Carbon Centre

At last! More serious attention is being given to the accurate measurement of carbon emissions. One might well ask why it's taken so long when our society has been committed  since the late 1980s - in words at least - to sustainable development. Sustainable carbon emissions are the number one performance measure within sustainable development...

A new UK facility aimed at improving measurement of carbon emissions and boosting development of clean technology is due to open. The Centre for Carbon Measurement will be based at the National Physical Laboratory in south-west London. It will raise accuracy of climate data, support better emissions monitoring to ensure a fair carbon market, and verify claims made about low-carbon products...more

Charles: Cabot [Carbon] Circus

Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall visited Cabot Circus shopping centre the other day to launch an 'environmental/sustainability' initiative. The claims that were made in local newspaper and tv reports about the 'green' credentials of Cabot Circus simply dont stand up to even the most basic scrutiny. The claims show just how weak and loose mainstream 'environmental/sustainability/green' thinking, standards and practices currently are...

THE Cabot Circus shopping centre had its first royal visitors yesterday, but the Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall were not in the city for a bit of retail therapy – they were here to paint the town green.

...James Bailey, Cabot Circus centre manager stated,

"As a centre, we have a strong track record of sustainability, having been recognised as the UK's first retail project of its kind to achieve the highest rating of 'excellent' by the Building Research Establishment.

"Environmental considerations have always been integral to Cabot Circus – from the overall design philosophy and integration with the existing city centre, to waste minimisation and use of energy and water efficiency features."

The distinctive energy-efficient domed roofing of Cabot Circus even seemed to get the thumbs-up from the Prince, who is known to often have unequivocal opinions on modern architecture...

If Cabot Circus is about 'green' Bristol and the West where does it prominently feature local and regional products? If it's consistent with Bristol’s green city/capital ambition why the focus on driving to the huge car park (pictured top left) and shops that import products from all over the world? Where are the genuinely green products and businesses? Why are plastic bags given out left right and centre?? Why no mention of how it has increased Bristol's already very large and unsustainable carbon footprint, both directly and indirectly? Cabot Circus is all about the celebration and advocacy of mass consumerism, the belief that the more we consume the better off we are, something that is remarkable in these pretty unprecedented times of credit crunch, economic downturn, resource depletion and environmental degradation.

The focus of Cabot Circus is much more global economy than local economy, much more about a small number of people getting rich than local people meeting their needs. Debt-funded mass consumption around the globe is causing extremely serious and urgent economic and environmental problems. So what have we done in Bristol? Build a massive shopping centre, including one of Europes biggest car parks!! Mass consumerist societies eat up resources (sparking oil price rises) like there is no tomorrow and spew out vast amounts of climate change causing carbon and very large amounts of all kinds of wastes

Would it not have been much more valuable to individuals, neighbourhoods and communities in Bristol to get together a proper strategy to maintain and develop shops, services and jobs in each locality? We need development to be localised. Cabot Circus is a million miles from local production for local needs yet this is the pattern of development we need for a happier, healthier, fairer, greener and more convivial city!

News from campaigners in Copenhagen...

From Catherine, Camp for Climate Action, Copenhagen: Thanks for reacting so promptly to our email earlier! Here's some of our best footage from the streets of Copenhagen for the past couple of days.

Tens of thousands marching for climate justice: http://blip.tv/file/2967354 Contains an eyewitness account of the mass arrests of peaceful demonstrators that made headlines yesterday.

And some more raw from-the-street footage from a climate camper http://qik.com/video/3906448

Here's a soundclip that traveled around Twitter today of climate camper Amelia Gregory escaping the mass arrests http://ipad.io/DKQ

An interview with a spoof carbon trader http://indymedia.dk/videos/1678

We are also pooling pictures from the protests at http://www.flickr.com/groups/climatecampcopenhagen2009/ Feel free to get in touch if you're looking for a specific protest-related image.

A lot of people at the first big demo hoped for a global, fair and legally binding deal... but what now, after many third world countries have walked out on the negotiations after being excluded by the rich world? We will continue going out on the streets to expose the flaws in the talks and will be in touch again soon.

I could write a guest post before the Climate Justice Action march on the 16th

Sustainability and tomorrows Budget

Three excellent posts on the blog of Sustainable Development Commission Chairman Jonathon Porritt. All relate closely to tomorrow's budget and I recommend looking over each of them:

Government and the low carbon economy

Sustainability on the political agenda

Prosperity without growth

'Green' consultants fly off to plant some trees!!

This story in todays local paper ('Bristol Airport security detects toothpaste but not live bullets', Post, 13 March) raises the very serious issue of airport security, which must be got right of course. However, the fact that 'Four staff at green consultancy Carbon Managers were setting off for a tree-planting trip in Scotland from Bristol Airport...' is also most noteworthy to say the least! What are carbon managers doing flying like this?

These people should surely recognise that there is no substitute for reducing emissions at source. Its hardly taking all practical steps to reduce carbon emissions if they are flying off to Scotland is it! But that is what the best advice says should be done before considering carbon offsetting, which is what these 'four staff' would probably say they have done with their emissions from the flight.

Even at the offsetting stage one has to be very careful indeed about the scheme chosen because there are some very dodgy ones out there - you just can't 'magic away' our climate problems by handing over some dosh to a consultancy. If the solution was that easy the problem would have been solved years ago!!

