Environment | News & Views

Whaling worsens carbon release, scientists warn

By Victoria Gill

A century of whaling may have released more than 100 million tonnes – or a large forest’s worth – of carbon into the atmosphere, scientists say. Whales store carbon within their huge bodies and when they are killed, much of this carbon can be released. US scientists revealed their estimate of carbon released by whaling at the Ocean Sciences meeting in Portland, US. Dr Andrew Pershing from the University of Maine described whales as the “forests of the ocean”.

Dr Pershing and his colleagues from the Gulf of Maine Research Institute calculated the annual carbon-storing capacity of whales as they grew. “Whales, like any animal or plant on the planet, are made out of a lot of carbon,” he said. “And when you kill and remove a whale from the ocean, that’s removing carbon from this storage system and possibly sending it into the atmosphere.” He pointed out that, particularly in the early days of whaling, the animals were a source of lamp oil, which was burned, releasing the carbon directly into the air.

“And this marine system is unique because when whales die [naturally], their bodies sink, so they take that carbon down to the bottom of the ocean. “If they die where it’s deep enough, it will be [stored] out of the atmosphere perhaps for hundreds of years.”

In their initial calculations, the team worked out that 100 years of whaling had released an amount of carbon equivalent to burning 130,000 sq km of temperate forests, or to driving 128,000 Humvees continuously for 100 years. Dr Pershing stressed that this was still a relatively tiny amount when compared to the billions of tonnes produced by human activity every year.

When whales die [naturally], their bodies sink, so they take that carbon down to the bottom of the ocean.
Dr Andrew Pershing, University of Maine. But he said that whales played an important role in storing and transporting carbon in the marine ecosystem. Simply leaving large groups of whales to grow, he said, could “sequester” the greenhouse gas, in amounts that were comparable to some of the reforestation schemes that earn and sell carbon credits.

He suggested that a similar system of carbon credits could be applied to whales in order to protect and rebuild their stocks. Other scientists said that he had raised an exciting and interesting problem.

Dr Pershing said: “These are huge and they are top predators, so unless they’re fished they would be likely to take their biomass to the bottom of the ocean [when they die].”

Read the full article at BBC News

Met Office to look again at global warming records

By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent

The Met Office is to re-examine 160 years of global temperature records following the ‘climategate’ scandal.

The project, in partnership with the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), will gather the original temperature records from thousands of weather stations around the world. The readings will be double-checked and new information that has become available, such as improved understanding of atmospheric change, will be added. The data will then be independently analysed to assess how the temperature has changed over different regions.

The new analysis, that will take three years, will not only provide a more detailed picture of global warming but boost public confidence in the science of climate change.

Climate change sceptics claim that emails stolen from the University of East Anglia show scientists were willing to manipulate global warming data in a scandal known as ‘climategate’.
In another scandal known as ‘glaciergate’ the UN body in charge of climate change science, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), was forced to retract a claim that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035.
However leading scientists, including the Royal Society, insist the case for man-made global warming is convincing and it remains a threat to the world.

Vicky Pope, Head of Climate Change Advice, at the Met Office, said the new global temperature analyses would not change the trend of global warming.
But she said it would verify the existing data and provide more information so the world can better adapt to climate change.

Read the full article at Telegraph Earth

Litter: our legacy to future generations

By Jeremy Paxman

Our grandchildren will know us by our discarded cans of Coca-Cola and packets of Walkers crisps

It’s the real thing, all right. That plastic jewel glinting in the verge among the emerging daffodils is a plastic bottle. Probably an empty Coke one.

An organisation called Litter Heroes (surely the most unglamorous club in Britain?) has done something rather useful. They have traced where the crud that morons in cars chuck out of their windows originally comes from. No surprise to discover that the worst-offending brand is Coca-Cola (4.9% of all litter), followed by Walkers Crisps (4.1%) and McDonald’s (3.6%).

And what does Coca-Cola say by way of apology? A company spokesman “acknowledges” the report. How very gracious of him. He goes on to blather that its bottles “carry the Tidy Man and Recycle Now logos”. Well, that should do it.

There is more fatuous wittering from McDonald’s, which even has the nerve to attempt a tone of wronged outrage, saying that “in 2009 we spent over ¬£2m on staff labour alone” picking up litter. That’s ¬£2m out of a turn over of more than ¬£2bn in Britain.

