Cowculating the impacts of council-run herd

Received this online invitation to comment on todays Post story that 'Bristol City Council wants to run its own herd of cows to provide beef for the city's schools and posh restaurants....'

'Don't cows produce lots of pesky methane? You know, that 'greenhouse gas', 20 times more potent than CO2, responsible for all that anthropomorphic (bovomorphic?) global warming? Hardly very responsible, is it guys? What do you think, Glenn Vowles? '(Mark, Scrabble Champion...)

Still working out the figures on my cowculator Mark! Moooo-re on this later perhaps.

Bring rail fares into line with those on the continent

The Post today reports that, 'Train fares in Britain cost at least 50 per cent more than on the Continent because of the way they are subsidised.

In France and Germany, the cost of rail services is regarded in the same way as roads – the cost falls mostly on the taxpayer.

But in Britain, there is a general principle that rail passengers should foot the bill for our trains.'

The Labour Govt are content with the highest rail fares in Europe. The Conservatives presided over very high rail fares last time they were in power. The Liberal Democrats Norman Baker called for a rail fare freeze - at what is currently the highest level in Europe!!

We need much better than this to get a decent, more affordable rail service.

The Greens have committed to spending the £500m a year necessary to bring UK rail fares in line with those on the continent. This is completely affordable given that we spend three times this on road building, widening and so on!

£500m more for rail is money very well spent for me!

Are sea level rises real? If so, what problems are caused?

Changing sea levels reshape whole coastlines, often affecting densely populated areas. Scientists want to understand sea level as thoroughly as possible, given the climate change problem, and have gathered increasing amounts of data. G Best’s letter (‘Where is the evidence of rising water levels?’, Open Lines, 17 Feb) says rising sea levels are ‘scares’ and requests the evidence. Maybe he thinks sea level rise does not exist because he has not noticed it with his own eyes? I can assure him that there is plenty of reliable evidence showing it!

DEFRA, the Environment Agency and South West Observatory data has identified which regional coastal sites and features are most at risk from sea level rise within the next 20 years. Sites at high risk according to them include: Westbury Court Garden, Bossington, Lundy Access Road, Godrevy, Penberth, St Michael’s Mount, Mullion Harbour, Cotehele Quay, South Milton Sands, Black Ven/Lyme Regis, Golden Cap, Studland, and Brownsea. Sites at medium risk include: Middlehope & Sandpoint, Brean Down, Woolacombe, Boscastle Harbour, Wembury, Greenway Quay, Burton Bradstock.

South West sea levels are set to rise between 20-80cm by the 2080s, depending on whether and by how much we all cut or increase emissions. Newlyn in Cornwall has one of the longest sea level records in the UK and sea level here was 161mm higher in 2006 than when records began in 1916 on average. Average wave height increased, from 1.8m in 1962 to 2.3m today (Seven Stones Light-vessel). Such changes may adversely affect sea defences, harbours, homes, businesses, infrastructure, maritime heritage as well as natural assets and biodiversity according to the Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory.

The National Trust has published research into the long-term future of the coastline and the impact that climate change (through sea level rise, coastal flooding and increased erosion) was predicted to have on this coast over the next century. In the south west 279 kilometres of National Trust coastline are at risk from erosion, with 852 hectares of Trust coastal sites becoming at risk of tidal flooding.

Information on global sea level rise, published by NASA in June 2006 showed sea level rose, on average, 3 millimetres per year between 1993 and 2005. Half of this was attributed to melting ice and the other half to thermal expansion as the ocean absorbs excess energy. Due to climate change scientists at NASA and elsewhere are particularly concerned about: thermal expansion—the tendency of warm water to take up more space than cooler water; the addition of water to the sea from melting glaciers; and changes in salinity, given that fresh water is less dense than salt water and therefore takes up slightly more space than an equal mass of salt water.

Do Something About It

I'm supporting the progressive politics organisation Do Something About It, which I originally came across through a friend on Facebook. I've signed their petition which says:

We call on the Prime Minister to supplement the banking bail-out with a British New Deal that will create jobs and lay the foundations for a greener, fairer future, less dependent on the demands of the financial sector.


http://www.dosomethingaboutit.org.uk/home.php


I hope many others will sign up.


This is how Do Something About It describe who they are and what they are about:


dosomethingaboutit.org.uk calls for government to:--lay the foundations for a diverse economy, less dependent on the demands of the financial sector--invest in green industries and energy production, as well as the skills needed for them to flourish--recognise that extreme inequalities between the very richest and the rest are socially unsustainable--commit to a fairer society, in which social enterprise and initiative are not stifled by lack of time and resources

dosomethingaboutit.org.uk aims to provide a service for busy but concerned progressives - keeping you up-to-date on how you can get involved in the fight for a progressive future, whether by signing a petition, contacting government ministers, or writing to your local MP. If you have a cause you'd like us to champion, or a petition you'd like to see set up, please get in touch.

dosomethingaboutit.org.uk is not affiliated with any political party. We aim to support progressive candidates whatever their progressive political affiliation - whether they be Labour or Liberal Democrat, members of Plaid Cymru, the SNP, or the Greens. Anyone committed to a progressive agenda, whether they are already part of one of these political parties or independent, is welcome to join.

Our carbon footprints

Climate change is a serious and urgent issue (report on the latest science here). Carbon emitted faster than it is absorbed is causing it. Thus the rising focus on carbon footprints as an indicator of environmental impact. We can both assess the scale of the problem and then monitor progress towards target low emission levels. The average personal carbon footprint in the UK is currently 12 tonnes per year (in the USA its 20 tonnes). A key provision of the UK’s Climate Change Act 2008 is a cut in emissions of at least 80% from 1990 levels by 2050. To achieve sustainable UK emissions, allowing for rising population, we are talking about between 1 and 2 tonnes per person each year.

Its not just carbon in the form of carbon dioxide emitted when fossil fuels are burned that is counted. All emissions that add to the greenhouse effect and cause climate change are converted to their carbon dioxide equivalent and expressed in tonnes or kilograms of this gas (a footprint in tonnes may seem odd but that’s because the name is drawn from the ecological footprint). Gases converted to their carbon dioxide equivalent include methane, nitrogen oxides, various hydrocarbons.

