Views about our real wealth - the natural and social world, the source of our resources and the basis of our lives - and how it can and should be sustained for generations.
Thursday, March 08, 2012
Safer speed
Wednesday, February 01, 2012
PMQs Queries
Today's Prime Ministers Questions featured some important matters of course...banking and bonus culture, reform of the NHS...As is most often the case however, the motivation for questions and answers is party politics and tactics - trying to get your opponent on the back foot. Very serious, highly topical matters that should be raised often dont get a look in.Saturday, January 07, 2012
Safe systems?
Friday, October 15, 2010
Water Words

Pairs of words that sum up a lot of water issues: life’s essential; renewable...potentially; community rooting; unevenly distributed; wasted widely; polluted commonly; rich, 100’s l; poor 10’s l; piped...UK; carried...Africa; city...leaks; extremely useful; farming, mostly; cooling, cleansing; ‘universal’ solvent; reservoirs, dams; socio-environmental havoc; community uprooting; climate changing; needs...wants; conflict prevention; modest measures; efficiency, accessibility; massive benefits!
http://blogactionday.change.org/
Friday, June 04, 2010
Biodiversity is...
Its International Year of Biodiversity this year so I'm going to do a series of articles on biodiversity in the run up to and a little beyond World Environment Day tomorrow. I've posted on topics relating to biodiversity many times before, notably here summarising the range of reasons why we should protect life in all its diversity and here illustrating the incredible variety of life to be found just within common fruit and vegetables, using the carrot as an example (click on the label biodiversity in the right hand column if you want to browse through my posts on this topic).*
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Synthia: life, dont talk to me about life
I've been following the reporting on Synthia, the so-called 'synthetic lifeform' or 'synthetic cell'. There's a lot of hype surrounding it, its creators, its promises and its dangers. Its very early days with this science and even earlier days in terms of applying the science ie technological uses - time for us to fully assess what it is and how we best employ it I hope.Some impressive science is involved but its not really fully 'life made in the lab' because a naturally-occurring microbe, minus its genome, is used as the host and though the genome then inserted is synthetic it needed both yeast and E.coli to be used as part of the production of longer DNA sequences.
The term 'life' has been applied with little or no reference the fact that there is huge debate about what life is. There is still a challenge for scientists and philosophers to define life in unequivocal terms. Defining life is difficult —in part— because life is a process, not a pure substance. Any definition must be sufficiently broad to encompass all life with which we are familiar, and it should be sufficiently general that, with it, scientists would not miss life that may be fundamentally different from earthly life...(more).
There's been talk of a 'new industrial revolution', bringing together together biology and engineering, using 'synthetic life' to clean up oil pollution and nuclear waste, taking climate changing human carbon emissions from the air, producing biofuels and new vaccines - and even human body parts! Interesting choice of problems caused by industrial revolution(s) that will be 'solved' by purely technical means due to another industrial revolution. Purely technical 'solutions' are all too often no solution at all - remember the technical promise of an 'unsinkable' Titanic, nuclear electricity 'too cheap to meter', freedom of movement via cars tempered by congestion and pollution, nuclear weapons that would deter still ever-present wars.
Technology certainly has a role to play in solving problems - we need it but it should meet the definition of being the practical means to live decently. We should be asking ourselves what proposed technologies are and undertake a rounded assessment of technical capabilities and limitations, cost-effectiveness and impact on working lives and various systems and environments now and on into the future. We need to question technical developments at the earliest possible opportunity as opposed to regarding them as unstoppable drivers of 'progress'. Unconditional surrender to inventions and novelties would mean we had no regard for any possible social, economic and environmental consequences. We need to consider - in a systemic and systematic way - how scientific and technical change can be best harnessed for individual, community, social and environmental good - but we are currently very poor indeed at this task!