Anyone who walks anywhere in this filthy country knows that what the 39 volunteers from Litter Heroes discovered is true. No one in their right mind talks any longer about a “green and pleasant land”. A beautiful country is being submerged under a rising tide of rubbish.

Worst of all is the fact that whereas paper bags biodegrade, plastic bottles and confectionery wrappers last for generations. Our great-grandchildren will still be living among the gaudy wrapping of the chocolate bar we excreted last month.

The poor saps who have to act as apologists for the fizzy-drink and junk-food manufacturers never use the obvious argument because it would ¬≠insult their customers. Why don’t they try the tactic of US gun ¬≠manufacturers, who say: “It’s not guns that kill, it’s people”? Of course, it’s not the boss of Coke or Cadbury chucking the company products out of the car window; it’s some oaf who doesn’t understand that in tidying up his private space he’s making the shared space filthy.

The turning of verges into rubbish tips is a symptom of the “everyone for himself” attitude that has come to dominate in the last 50 years. What can we do? Local councils are supposed to have a statutory duty to clear up litter, but are largely useless. Ditto the national government. The fault, dear Brutus, is in ourselves. At least future generations won’t lack evidence of the kind of people we were.

Read the full article at the guardian website

World’s top firms cause $2.2tn of environmental damage, report estimates

By Juliette Jowit

Report for the UN into the activities of the world’s 3,000 biggest companies estimates one-third of profits would be lost if firms were forced to pay for use, loss and damage of environment

Black clouds over the central business district, Jakarta. The report into the activities of the world’s 3,000 biggest public companies has estimated the cost of use, loss and damage of the environment. Photograph: Jewel Samad/AFP/Getty Images

The cost of pollution and other damage to the natural environment caused by the world’s biggest companies would wipe out more than one-third of their profits if they were held financially accountable, a major unpublished study for the United Nations has found.

The report comes amid growing concern that no one is made to pay for most of the use, loss and damage of the environment, which is reaching crisis proportions in the form of pollution and the rapid loss of freshwater, fisheries and fertile soils.

Ahead of changes which would have a profound effect – not just on companies’ profits but also their customers and pension funds and other investors – the UN-backed Principles for Responsible Investment initiative and the United Nations Environment Programme jointly ordered a report into the activities of the 3,000 biggest public companies in the world, which includes household names from the UK’s FTSE 100 and other major stockmarkets

The biggest single impact on the $2.2tn estimate, accounting for more than half of the total, was emissions of greenhouse gases blamed for climate change. Other major “costs” were local air pollution such as particulates, and the damage caused by the over-use and pollution of freshwater.

The true figure is likely to be even higher because the $2.2tn does not include damage caused by household and government consumption of goods and services, such as energy used to power appliances or waste; the “social impacts” such as the migration of people driven out of affected areas, or the long-term effects of any damage other than that from climate change. The final report will also include a higher total estimate which includes those long-term effects of problems such as toxic waste.

Trucost did not want to comment before the final report on which sectors incurred the highest “costs” of environmental damage, but they are likely to include power companies and heavy energy users like aluminium producers because of the greenhouse gases that result from burning fossil fuels. Heavy water users like food, drink and clothing companies are also likely to feature high up on the list.

Sukhdev said the heads of the major companies at this year’s annual economic summit in Davos, Switzerland, were increasingly concerned about the impact on their business if they were stopped or forced to pay for the damage.

“It can make the difference between profit and loss,” Sukhdev told the annual Earthwatch Oxford lecture last week. “That sense of foreboding is there with many, many [chief executives], and that potential is a good thing because it leads to solutions.”

The aim of the study is to encourage and help investors lobby companies to reduce their environmental impact before concerned governments act to restrict them through taxes or regulations, said Mattison.

Read the full article at guardian.co.uk

Battery Recycling

30,000 tonnes of portable batteries enter the UK market each year.

New EU rules have come into force that require some stores selling batteries to provide in-store recycling bins. Anyone selling more than 32kg a year – equivalent to one pack of four AA batteries a day – must comply as part of targets on cutting landfill.

The UK currently recycles only 3% of portable batteries, but the aim is to raise that figure to 45% by 2016. Battery maker Varta warned that a lack of awareness among consumers could hamper the scheme’s success.

An estimated 30,000 tonnes of batteries – from those in electrical goods like torches, to rechargeable ones in mobile phones – enter the UK market each year.