Carbon emissions arise through fuel use for heating, lighting and transport. These are direct and we have reasonable control over them. Emissions also arise less directly because they are embedded in the products and services we use, from the production and disposal ends of their lifecycle. Its harder to have control over these though of course we can alter the type and number of products and services we consume.

Picture a system boundary around a city, a person, a house, factories, offices, a country, group of countries – the carbon footprint of each can be assessed. A boundary can be drawn around various products, say beef or cars, and the carbon footprint of the product’s lifecycle assessed. Organisations want to know their carbon footprint for energy and/or environmental management purposes, prioritising and quantifying effective, efficient and economic action. Growing numbers use the data in corporate social responsibility reports, responses to customer and investor requests. Organisations as diverse as Ipswich Town Football Club and Marks and Spencer have carbon neutral policies. Carbon footprint figures are appearing on a range of products, including Walkers crisps, Innocent Drinks smoothies and Boots shampoo…to enable informed consumer choices.

The carbon footprint concept is itself inevitably a simplification of reality. The computer models used to calculate footprints are further inevitable simplifications. This is both a plus and a minus of course. As with all measurement and calculation, care and preparation is needed when establishing and reporting figures. Independent verification may often be appropriate. Caution and checks are needed to ensure fair comparisons. Footprint standards are bringing methods closer together, making data more consistent and comparable.

Carbon footprints relate to one key environmental impact - climate change – and according to the Global Footprinting Network amount to half the ecological footprint (and not all types of environmental impact can be converted to the land area ecological footprints establish). This is a very significant proportion of the ecological footprint and so it is essential to establish it. However, we must not forget the other ways we are breaching environmental limits as measured by: overfishing; socio-economic effects; deforestation; species extinction; our water footprint; the spread of monocultures; deaths due to toxic pollution; quality of life reduction from noise and visual impacts, and more.

Sustainability is a whole system phenomenon. Types of impact are interrelated. If we don’t take a whole system approach to finding solutions our actions may be ineffective or cause further damage through effects we did not intend or anticipate. The dash for biofuels provides a timely lesson for us. Carbon footprinting is an excellent tool for awareness raising, getting a sense of the overall scale of the problem and progress made toward reduction targets but we must combine it with other measures and make good judgements on how problems interlink.

Further information: UN, Defra, carbon calculator, Marks and Spencer policy,

Walkers Crisps carbon footprint, corporate social responsibility.

Statement to council committee on Elizabeth Shaw Factory and surrounding land

Former Elizabeth Shaw Factory and surrounding land

Statement about planning application number: 08/03862/F,

submitted to council and which I hope to read out at the planning committee meeting Weds 18 Feb:

I currently have a complaint lodged with the Local Government Ombudsman (ref 08 013 849/LMP) which relates directly to this planning application and a number of other issues. Its been with an investigator for a month or so now. I will be in discussions with the investigator over the coming weeks and have asked them to look at several issues relating to this application.

Given that the LGO process is ongoing and involves both broad matters about policy and procedures not being followed and matters specific to the planning application it would in my view be inappropriate for the committee to proceed further with considering this application at this stage, unless you are minded to refuse permission. It forms a very important part of the context. If further details of my LGO complaint are required during any delay I will supply them.

___________________________________________________________________

Update (25 Feb) - Received official confirmation in writing that the committee has deferred finally deciding on this issue probably until 1 April (no joke) - but only on the grounds that they await the successful completion of a legal (S106) agreement, the terms of which had not been finalised at the time of the meeting. Unfortuneately this will be the only matter they will discuss from now (unless something striking happens during Feb/March) as they are minded to approve the application. Not sure what effect, if any, the change of administration following Helen Holland's resignation will have. I will know more about the LGO complaint before the committee next meets I hope but it seems unlikely that the committee will take any notice - even if the decision is very damning!!

Tesco/The Friendship

Statement about the Tesco application 08/04903/F to build a car park on The Friendship pub garden which I have submitted and plan to read out at the meeting of the relevant planning committee (Development Control South and East) this Weds 18 Feb:

The applicant here is Tesco and that sets the context which determines the meaning of the application. The paper petition and my e-petition, http://epetitions.bristol.gov.uk/petition.php?id=231
outline exactly why very, very large numbers of local people feel very strongly and say no to this planning application. They see the big picture and ask that the committee does this too. They know the area best and fully appreciate the detrimental effects.

With just text and a scale drawings to go by it must be very difficult for the committee to fully appreciate what the area in and around The Friendship is like now and what it would be like if Tesco’s plans come to fruition. I recommend that you visit the area before making a decision on this application.

I believe that if you visited the area you would agree with me, a current Knowle resident who lived for several years directly opposite the pub garden, that these words in the Design and Access Statement ‘…the proposal is successful in providing safe and convenient access….’ is in fact false. Cars turning into and out from the car park have no proper view if turning right due to the high wall and a highly restricted view if turning left. Additionally the car park design does not facilitate good flow in and out. Cars will be parked near the car park as well as exiting driveways. The close proximity of the proposed car park exit and entrance to the brow of Redcatch Hill and the Redcatch Rd and Friendship Rd turnings presents a significant additional hazard over the present situation.

Applicants Tesco seek to ‘…maximise the accessibility of the site through providing increased car parking…’ (Design and Access Statement). Increased parking capacity for cars means increased traffic flow on roads that are already increasingly busy. This means an increase in all that comes with more traffic, including additional: accident risk; noise; air pollution; climate change; light pollution (car lights and car park lighting); congestion, delay and stress.

Several mature trees with good biodiversity value will be removed if plans proceed and replacement trees take many years to establish. The green area will be lowered. The wildlife value of the area will decrease and can’t recover to its current level therefore. This is in opposition to the new local biodiversity policy.

Local quality of life and sustainability will decrease if this car park is built. This is in opposition to local policies aimed at creating a green city. It is in opposition to the new Climate Change Act with its tough carbon emissions target.
___________________________________________________________________

Update (25 Feb) - had official confirmation in writing that we have successfully persuaded the committee members defer the decision and to visit the site before deciding (visit will take place on the morning of 1 April and the planning application will be decided on that afternoon at the council house). This is good news as far as it goes. We have further work to do illustrating to the councillors on the committee just why this planning application should be refused. Tesco also have time to rethink and replan, as appropriate, between now and 1 April. You have to smile at the date this is all happening on!!

