lake in the middle of it. When you look at the aerial view of the forest and my neighbourhood you can see that my road comes to an abrupt halt at the edge of the forest. That forest, Hawley Woods, appears like a great green lung, a carbon sink, on the outskirts of my town.

The swathe of forest at the end of my road is a perfect place into which to extend the small estate where I live and build more houses. It’s a very real threat as I used to live in nearby Fleet & Church Crookham in Hampshire. In this small town & village conurbation the erosion of green land has been constant – Ancells Farm, Zebon Copse, Elvetham Heath and now the Hitches Lane development. The march of “progress” has been relentless as fields have disappeared to make way for more tightly-packed modern housing estates.

Back in the Fox Lane region of Farnborough, the last remaining suburban farm down the road has made way for around 50 new houses. Yet because there are army barracks across the other side of Hawley Woods the land all belongs to the Ministry of Defence (M.O.D.) and nobody else can build on that land. The main reason for living in my current property, apart from the convenience of being between London and the south coast, easy access to rail and road links, good job prospects, relatively affluent part of the country etc is the proximity of the woodland. If the M.O.D. ever moved or closed Gibraltar Barracks, e.g. for efficiency, streamlining and cost-cutting reasons, then there is a huge likelihood that the forest would make way for housing.

So is being green and supporting the British Army at a local event wrong? Consider that Aldershot has declined socially and economically as troops have been moved away from the area to other Barracks (the Paras to Colchester, for instance) and the once-excellent Louise Margaret/Cambridge Military Hospital has been all but killed off (apart from some minor outpatient services to Frimley Park Hospital). Nearby Church Crookham lost Queen Elizabeth Barracks, home of the Ghurka Rifles, and that is now to be a housing estate where it was once the country’s last wooden billet barracks and green fields.

The modernisation of the British Army has had a huge negative social & economic impact as the military has slowly left its traditional and spiritual home town of Aldershot. If the Army can treat their main home this way then what level of conservationism is there for retaining an interest in land that is “less” important?

So, is it a little wrong to support the British Army when you’re a green? Very probably yes. But there is also an overwhelmingly positive aspect to the fact to the side that the Army occupy a lot of land that is often unfarmed, untouched by the public or by private interests.

If you look at the Green Party’s own Peace & Defence Policy there is very little there from a green & environmental angle as most of the subjects regarding the peace & defence policy are primarily from social and ethical viewpoints. Yes, there are secondary environmental considerations there and, whilst the policy talks of simply cutting military spending you have to question all the practicalities of simply & ruthlessly executing the terms of the manifesto.

I replied to my friend with

The M.O.D. own a LOT of land ’round here. Turn my back on the forces & the land here gets built on. So no problem

The very same day the BBC’s Countryfile TV Show had a small piece on the Castlemartin range in Pembrokeshire where the British Army test live ammunition from their tanks. Whilst the forces might be shooting explosive rounds from 50-ton machines and doing 4 MPG, the land has never been farmed and remains one of the country’s largest wild grasslands. Castlemartin is home to many rare breeds of flora & fauna and the restricted public access has maintained the green status of the place.

So were we still a little wrong? Maybe, but also a lot of right too.

Friends, Britons, countrymen… lend me your ears.

Today, Friday 10th July 2009, is supposedly Green Britain Day. The concept has been thought up by French nuclear energy giants EDF.

However, as has been said , this whole concept is a complete sham because:

1. EDF are French not British.
2. EDF are not green because they are the world’s biggest corporate producer of nuclear waste.
3. The green union flag has been stolen from British wind-power generators Ecotricity.

So really it’s not Green Britain Day but rather Greenwash Day. Do not be fooled by the company that:

1. Has Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s brother, Andrew Brown, as their Media Director (funny that, aye?)
2. Has spent a reported £50 million in advertising revenue on the campaign.
3. Brought Britain’s nuclear energy generator, British Energy, for some £25 billion.

Dale Vince, CEO of Ecotricity, is right in saying that this could be the biggest greenwash in corporate history, so shame on EDF for these bully-boy tactics.