Easy Jet; the law of supply and demand; and the real truth on carbon offsetting

Yesterday my blog focus was on Ryanair's boss Michael O'Leary. Writing that blog entry reminded me of a poster I'd seen recently whilst walking to work to deliver a tutorial (ironically about climate change and ecological footprints). Near the junction of St Lukes Rd and York Rd I saw a large orange poster advertising an easy Jet offer 'Bristol to Madeira from only £24.99'. This sends out exactly the opposite message of the one I would want and I dont see it as ethical. Flying is not in fact even remotely like a low cost activity (see here for an excellent description of why by George Monbiot - who is speaking in Bristol soon) and therefore should not be priced as such or facilitated by expanding airports.

By the law of supply and demand offering flights at very low cost means that demand for them is likely to be very high (exactly what we are seeing), unless some other powerful factor is in operation to deter people. Easy Jet's website has an environment page detailing things like being efficient on the gound, efficient in the air, carbon offsetting, aircraft design and its Corportate Social Responsibility report. The trouble is that the factors they describe are, in terms of environmental effects, completely outweighed by the company's main aim of getting vast numbers of people to fly more and more often !

Easy Jet might respond by saying that people can offset their carbon emissions but planes emit more than carbon (eg water vapour, nitrogen oxides, particulates...) and there are many problems with offsetting, as I've discussed previously. According to the easy Jet carbon calculator flying Bristol to Madeira emits, per person, 195kg of carbon dioxide and that the
offsetting cost per person is £2.54. If only tackling carbon emissions was that straightforward!!

Government advice to business and individuals is 'that carbon offsetting is not a substitute for reducing emissions at source but is: the ‘next best’ solution for mitigating remaining emissions from essential activities after all practical steps have been taken to reduce them' I tried extremely hard to find comments like this on the easy Jet site , looking at all the pages, following links to other pages and documents, but could not find anything like them at all - no surprise really.

Easy Jet want to give the impression that carbon offsetting is a better, much more environmentlly friendly and effective option than it really is of course. They simply aren't going to tell people that they should take 'all practical steps' to cut emissions before considering offsetting the rest - because this would mean not flying at all or flying fewer miles or on fewer occasions!!

Politicians should also set a personal green example

Tony Blair and the government should set a good example on climate change by adopting more sustainable personal behaviour and so Philip C James letter ('Government must lead by example', Bristol Evening Post, January 15) hit the nail on the head. We all need to do our bit because it all adds up - the Government are asking us all to contribute and it is hypocritical if they are not doing likewise.

Philip asks whether Labour are ready to offer leadership on this issue. The signs are far from good. Tony Blair first said he had no intention of cutting back on personal air travel but then quickly announced he would start to offset his carbon emissions. I cannot see why Tony Blair would not help to promote the country he leads by saying that he would take a holiday or two here instead of always flying. What does he not like about the UK?

Whilst his very sudden conversion to offsetting his carbon is welcome up to a point, there are also issues with the effectiveness of some offsetting schemes. Its also the case that committment to carbon offsetting varies considerably across the Cabinet! What's more the government's own advice to businesses considering carbon offsetting says that action to minimise emissions should be taken first, with only emissions that cannot be eliminated then offset. This is excellent advice to all trying to make carbon cuts and Tony Blair himself should follow it.

In a survey of government ministers only 5 out of 14 questioned by The Guardian currently offset their personal carbon from flights. This is very poor. Secretary of State for Culture Tessa Jowell was quoted as saying, 'I'll be working to plant trees to offset my carbon emissions'. This shows a real lack of awareness at the heart of government about what makes a reliable carbon offsetting scheme - in the week they are launching an offsetting standard! There is no way as yet to accurately measure how much carbon is absorbed and released by forests and woods as trees go through their lifecycle. One EU study estimated that Europes forests absorbed somewhere between 120 and 280 million tonnes of carbon per year, indicating massive measurement uncertainty.

There is growing interest in carbon offsetting but people considering it, Cabinet members included, should look closely at the particular schemes used and shop around for the best. Those that are heavily reliant on tree planting may not be reliable in terms of carbon absorbed - the error in measurement can be as high as 50% according to one New Scientist report! This is perhaps no surprise as carbon absorption by trees depends on many things: species; age; our increasingly uncertain climate, especially droughts and forest fires; diseases; canopy type; a range of pollutants and other factors.

Tree planting done properly is a very good thing and in optimum conditions a lot of carbon can be absorbed but such conditions seldom exist and its very hard to know with accuracy how much is absorbed. There are still fears that foresters might cut down existing forests to plant carbon guzzling trees. There are also many competing land uses for areas around the world that might be considered for trees, not least food production.

In any case carbon offsetting by trees is only a temporary 'solution'. Once trees are mature they begin emitting net amounts of carbon as they begin decomposing in whole or part. They must be removed or managed so that locked up carbon is not simply released again a few decades on.

Its important that we dont come to rely on carbon offsetting, especially by tree planting. Its tempting to put off the real task of cutting pollution or wriggle off the hook of emissions targets. However, the only guaranteed way to tackle climate change is to adopt sustainable lifestyles, which in any case would enhance our general wellbeing. So come on Tony Blair and company - show us how this is done!