The Power of the Community: film show 27 Feb

Open Meeting: Film and discussion

The Power of the Community
- how Cuba survived peak oil

Southbank Club (formerly Holy Cross), Dean Lane
Southville


Friday 27 February, 7pm to 8.30 pm
(doors open 6.30pm)

When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1990, Cuba's economy went into a tailspin. With imports of oil cut by more than half – and food by 80 percent – people were desperate. This film tells of the hardships and struggles as well as the community and creativity of the Cuban people during this difficult time. Cubans share how they transitioned from a highly mechanized, industrial agricultural system to one using organic methods of farming and local, urban gardens. It is an unusual look into the Cuban culture during this economic crisis, which they call "The Special Period." The film opens with a short history of Peak Oil, a term for the time in our history when world oil production will reach its all-time peak and begin to decline forever. Cuba, the only country that has faced such a crisis – the massive reduction of fossil fuels – is an example of options and hope.
http://www.powerofcommunity.org/cm/index.php

Speaker: Wendy Emmett – environmentalist and follower of the Cuba experience. Just returned from leading an environmental study tour of Cuba.

Free entrance (bucket collection proceeds go to the organisers, Bristol South Green Party and Bristol Cuba Solidarity).

Bar Available!!

No global warming??

John from Whitchurch seems to think that the brief spell of recent cold weather we’ve had in the UK is evidence that there is no global warming (‘Global warming? You must be joking’, Open Lines, Feb 12). Questioning of evidence is what science is all about and I’m all in favour of it. John seems not to have applied this principle to the evidence he uses however.

His evidence is only for a very, very short period of weeks and days. He refers to information only from the UK. Climate is about decades of changes not short term weather. Climatic change as now discussed, of which global warming is only one aspect (albeit very important), is a phenomenon which is global and which is tracked over geological time (hundreds, thousands and millions of years).

Has he considered whether the recent weather around the globe fits predictions made by the scientific ‘experts’ he scoffs at? Has he looked at patterns and trends over long periods of time and over large areas of the globe as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have in their independent work for the United Nations?

John very properly asks who these ‘experts’ are and what qualifications they have but this information has been very widely publicised for years now. The IPCC were awarded a Nobel Prize for their work last year! There is no doubt that the United Nations are served by very well qualified scientists as are hundreds of governments and thousands of businesses and scientific institutions all around the globe. They have all assessed the evidence and conclude that climate change is real, very serious and requiring urgent, large scale action! However, its not the fact that they are ‘experts’ that convinces me about climate change – it’s the fact that their central evidence and their expertise has passed continual and rigorous testing. This testing rightly continues to be an essential part of the problem solving process.

The views of England's 11 million children

Good report in today's local paper about the visit of the Children's Commissioner for England, Professor Sir Albert Aynsley-Green, to Bristol. He was here doing his job - hearing what matters to children, ensuring that adults in charge really listen to their views, interests and needs and working to improve children's lives. He reported that children tell him that these things very important to them: family; stability; friendship. Visit his website to find out more and to contribute: http://www.11million.org.uk/

Previous relevant blog entries:

http://vowlesthegreen.blogspot.com/2007/10/really-enact-principle-needs-and-future.html

http://vowlesthegreen.blogspot.com/2007/09/children-need-real-play-food.html

http://vowlesthegreen.blogspot.com/2007/02/importance-of-understanding-children.html

Upside down price incentives

The figures in the letter from Phillip Morris, Bristol to Newcastle by train £116.70 and by plane £43.98, show a clear financial incentive to fly (‘Why take the train when the plane is so much cheaper’, Open Lines, February 10). Our society often has its financial incentives upside down because of the way it shifts the social and environmental cost burden onto society and onto future generations instead of factoring them fully into the price individuals pay now.

Phillip’s flight to Newcastle emits between 122 and 160 kg of carbon dioxide for every passenger. Going by train would emit between 37 and 59 kg of carbon dioxide pollution per passenger. The environmental advantage of the train is very clear but it is not reflected in the price paid.

We should reassess all modes of transport and adjust price incentives using a mix of regulation and taxation. Travelling by rail needs to become cheaper and flying more expensive, to reflect their total costs. The huge subsidies to the airports industry hidden in government funding for regional development, roads and airport infrastructure need to go. £9 billion a year for investment in greener transport like trains would be gained if aviation fuel was taxed and aviation transactions were subject to VAT.

A vote for Bristolians on a congestion charge proposal - once we have one!!

'Opponents of congestion charges are calling for the people of Bristol to be given a chance to vote on the issue – on local elections day, June 4.' reports the local paper's website today.

I'm very strongly in favour of Bristolians voting on a proposal for large, additional investment in public transport to be followed by the introduction of a congestion charge which will then raise further money for investment in public transport. However, we need a specific proposal showing the details first so that we all know what we are voting on! On this occasion I agree with Cllr Mark Bradshaw's good sense view (extract below) rejecting voting this summer therefore.

"But we are not simply going to reject the possibility given the demand for better, more integrated public transport and the need for a huge injection of funding to pay for this.

"Though the West of England Partnership is exploring various models for congestion charging, which could be part of this bid if it occurs, it is a long way from any firm proposals.

Its close minded to reject all and any proposals that involve congestion charging - and clear political opportunism in the months running up to local and European elections. Solving Bristol's serious transport problems must mean keeping options open and giving serious consideration to proposals once the details are available - form a view then!!

Congestion charge for Bristol still on the agenda

Bristol’s horrendous traffic continues to lower our health, wellbeing and quality of life. This will continue to damage present and future generations if we don’t do something soon that is effective. I’m therefore glad that Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon has said that congestion charging for big cities is still on the agenda ( ‘ Road charge ‘on agenda’ ’, Post, February 9). Due to their no vote Manchester wont now be receiving the very large investment in public transport improvements that comes before congestion charging is introduced. However, that money is available for other cities and our need for transport investment is great, so it makes sense not to rule out options.

Bristol’s transport problems are serious: every day too many vehicles are trying to use local roads; there are very limited possibilities for building more roads and in any case more roads bring more traffic and more damage; drivers spend half their time crawling in jammed traffic; congestion is costing business very large amounts of money; traffic congestion generates more air pollution and produces more climate change causing carbon emissions; congestion causes frustration and raises stress levels.