At present, 97% eventually end up in landfill sites, where they can leak toxic chemicals into the soil.
The EU Batteries Directive aims to tackle that problem and cut carbon emissions by reducing the need for new batteries to be made from scratch.

All the evidence shows home collections of recyclables produce the best results

Environment Secretary Hilary Benn said: “This new legislation will make it easier for consumers to do the right thing whilst ensuring retailers fulfil their part of the bargain.”

But Vince Armitage, divisional vice-president of Varta, said he was concerned. ”The directive places the responsibility of meeting its stringent collection and recycling targets on the manufacturer, but it relies on the co-operation of consumers and retailers to make it work,” he said. ”However, a lack of promotion means that awareness of the directive among these key groups is low.
“This gives us great concern that, as a nation, we are setting ourselves up to fail before we even begin.” Varta estimates that just meeting the 10% target will cost manufacturers £3m.

Bob Gordon, from the British Retail Consortium, said retailers were ready for the new requirements, but called for a “comprehensive and continuing” government information campaign to raise awareness among consumers. He also said shops should not be the only route for collection, adding: “We need an infrastructure to develop which includes workplaces, schools, community centres and kerbside collection.

Read the full article at: bbc.co.uk/news

Favourite ‘Green Books’

Leo Hickman’s full article can be found at theguardian.co.uk GreenBook

The University of Cambridge’s programme for sustainability leadership has compiled a list of the top 50 green books. It asked its alumni – “around 2,000 senior leaders from around the world who have participated in its sustainability programmes over the past decade or more” – to list some of their favourite “sustainability” books.

The result is a pretty comprehensive rundown of the most influential and thought-provoking books of all time. There are many classics – Silent Spring, Fast Food Nation, The Limits to Growth, The Population Bomb, Small is Beautiful, A Sand County Almanac – but there are also a few omissions, too. Where’s Henry David Thoreau’s Walden? Where’s Thomas Friedman’s Hot, Flat and Crowded? Where’s Bill McKibben’s The End of Nature?

And should fiction be allowed onto the list, too? How about Cormac McCarthy’s The Road? Or Edward Abbey’s The Monkey Wrench Gang?

Of course, there’s always that debate about what you mean by the term “sustainability”, but let us for the sake of argument say that in this instance it refers to books that make you think long and hard about how best to exist within a fragile biosphere blessed with finite resources.

The full list (in alphabetical order)

Banker to the Poor: Micro-Lending and the battle Against World Poverty, by Muhammad Yunus1999

Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature, by Janine Benyus, 2003

Blueprint for a Green Economy: by David Pearce, Anil Markandya and Edward B. Barbier, 1989

Business as Unusual: My Entrepreneurial Journey, Profits and Principles, by Anita Roddick, 2005

Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business, by John Elkington, 1999

Capitalism as if the World Matters, by Jonathon Porritt, 2005

Capitalism at the Crossroads: Aligning Business, Earth, and Humanity, by Stuart Hart, 2005

Changing Course: A Global Business Perspective on Development and the Environment, by Stephan Schmidheiny and WBCSD, 1992

The Chaos Point: The World at the Crossroads, by Ervin Laszlo, 2006

The Civil Corporation: The New Economy of Corporate Citizenship, by Simon Zadek, 2001

Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Survive, by Jared Diamond, 2005

The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power, by Joel Bakan, 2005

Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things by William McDonough and Michael Braungart, 2002

The Dream of Earth, by Thomas Berry, 1990

Development as Freedom, by Amartya Sen, 2000

The Ecology of Commerce: A Declaration of Sustainability, by Paul Hawken, 1994

The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review, by Nicholas Stern, 2007

The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Time, by Jeffrey Sachs, 2005.

Factor Four: Doubling Wealth, Halving Resources Use-A Report to the Club of Rome, by Ernst Von Weizsäcker, 1998

False Dawn: The Delusions of Global Capitalism, by John Gray, 2002

Fast Food Nation: The Dark Side on the All-American Meal, by Eric Schlosser, 2005

A Fate Worse than Debt: The World Financial Crisis and the Poor, by Susan George, 1990

For The Common Good: Redirecting the Economy toward Community, the Environment and a Sustainable Future, by Herman Daly and John Cobb, 1989

Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid: Eradicating Poverty through Profits, by C.K. Prahalad, 2004

Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth, by James Lovelock, 2000

Globalization and its Discontents, by Joseph Stiglitz, 2002

Heat: How to Stop the Planet from Burning, by George Monbiot, 2006

Human-Scale Development: Conception, Application and Further Reflections, by Manfred Max-Neef, 1991