A congestion charge would try to achieve: significantly reduced traffic in the most congested areas; similarly reduced delays; shorter journey times; reliable delivery times; the saving of many hours of journey time; the raising of large sums of money for re-investment in transport, especially public transport; switching to sustainable transport modes; a boost for public transport use; a system that pays for itself within a few years or less. Very sizeable and additional central government transport investment is promised before congestion charging is introduced.

Lessons from London’s congestion charge should encourage us. Congestion and traffic levels have reduced. The number of cars and car movements has decreased. Movements of buses, coaches and taxis has increased. Tens of thousands more bus passengers enter the charge zone during the morning peak. Bus reliability and journey times have improved and the time passengers wait at bus stops is much lower. There is much less disruption on bus routes due to traffic delay.

We clearly have a serious problem. We have congestion charge proposals that are targeted at solving at least some of the problems, backed by large amounts of money. We have clear evidence that congestion charging in London is producing some significant improvements. If the details of any scheme for Bristol are right, the decision making processes are fair and we can implement the scheme properly then I’m strongly in favour.

Further information and useful links:
http://www.roadpricing.greenisp.org/furtherreading.htm

Unique ecology of the Severn Estuary

John Tanner’s letter dismisses the impacts of building a huge barrage across the Severn as inconveniencing an unnaturally large bird population (‘Setting the record straight on the Severn barrage’, Open Lines, February 5). Bridgewater Tory MP Iain Liddle-Grainger implies a similar sentiment by saying ‘…build a barrage, to hell with the RSPB’ ( ‘Make your minds up’, Post, February 5). What an ill-informed and ill-considered response they give to this complex issue. They should have more respect for the natural world.

The Severn Estuary supports very important habitats. Its ecology is unique. Strong protection under international law exists for such environments and rightly so. Building a huge barrage from Weston-Super-Mare to Cardiff would have very significant impacts on the estuary, its wildlife and landscape. Implications for navigation and flooding are also serious.

Its not just green pressure groups that are expressing grave concerns about a huge barrage and calling for serious consideration of tidal lagoons, tidal stream turbines or a tidal reef. Government bodies like the Environment Agency and Natural England are worried too. They think that a barrage has many implications, including legal ones. They too feel there should be serious consideration of less damaging ways of tapping the Severn's tidal energy.

14 Feb Consultation Event: Redevelopment of Torpoint Road, Kingswear Road & the College Site on Marksbury Road

I'm going to drop in to this consultation event (details from the organisers copied below), to represent the neighbourhood Transition group (Sustainable Knowle) I coordinate. I've had some contact with the organisers already and have forwarded to them some particular areas where I have questions: is there a relationship to the Area Green Space Plan process; can new green spaces be created and/or existing ones improved; is 'mixed development' possible; how green will building standards be; any 'special' features possible eg use of rainwater collected, or 'super-insulation'; affordable/social housing...

Consultation Event: Redevelopment of Torpoint Road, Kingswear Road & the College Site on Marksbury Road

Date: 14th February 2009Time: 11am-3pm (this is a walk-in event)

Location: City of Bristol College, Marksbury Road, Bedminster, Bristol BS3 5JL

Contact: Sean Griffiths, 02072516735, sean@fat.co.uk

Description: Meet the team to discuss proposals for the development of Kingswear Road, Torpoint Road and the College Site at Marksbury Road. Bristol City Council, Knightstone Housing Association and the Homes and Communities Agency have employed architects FAT to come up with ideas for the redevelopment of the site. There is potential to provide new homes and new community facilities. Before work starts on the design proposals we would like to hear your views on the area.

Water fluoridation for Bristol??

In late January Bernard J Seward, a campaigner from the National Pure Water Association and the Safe Water Campaign for Avon, Gloucester and Wiltshire had a letter in the local paper about a possible public consultation in the Bristol area on putting fluoride in all our drinking water. It seems that there is a drive for more water fluoridation from central government. There are therefore understandable concerns that consultations on the issue would not be genuinely open as to the outcome.

I’ve spent a few days looking from all angles at as much information as I can on the issue. There are, however, significant problems obtaining a decent amount of high quality research showing that putting fluoride in drinking water safely and effectively does what it is supposed to do – reduce tooth decay. Available research is often categorised as of only moderate quality because bias and lack of control are evident and analysis is lacking. No clinical trials have been conducted. No license obtained for fluoridated water. Why not? Fluoridated water aims to create bodily changes to fight tooth decay does it not?

Other aspects of the issue defy good scientific practice too. The dose of fluoridated water received by each person depends on the amount of water we drink. Since we all drink different amounts the dose is highly variable – and will be received over a long period of time. Further, the people receiving the dose are highly variable too and unlike being prescribed a treatment by a GP, wont be seen beforehand and wont have their medical history checked. The whole scenario lacks control.

Most of Europe has seen falling rates of tooth decay for several decades – without a policy of widespread water fluoridation. Fluoride is available by choice in toothpaste. Salt containing fluoride could also be made widely available alongside non-fluoridated salt. Those who don’t want to consume fluoride, or have no need to, have a choice now but obviously cannot choose not to drink water and fluoridation is not essential to supplying safe water unlike chlorination to kill bacteria!! If all our drinking water was fluoridated they would therefore be consuming something designed to create bodily changes without their consent. It is the norm in our society to consent to treatment and we should stay consistent with this.

There is no substitute for regular dental check-ups where all sorts of medical issues can be covered. One wonders, given the difficulties people have experienced in recent years with getting an NHS dentist, whether the focus should be there and not with water fluoridation!!

The maximum concentration of fluoride currently allowed in our water is 1.5 mg/l. Any water fluoridation system would have to stay below this legal limit or perhaps an even lower limit would be set. There is always going to be debate over what ‘safe’ levels are. Its clear that the substances used to fluoridate water (sodium fluoride, fluorosilicic acid and sodium fluorosilicate) are, as pure substances, most unpleasant to say the least. That fluorosilicic acid is a by-product from phosphate fertiliser manufacturing hardly adds to the case for its use! Overfeeding of such substances into drinking water has caused serious health problems, as at Hooper Bay in Alaska in the 1990’s, where equipment and human failure resulted in 1 death and 295 cases of fluoride poisoning(details here). Overfeed precautions and plans for defluoridation if limits are exceeded are of course not needed if you don’t fluoridate in the first place!

Key local and regional decision makers and further information:

http://www.southwest.nhs.uk/membersoftheboard.html

http://www.bristolpct.nhs.uk/thetrust/board/profiles.asp

http://www.dwi.gov.uk/

I've written to Dr Hugh Annett, Director of Public Health for NHS Bristol and Bristol City Council via info@bristolpct.nhs.uk , and the Strategic Health Authority via go@southwest.nhs.uk on this issue and hope others will too.

Bristol City Council's recycling record

I'm afraid Steven Moore, Service Director for Environment and Leisure at Bristol City Council, misses the point in his letter ('We're pround of recycling achievements', Open Lines, Jan 31). Is he proud of the fact that over 7000 tonnes of recycling was shipped to Belgium for processing, reducing some of the environmental advantage gained? Is this the best green practice we can expect from an aspiring 'green capital'? Surely we need to move on from the undoubted step in the right direction made in recent years, to make further recycling improvements - a green city is still a very long way off - and abandon waste incineration plans which make recycling improvements harder?

He talked proudly of the council's collection of food waste for composting. Is he proud of the fact that we've spent years sending the material all the way to Dorset in lorries because we didn't plan ahead and establish a local composting facility to coincide with the introduction of the brown bin scheme?? His own figures show that waste for composting travels 233,000 lorry miles every year, reducing some of the environmental gains made.

Looking after ourselves and our relatives

I very much enjoyed the BBC's Charles Darwin and the Tree of Life program broadcast yesterday. David Attenborough's presentation was as full of enthusiasm, wonder and insight as ever. His concluding lines really struck me,

'...above all Darwin has shown us that we are not apart from the natural world. We do not have dominion over it. We are subject to its laws and processes as are all other animals on Earth, to which, indeed, we are related.'

Recognising this and wanting to act accordingly, in my late teens, over 25 yrs ago now, is certainly one of the main reasons I became an active green.

Loads of information/background on Darwin, natural selection and evolution here. Debate on evolution here. Events celebrating 200 yrs since Darwin's birth and 150 yrs since the publication of On the Origin of Species, here.

New Bristol City Stadium - green design?

I’ve previously reported my interest in Bristol City FCs consultation on its new stadium design. I sent off a completed consultation form a while back, including suggesting: abiding by the concept of compensation for loss of green space; a thorough ecological assessment of the whole area, at various times of the year; walking, cycling and light rail transport links; an unobtrusive external colour; use of ecological footprinting to measure impacts; permanently protected nature reserves around the stadium designed to maximise biodiversity; aiming to be a carbon neutral stadium; avoiding any 'sprawl' in design; being an example of sustainable design - promoting sustainable economic activity, the latest energy efficiency, renewable energy and sustainable transport technologies.

My follow up to this has been looking for examples of football clubs who have used or attempted to use green principles, designs and technologies.

Some interesting findings (below). Bristol City have the option of following good, green practice – will they take it? It would fit well with Bristol's green capital ambitions and compensate to a degree for the loss of green space.

Dartford FC – living grass roof, solar electricity and heating, rainwater collection and low noise and light pollution design.

Ipswich Town – carbon neutral scheme.

Renewables in football clubs information.

Middlesborough – solar roof and wind turbines project.

Man City – community involvement, transport and waste initiatives (wind turbines were planned but sadly now abandoned).

Right to rent and free insulation to help people make ends meet

Letter writer William A Jewell from Knowle makes an excellent point when he says that the Government should be doing more to help home-owners struggling to pay their mortgage through no fault of their own (‘Government should help hard-up homeowners’, Open Lines, January 28).

The 'right to rent' should be enshrined in law. Any home owner who ultimately cannot pay their mortgage and is threatened with repossession should have the right to sell, in whole or part, to the council. They should then be allowed to continue to live in the property and pay rent. This would avoid the social and economic disruption of repossession and in many cases the need for councils to find new homes for families.

Government should also ensure free insulation for every home that needs it, beginning with those most in need. Insulating every home properly cuts fuel bills in the average home by up to half. This would help everyone struggling to make ends meet due to the recession (and solve one of letter writer John Tanner’s problems with insulation, ‘When insulating your loft can be too expensive’, Open Lines, January 28). Free insulation would bring simultaneous environmental benefits. Carbon emissions from homes amount to approx a fifth of total UK emissions and a free insulation programme alone can cut these emissions by a quarter.

Privatisation and profit or people and public service??

First Great Western cancelled over 4000 journeys last year, we have the most expensive railways in Europe and when you can get on a train that is running on time you often can't get a seat! The 19 train operating companies between them cancelled 62,000 trains! Hasn't serious underinvestment and privatisation of the railways been great!?!

(If you are a shareholder privatisation has been great for your pocket though - with huge profits put before people travelling)

Let's run the railways (and the buses for that matter) with a proper public service ethos, put public transport into public/community ownership and give people an affordable, good quality alternative to car use (details here).

Bristol primary schools axed

Two Bristol primaries axed...This is a shocking decision. Bristol City Council's Primary School Review should be totally reassessed. It shows scant regard for the quality of educational relationships and experiences that children and parents get at smaller schools.

There should indeed be an extraordinary meeting of the whole council organised. There should be a vote of no confidence in the current Labour Administration. All political parties should be planning how the city will be run and by what party or arrangement between the four parties if Labour loses the vote. I'd certainly vote against this leadership and administration.

Tidal energy from the Severn Estuary: Yes...but not at the price of estuary destruction!

The Severn Barrage issue is in the news, with the shortlisting of five tidal energy options. Its a mixed picture, with some good and some bad sides.


Lots of talk about tidal energy and not enough debate and action on having a proper energy strategy. A correctly prioritised energy strategy would put energy efficiency top of the list - why not insulate all homes at no cost to the occupiers (such a scheme quickly pays for itself in saved energy, and thus lower bills, and rapidly reduced carbon emissions)??


Its good news that tidal lagoons will be considered. They offer large amounts of affordable and renewable power at low environmental cost to the estuary.


Its bad news that tidal reefs/fences are not on the list (though they will apparently get money to develop the idea). They too promise lower impacts.


Its even worse news that the Brean/Weston-Super-Mare to Cardiff barrage is on the shortlist. Its environmental impacts are huge and amount to destruction of the estuary. This fails the EU Directive on Habitats and Birds.