The Hungry Spirit: Beyond Capitalism: The Quest for Purpose in the Modern World, by Charles Handy, 1999

An Inconvenient Truth: The Planetary Emergency of Global Warming and What We Can Do About It, by Al Gore, 2006

The Limits to Growth, by Donella H. Meadows, Dennis L. Meadows and Jorgen Randers, 1972

Maverick: The Success Story Behind the World’s Most Unusual Workplace, by Ricardo Semler, 1993

The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else, by Hernando De Soto, 2000

Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial Revolution, by Paul Hawken, Amory Lovins and L. Hunter Lovins, 2000

No Logo: No Space, No Choice, No Jobs, by Naomi Klein, 2002

Open Society: Reforming Global Capitalism, by George Soros, 2000

Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth, by Buckminster Fuller, 1969

Our Common Future, by The World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987

The Population Bomb, by Paul Ehrlich, 1969

Presence: An Explanation of Profound Change in People, Organizations and Society, by Peter Senge, C. Otto Scharmer, Joseph Jaworski and Betty Sue Flowers, 2005

The River Runs Black: The Environmental Challenge to China’s Future, by Elizabeth C. Economy, 2004

Sand County Almanac, by Aldo Leopold, 1949

Silent Spring, by Rachel Carson, 1962

The Skeptical Environmentalist, by Bjorn Lomborg, 2001

Small is Beautiful: Economics as if People Mattered, by E.F. Schumacher, 1973

Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Development, by Vandana Shiva, 1989

The Turning Point: Science Society and the Rising Culture, by Fritjof Capra, 1984

Unsafe At Any Speed: The Designed-in Dangers of the American Automobile, by Ralph Nader, 1965

When Corporations Rule the World, by David Korten, 2001

When the Rivers Run Dry: What Happens When Our Water Runs Out? by Fred Pearce, 2006

Green and Black’s to go 100% Fairtrade

Move will make Green & Black’s the world’s leading manufacturer of organic Fairtrade chocolate green-and-blacks

The company’s Maya Gold chocolate was the first official Fairtrade product to go on sale in Britain 15 years ago. Its extended range of chocolate bar and beverage products in the UK will start to carry the distinctive blue and green Fairtrade logo from late 2010, and it is hoped that full conversion of the entire chocolate bar and beverage range in more than 30 countries will be achieved by the end of 2011.

The Fairtrade market, which now covers products from developing countries ranging from chocolate and coffee to cotton, was worth £22m in 1999, according to a recent survey from the Co-op. Last year, sales of Fairtrade products grew to £635m and the Co-operative is predicting it could break the £1bn barrier in 2010.

The Fairtrade funding, approximately £300,000 a year, received by farmers in the Dominican Republic will be spent on sustainability initiatives which will include improving quality, yields and education, which in turn will increase income for farmers, ensure the cocoa industry becomes more sustainable and secure the supply of high-quality organic cocoa beans to support the brand’s international growth.

Dominic Lowe, managing director of Green & Black’s, said: “We buy quality, organic Trinitario cocoa beans from co-operatives in the Dominican Republic, and have done so for 10 years. Up until now we have committed US $500,000 in local initiatives to improve quality and availability, but we wanted to do more to support farmers.”
The Fairtrade Foundation (UK) executive director, Harriet Lamb, commented: “This newest commitment to Fairtrade will enable producers to benefit themselves, scale up their businesses and invest in their communities, not just now but for the future.”

See the whole article at theguardian.co.uk

Is the Government Doing Enough?

The Government has played down claims it is not doing enough to help introduce electric cars in the UK. electric-car-gas-gauge

In a visit to the region this week Ivan Hodac, secretary-general of the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association, said money spent on support for the North East’s electric car infrastructure was not supported across the rest of the UK.

His outspoken attack on “piecemeal” Government support has upset ministers who have spent millions of pounds on electric vehicle support.

Nissan’s Sunderland plant, which employs more than 3,000 workers, is currently bidding against its factory in Portugal to build the manufacturer’s LEAF electric car – a contract which it hopes could create thousands of North East jobs. But Mr Hodac said Portuguese efforts to introduce electric car charging points were moving much faster than UK plans.

The Government claims to have found £30m for charging points for electric and plug-in hybrid cars.