More here: http://www.stopthebarrage.com/

Petition: BBC should reverse its decision not to broadcast the Disasters Emergency Committee Gaza aid appeal

I wanted to draw your attention to this important petition that I recently signed:

"Reverse BBC decision re: DEC"

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/reverse_bbc_decision?e

I really think this is an important cause, and I'd like to encourage you to add your signature, too.

Further information on the work of the Disasters Emergency Committee and to donate to the Gaza and other appeals: http://www.dec.org.uk/

Time for Community Banks??

Very interested to hear Will Hutton, interviewed on This Week, say that the UK lacked banking capacity.

It reminded me of the longstanding Green Party policy (quoted below) to establish a widespread and well supported community banking system.

In order to help bring about the democratisation of the banking system, and in pursuit of our policies to support the growth of local economies, a network of local Community Banks will be established. These will be democratically accountable non-profit-making trusts, which will be able to provide low-cost finance both at district and regional levels. Any operating surplus arising from these Community Banks will be reinvested in their local communities. Community Banks will be empowered to create credit in the same way that commercial banks currently do, and will be given favourable conditions for doing so by the central bank. They will also be able to create their own local currencies**, to operate alongside the national currency, where this is supported by the local community.

The Manifesto for a Sustainable Society continues...

In order to bring about a more socially equitable society, it is important that poorer citizens have access to affordable credit, which can give them an opportunity to increase their basic living standards. Alongside Community Banks, measures to help facilitate this will include the promotion and support of credit unions and micro-credit schemes in which small groups of people cooperate to provide guaranteed small loans to each other.

**As for the idea of local currencies, the advantages are very well expressed by the extract below from the Schumacher Society.

...local currencies are a legal, but underutilized tool for citizens to support local economies. Local currencies function on a regional scale the same way that national currencies have functioned on a national scale—building the regional economy by creating a protective “membrane” that is defined by the currency itself. Local businesses that accept the currency are distinguished from chain stores that do not, building greater affinity between citizens of the region and their local merchants. Individuals choosing to use the currency make a conscious commitment to buy locally first, taking personal responsibility for the health and wellbeing of their community, laying the foundation of a truly vibrant, thriving local economy.

Also see these sites describing examples of local currencies in the UK:

http://totnes.transitionnetwork.org/totnespound/home

http://www.thelewespound.org/

Bristol Airport expansion plans: flying into trouble

Bristol Airport has revealed its expansion plans. I've made a few contrbutions to the online debate, including commenting here on a local newspaper blog.

By expanding air travel we are encouraging money flow out of our economy - the difference between what Britons flying abroad spent in other countries and what visitors to this country spend here produces an £11 billion a year deficit! Its important at all times but especially in a recession, that people spend money supporting their own economy.

There are huge subsidies to the airports industry hidden in government funding for regional development, roads and airport infrastructure. The UK economy loses around £9 billion a year in taxation because aviation fuel is tax-free and all aviation transactions are VAT-free.

The most frequent flyers are in the top 10% of income-earners. They benefit most from the current tax concessions. In a typical year: less than 50% of the population flies at all; the poorest 10% hardly ever fly; of those that do fly, only 11% come from poorer backgrounds; even on budget airlines, 75% of the trips are made by the upper and middle classes.

Aviation is a very rapidly growing contributor to climate change. Planes are very heavy users of fossil fuel. The way that jet engines burn fuel produces nitrous oxides and high level clouds - tripling climate change impacts. Flying contributes 3.5% of climate changing emissions world-wide now, rising to perhaps 15% by 2050 on past trends. If expansion plans continue aviation emissions will scupper Government targets on climate change in the Bill that only recently became law.

Ecosystems, buildings and people’s health are at risk across the country. Air pollution around airports will continue to rise. Expansion is also generating more car traffic and invariably new or wider roads are proposed and built – adding to impacts in both construction and use.

The noise experienced by people living around airports or under flight paths will grow. There is no prospect of significantly quieter planes coming on-stream over the next 30 years. Already people under the flight paths to the busiest airports have to endure a plane every 90 seconds. They say it is 'like living under a sky of sound.'

The impact of aviation expansion on poor people in the developing world will be devastating unless we act. These are the people who: are worst affected by the changing climate; have few rights; have little choice about where they live; who are the least likely people on the planet to set foot aboard an aeroplane!!

The Government has said that it expects the number of passengers using UK airports to nearly treble by 2030. To meet this demand means new runways are needed at Stansted, Heathrow, Birmingham, Edinburgh and most likely Glasgow. Many of the country's other airports would see significant expansion, such as that proposed for Bristol. Government has provided a charter for the aviation industry and developers to proceed with airport expansion despite its new legislation on climate change, with a target of cutting emissions from 1990 levels by 80% by 2050!!

Further information:

http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/pages/aviation.html

http://www.neweconomics.org/gen/z_sys_PublicationDetail.aspx?PID=261

http://www.planestupid.com/?q=reasons

http://www.nobristolairportexpansion.co.uk/questions.php

http://www.airportwatch.org.uk/index.php

Bristol's tranquil places

I've now contributed both a general statement and a list of specific suggestions to the new Bristol City Council consultation on traffic noise. There is also an interactive map where people can add notes on their favourite quiet areas and indicate where/how places could be quieter. Photos and video can be added too. I've added some observations about some places I frequent. The more people that contribute to the consultation and map the better.

The idea is to build a map of valued quieter spots eg green spaces, in the city. The noise consultation will feed into the noise action plan for the city and help in developing a noise strategy for Bristol. Its worth noting that actions needed to lower noise pollution will also help create safer streets and will contribute to tackling air pollution and climate impact eg through speed reduction, encouraging walking and cycling and (hopefully) using shared space principles. This is the way to go to achieve better health, wellbeing and quality of life.

Shared Space - a relatively new name for a concept emerging across Europe. It encapsulates a new philosophy and set of principles for the design, management and maintenance of streets and public spaces, based on the integration of traffic with other forms of human activity. The most recognizable characteristic of shared space is the absence of conventional traffic signals, signs, road markings, humps and barriers - all the clutter essential to the highway. The driver in shared space becomes an integral part of the social and cultural context, and behaviour (such as speed) is controlled by everyday norms of behaviour.

Bristol City Council: adopt and enact a noise strategy

You may be aware that I've previously expressed concern over the lack of focus on noise pollution in the environment and called for a noise strategy similar to London's to be adopted in Bristol. Many just dont realise the damaging health and wellbeing impacts of noise. A short while ago I contributed to the current Bristol City Council consultation on noise and I will now send in the list of more specific suggestions below:

*Reduce noise through better planning and design, ackowledging that growth in Bristol’s population, housing, air travel and traffic presents great challenges

*Seek to make the most of redevelopment and refurbishment eg through high density, mixed-use developments with quiet outdoor, green spaces

*Establish a Bristol award scheme to promote excllence in relation to design and noise

*Encourage quieter transport eg walking, cycling, electric vehicles

*Build noise reduction into day-to-day traffic management and integrating noise considerations across all council policies – cutting speeds, reducing congestion, reducing stop-start driving where appropriate, smoothing traffic flow, allocating street space better

*Protect existing quieter spaces eg open, green spaces

*Create quieter spaces like: open, green spaces; home zones; 20mph areas; pedestrianised areas

*Seek funding for developing targeted traffic noise reduction projects and for experimentation with fuel cell buses, hybrid-electric buses

*Extend support for the encouragement of smoother and thus quieter, safer, cleaner and cheaper driving eg via driver training

*Maximise the use of noise-reducing surfaces across all roads where they would be effective, primarily faster roads, along with less disruptive and better reinstated streetworks

*Where impacts are highest, protect wider areas from road and other noise using appropriate noise barriers (if/where the issue cannot be immediately tackled at its source) and investigate the integration of photovoltaic power generation into barriers

*Seek the cessation of night flying across the city via lobbying

*Lobby for a national noise strategy which was promised years ago and has not been delivered
and request that councils be given a remit to tackle traffic noise, as is the case in many EU countries.

More information on noise: Defra Bristol City Council

Ecological footprinting: living in a dome

Copy of a briefing I've written on ecological footprinting for possible inclusion in a book:

Picture a city totally enclosed by a transparent dome. The city’s people would obviously be unable to survive for long inside it unless they had access to air, water and other essential resources from outside. Think through how far the dome would have to extend in order to keep the city going indefinitely given a certain level of consumption, energy and resource supply and technological development and you are ecological footprinting. London was found to have a footprint of 49 million hectares, about the land area of Spain (!) in a study by Best Foot Forward in 2002. You could also picture a dome totally enclosing a person, a house, factories, offices, a country, group of countries – or indeed a planet! You could draw a boundary around various products, say beef or cars, and assess the ecological footprint of the product’s lifecycle.

An ecological footprint is the total land and sea area required to supply the resources and safely absorb the wastes and pollutants from a certain lifestyle and can be thought of at a range of levels. The unit of land area used is global hectares, where one global hectare is equal to one hectare (2.47 acres) of world average biological productivity with current technology. Some, like WWF, use ‘planets’ as a unit, which is good because any footprint greater than one immediately illustrates the unsustainability, excess demand or ecological debt (world footprint is now 1.3 planets and if current patterns are not changed we are heading for a 2 planet footprint by 2035). Land and sea is needed for: crop, animal and forest products; for housing and infrastructure; to absorb carbon emissions from fuel burning; biodiversity preservation; human wellbeing and quality of life.

William Rees came up with the ecological footprint idea, publishing the first academic paper on the subject*. Personal Environmental Impact Accounting, a concept closely related to ecological footprinting, was developed in the early 1990s by Don Lotter and released in 1992 as EnviroAccount software which became Earth Aware software in 1996 (still available as a free download from the internet). Rees worked on footprinting with Mathis Wackernagel in the early 1990’s at the University of British Columbia, Canada, the two publishing a book Our Ecological Footprint in 1996 explaining the concept. Much work has since followed eg the book Sharing Nature’s Interest published in 2000, written by Wackernagel, Nicky Chambers and Craig Simmons.

Footprinting’s methodology for the national level is detailed in the 2006 Living Planet Report and the Global Footprint Network's method paper. The Global Footprint Network has clearly indicated how research should be used to improve the method. This is important because different methods have been used in various studies with respect to: sea area; fossil fuels; imports and exports; and nuclear power. Data sources used have varied. Whether to use average global numbers or local numbers when looking at a specific area has been an issue. Including space for biodiversity has been debated. Footprint standards, are bringing methods closer together, making data more consistent and comparable. EU assessment of footprinting has been positive and ackonwledges the work being done to perfect methods.

When consideraring footprint data it is important to remember what they don’t tell us in addition to what they do. The footprint concept is itself inevitably a simplification of reality. The computer models used to calculate footprints are further inevitable simplifications. This is both a plus and a minus of course. Footprints do not deal with that which it is difficult or impossible to convert to a land area: pollutant toxicity; health impacts; the depletion of non-renewable resources (though it does account for the energy, land and resources needed to process them); socio-economic impacts; noise and visual impacts, for instance.

Keeping in mind its limitations, ecological footprinting is an excellent tool for awareness raising, getting a sense of the overall scale of unsustainability by comparing it with actual land area. The biological capacity of an area indicates resources that can indefinitely regenerate without depletion or degradation. Most industrialised countries have insufficient capacity to support their population eg Netherlands (average footprint 4.8 gha/person, land area 0.8gha/person in 1999) unless they have large land areas and low population densities eg Canada (footprint 2.7 gha/person, land area 8.8 gha/person, in 1999). The world as a whole went into ecological debt (where consumption exceeds regerative capacity) on 19 Dec 1987 and because of unsustainable living we enter into this debt earlier every year – in 2008 we went into debt on 23 Sept!

*Rees, William E.(October 1992). "Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: what urban economics leaves out". Environment and Urbanisation 4 (2): 121–130.

20 mph for Bristol: go for it!!

Bristol gets 20mph speed limits on roads.

Reduction in accident frequency and severity*, lower air pollution**, quieter and safer places... 20mph is a great idea! But lets have all residential areas covered, especially around schools, lets also lower speeds on other roads - and lets make sure that 20mph is enforced properly! I hope Bristol City Council goes well beyond tinkering with this green idea.