“Cities and businesses are joining together to bid for this money which will help fund the installation of charging points on streets, car parks and in commercial, retail and leisure facilities,” the Government spokeswoman said.
She added: “Overall, we’re investing more than £400m to encourage the development, manufacture and use of next generation ultra-low carbon vehicles. This support is being targeted to create jobs in a low-carbon automotive sector and to cut carbon from UK road transport.”

Mr Hodac is a representative in Brussels of the 15 European car makers.

View the full article at nebusiness.co.uk

Did the Copenhagen Summit Fail?

According to John Vidal, Allegra Stratton and Suzanne Goldenberg – ‘Copenhagen Ends in Failure’ cop15_logo_b_m1

(This article is a summary – read the full article at the guardian.co.uk)

The UN climate summit reached a weak outline of a global agreement in Copenhagen tonight, falling far short of what Britain and many poor countries were seeking and leaving months of tough negotiations to come.

After eight draft texts and all-day talks between 115 world leaders, it was left to Barack Obama and Wen Jiabao, the Chinese premier, to broker a political agreement. The so-called Copenhagen accord “recognises” the scientific case for keeping temperature rises to no more than 2C but does not contain commitments to emissions reductions to achieve that goal.

American officials spun the deal as a “meaningful agreement”, but even Obama said: “This progress is not enough.”

In a press conference held after the talks broke up, Brown said the agreement was a “vital first step” and accepted there was a lot more work to do to get assurances it would become a legally binding agreement. He declined to call it a “historic” conference:

The deal was brokered between China, South Africa, India, Brazil and the US, but late last night it was unclear whether it would be adopted by all 192 countries in the full plenary session. The deal aims to provide $30bn a year for poor countries to adapt to climate change from next year to 2012, and $100bn a year by 2020.

But it disappointed African and other vulnerable countries which had been holding out for deeper emission cuts to hold the global temperature rise to 1.5C this century. As widely expected, all references to 1.5C in past drafts were removed at the last minute, but more surprisingly, the earlier 2050 goal of reducing global CO2 emissions by 80% was also dropped.

Obama hinted that China was to blame for the lack of a substantial deal. In a press conference he condemned the insistence of some countries to look backwards to previous environmental agreements. He said developing countries should be “getting out of that mindset, and moving towards the position where everybody recognises that we all need to move together”.

Negotiators will now work on individual agreements such as forests, technology, and finance – but, without strong leadership, the chances are that it will take years to complete.

John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace UK, said: “The city of Copenhagen is a crime scene tonight, with the guilty men and women fleeing to the airport. Ed Miliband [UK climate change secretary] is among the very few that come out of this summit with any credit.” It is now evident that beating global warming will require a radically different model of politics than the one on display here in Copenhagen.”

Budget Airlines – Better for the Environment

Passengers who fly with no-frills carriers leave a softer “carbon footprint” than those on full-service easyjet airlines, new research has shown.

A couple flying with Ryanair from London to Venice and returning a week later have a carbon footprint of 410kg, while the equivalent journey on Alitalia would produce 977kg. A flight from London to Zurich with easyJet has a carbon footprint of 277kg per couple, compared with 688kg with Aer Lingus.

An easyJet spokesman said: “Our policy is to expand our fleet through the acquisition of the latest-technology aircraft, as these are more fuel-efficient than older models. The average age of an aircraft in our flight is 3.5 years. We also use these aircraft as efficiently as possible, by maximising load factors and seating density.” On an Airbus A319, the average full-service airline has 124 seats; easyJet has 156.

“Our analysis shows that the environmental stigma of budget travel may be unwarranted,” said Gbenga Kogbe of Liligo.co.uk. “Travellers can now assess the financial and environmental costs of travelling with low-cost airlines, traditional airlines and charter-flight companies.”

While many scheduled carriers report dwindling passenger numbers, low-cost carriers continue to see growth: easyJet reported a 9.3 per cent rise in passenger traffic in December compared with December 2008.
Analysts said the airline had benefited from the threat of Christmas strike action against BA and the disruption by snow of Eurostar services.

BA carried four per cent fewer passengers in December compared with the same month last year. Overall, passenger numbers fell by 750,000 to 25.2 million last year. It is not yet clear how damaging the renewed threat of strikes will be to bookings, but several travel agents have already switched flights away from BA since the cabin crew’s union, Unite, announced plans for a new strike ballot. The vote is expected to be held in early March.

Read the full article at the telegraph.co.uk