*At 20mph a pedestrian you knock over stands a 90% chance of surviving. At 40mph they stand a 90% chance of dying. http://www.greenflag.com/help/saferdriving_speed.html

**Most energy is used in accelerating and braking, which happens more frequently in cities . Driving in any particular gear consumes more energy per mile the faster you travel. Driving steadily at 20 mph is more efficient and thus cheaper and cleaner. http://drivingefficiency.org/driving_gently.pdf

Shopping local: the benefits

Update on Tesco's plans to convert The Friendship in Knowle into one of their stores. The campaign against the plans is developing very well and I'm very happy to be playing a decent role in it. To date the paper petition organised by local shopkeepers has several hundred signatures. My e-petition has a respectable 67 signatures so far and has I note fairly recently been signed by Cllr Mark Wright (who is also the Prospective Liberal Democrat MP for Bristol South). I have submitted two letters of objection, have helped other people to voice their opinions (for and against!!) and will submit a statement to the council planners on the benefits of local shops (below) today. I've written direct to Tesco Corporate Affairs Manager Juliette Bishop (who has yet to even acknowledge it let alone reply!). Several news stories have gained publicity for the issue (eg here and here) and letters have been published in the local paper (eg here). The resulting online discussion has been very lively!

With other local campaigners I've helped to get local councillors much more active on the issue, overcoming what appeared to be initial reluctance. To his credit Knowle's Lib Dem Councillor Gary Hopkins has now done some very useful work which I and others opposing Tesco's plans appreciate. The issue: has been given more time for consideration; will now be going to a planning committee (though no-one told any local that it was to have been delegated to officers!) probably on Tues 18 Feb at 2pm; its been made clear that the Tesco plan cuts across council policy favouring district shopping; a public meeting will be held to debate the issue on 16 Feb, 6.30pm, Redcatch Rd Community Centre and will hopefully gather together many locals, businesses etc. I plan to attend the 16 Feb public meeting to contribute and plan to make a statement and/or submit my e-petition to the 18 Feb planning committee meeting once details are confirmed.

It appears that the council have not yet informed local people about the changes to planning application deadlines and extended time available to comment/support/object!! Perhaps the local media will help to inform local people of the changes along with this blog.

There are concerns that unless shopping habits change, high streets, small ranks of shops and corner shops will disappear. Popping to the local shop for milk, bread or tea… will not be an option for many unless more shoppers change their ways. By supporting local shops we can help slow down and stop this decline and boost the local economy as well as help in the fight against climate change.

The Office of Fair Trading has looked at supermarket dominance, referring tha matter to the Competition Commission. Small shops are currently struggling to survive due to the power of the big supermarkets, with thousands of independent shops going out of business each year. Supermarkets power has become huge. The four biggest already control over three quarters of the grocery market. Tesco alone take 30 per cent and is still moving into neighbourhoods all over the country including Knowle (see: http://epetitions.bristol.gov.uk/petition.php?id=231).

The All Party Parliamentary Small Shops Group warned in 2006 that many independent shops could be gone within a decade unless action is taken now to curb the power of the biggest supermarkets. Big supermarkets have announced plans to improve their environmental credentials, but shopping locally is still a better option, especially if you leave the car at home and buy locally-sourced food.

The range of benefits from local shops is excellent: greater likelihood of providing local food; they often offer a much more personal service; they keep money circulating in the local area supporting other local businesses; along with street markets they offer affordability without roping you via special offers and some slashed prices into more expensive purchases (a Friends of the Earth survey in 2003 found that apples were cheaper in greengrocers than supermarkets and in 2005 a study for the New Economics Foundation found that street markets in London were "substantially cheaper" than supermarkets for fruit and vegetables); they are more energy efficient than huge superstores – a study by Sheffield Hallam University showed that it would take more than 60 greengrocers to match the carbon dioxide emissions from just one average superstore (more here); a broad range of local shops provides more choice than one big supermarket.

The Competition Commission should enact measures to achieve a healthy balance between the big supermarkets and local shops – but consumers should not wait for such action because it could be too late for many local shops if they do.

Gaza: petition for a complete ceasefire, civilian protection, humanitarian assistance

1000+ Palestinians and 13 Israelis killed. The death toll mounting daily. The Gaza offensive escalates. Action to end the violence and protect civilians is desperately needed. I've signed the petition (wording below) calling for robust international action to achieve an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and take further crucial steps toward a fair and lasting peace in the Middle East.

The message and numbers signing (which has already reached 500,000) will be published in US ads and delivered to key powers in the coming days:

Petition to the UN Security Council, the European Union, the Arab League and the USA:

We urge you to act immediately to ensure a comprehensive ceasefire in the Gaza Strip, to protect civilians on all sides, and to address the growing humanitarian crisis. Only through robust international action and oversight can the bloodshed be stopped, the Gaza crossings safely re-opened and real progress made toward a wider peace in 2009.

An adapted and edited version of the petition site.

Gordon Brown's plans: definitely more brown than green!

Saw my MP Kerry McCarthy put this question to Gordon Brown at Prime Minister's Question Time today and its been reported on the local newspaper's website,

"Does he agree with me and the people of Bristol that green jobs and sustainable development are the way out of this economic downturn?"

The Prime Minister replied: "I look forward to visiting Bristol very soon. On the environment, she is absolutely right. I believe, coming out of this downturn, some of the triggers for further growth can be investment in the environment. We are going to invest in green jobs and environmental technologies."

I'd very much welcome a comprehensive and coherent plan to create a green economy. Growing numbers of economists eg the authors of the Green New Deal, and at the UN, are saying that investing heavily in efficiency, renewable energy, sustainable transport, reduction, reuse and recycling of waste, building stronger local economies and communities with local production for local needs, is by far the best way to direct our efforts. After all we currently have intimately entangled, mutually reinforcing economic and environmental crises.

However, there is no such plan available from Gordon Brown's Labour Govt.. Where is what should be top priority, a plan to insulate all homes free of charge for instance (its something that self-evidently pays for itself in saved energy and thus lowered bills)!?!?

The lack of a real green plan is surely no surprise to anyone given that Mr Brown spent over a decade as Chancellor before his period as PM and we're certainly no greener now than when he came to power!! By the Government's own figures carbon dioxide emissions are higher now than ten yrs ago for instance. Current Brown plans in favour of building more coal fired power stations, the expansion of airports, the building of hundreds of miles of new roads, more nuclear power stations cannot considered green (more here).

Looks like PM Gordon Brown's plans are pefectly consistent with his past actions as Chancellor doesn't it - definitely more Brown than green!