Applied Demonolgy

Just look at this: Applied Demonology. I do so like elegant experiments!

Ecologist Debate re Biotechnology

Did you follow this? I must admit I came rather late to it but I find the result interesting. The motion was "This house believes that biotechnology and sustainable agriculture are complementary, not contradictory". It was defeated 62% to 38% and, judging from my, admittedly hasty, scan of comments the main reason was that 'biotechnology' was translated by many as 'GM'. This appears to have really polarised things. Fun and games with the Economist's servers are worth reading about, too.

If my assumption of polarisation is, indeed, a fair assessment then I think it's a pity. As with any technology, there are potentially beneficial applications and other harmful ones. I am all too well aware of the problems that could arise from further promotion of mono-cultures by the development of, say, herbicide resistant strains. However, with an ever growing global population there is a crying need for yield improvement and biotechnological techniques have their place.

Parenthetically, isn't it interesting how technology is the only 'ology' (as Beattie would say) whose meaning has moved away from 'the study of' and now actually refers to the equipment and techniques that arise from application of that study?

An Exercise for the Reader

Just been reading an obituary of Robin Day, the designer of the polyprop chair. It struck me that a full lifecycle analysis of its environmental impact would be very interesting. Plastic - extracted from the "black stuff" - but amazingly long lasting.  Has anyone done the deed?

 

Climate Policy Tracker

Ecofys and WWF have just launched a climate policy tracker that they claim is the first up-to-date tracker of climate policy controls (Is that really true? Not that it matters). In summary what it suggests is that the combined action of EU states is only 1/3 of the way to decarbonising for 2050. What I found particularly depressing was that support for renewable energy was widely covered but that energy efficiency was much less comprehensive. This is just so nuts when you think of all the effort that has been put into the EE message. It's back to the old problem of what is sexy grabs the headlines.

No country comes out particularly well - the best rating is a D. The UK ranks somewhere in the middle of the pack with an E. I've not yet looked at the full report (registration to obtain access does not appear to be instantaneous) but from the country summaries I worry that there may have been some (probably unintentional) bias included. Just compare summaries for, say, Austria with the UK. Of course - the full analysis may well be pukka - in which case my apologies for misreading the summaries. Whatever, this provides just one more indication that not enough is being done - anywhere.

Global Carbon Budget

The latest report from the Global Carbon Project suggests that  atmospheric CO2 had risen to 387 ppm by the end of 2009. This is on the back of a 1.3% fall in emissions from fossil fuels - significantly lower than had been predicted. The trouble is that these bald numbers mask a continuing rise in emissions from developing nations offset by falls from developed nations caused by the financial downturn. So, all in all, this is not good news - just likely to be a one-year blip with overall emissions predicted to be on the rise again this year. What price Cancun?

Economic Nonsense

There's an article in a recent New Scientist indicating that investors are pricing alternative energy stocks at a level suggesting that they don't think renewables will replace fossils for another 130-odd years. But no-one lives for 130 years so why would any investment decision be taken on that basis? I can't think of any stocks that are that illiquid so markets would move much earlier and quicker. This is a case of an economic model departing from reality and wasting good publishing space.

HMG Spending

Just thought I'd join everyone else and have a little play with the published HMG departmental spending information. In particular I looked at DECC, given that indirectly they paid much of my EST salary.

As most of the commentators have said - it's all pretty useless without some sort of context. Indeed a cursory look at the DECC numbers rather triggered a desire to yawn but there are one of two things that make one stop and think. I looked a bit more closely at the September spend (DECC publish items down to £500). In that month alone there was an outlay of £323,330 on hire of agency staff. Now, there's little indication of the grade of hirees but it looks like a fair number of bums on seats to me.

Then there are some interesting inter-departmental transfer charges. For instance some £9,692,000 was paid in grants to BIS in September. Now what's all that about? Defra received £222,063 for "minor works".

But the one that really caught my eye was £2,350 of professional subscriptions to Stonewall. Really?

Huhne and the CBI

Upbeat minister, downbeat director general. It was ever thus!

I have much more sympathy for Richard Lambert's analysis than Chris Huhne's exhortations and hand-wringing, especially over changes to the CRC. To switch from a revenue recycling scheme, with all the incentives that are thereby entailed, to a plain environmental tax strikes me as just crass. Huhne signalled a little bit of reigning back but only on time-tabling and exemptions, not on the basic taxation principle.

Lambert also identified the possible damp squib of a Green Investment Bank, the lack of any discernible movement in public attitudes, and the close-your-eyes-and-wish situation with the Green Deal as further worrying issues.

I couldn't agree more.

CABE Faces Up To The Future

The Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE) is one of the organisations whose public funding is being withdrawn as a result of the Comprehensive Spending Review. The organisation has now finally admitted that it will have to change radically if it is to survive. I have to own up to being somewhat equivocal about all this. CABE has done some excellent work but whenever I've really wanted to get into some detailed advice - we've recently been reviewing our local public spaces, admittedly rural rather than urban - I've found that their publications rather skim the surface. Perhaps if they can find another source of substantial funding they will find focus along with it.

A New Plan A?

Unilever has unveiled it's Sustainable Living Plan - and on the surface it looks a lot like the M&S Plan A. There are some bold targets - halving the environmental impact of their products is, for instance, one of their headlines. When one delves a little more closely this actually translates into halving GHG emissions, water use and end-of-life waste; and sourcing 100% of their agricultural raw materials sustainably. And delving even further there is an interesting mix of "hard" technical targets and "softer" social action ones. In my quick wizz through I spotted that they aim to change their customers' showering habits, quite correctly identifying that the biggest impact from their shower products is the amount of time that people spend under the shower using them. We know that heating water is a significant source of CO2 emission from domestic premises. All this is within the context of Unilever still growing, so there is still the whole natural resources demand issue to tackle but if they can pull off what they claim to be targeting it willl be a significant step forward and might even have a wider market impact.

We All Do It

A recent Telegraph article, quite rightly, points out the similarities between the Deep Water Horizon and Chernobyl disasters in that both resulted from a string of human errors - and, to some extent inexplicable ones at that. The article suggests that over-confidence is a root cause of these skilled operators taking plainly stupid decisions - and even quotes my old colleague Brian Edmondson's summing up of Chernobyl: the operators had lost their fear of the reactor.

We all do this to a greater or lesser extent. I have been guilty of ignoring warning lights in my car because of false alarms in the past and because I have it properly maintained, don't I. Why am I so confident that it's the warning system that's at fault and not the car engine or brakes or whatever? It's something to do with that "It won't happen to me" syndrome.

How one manages to avoid such errors in big systems such as Deep Water Horizon is a difficult question. Perhaps we should not rely on the long-term expert but always have someone on the steep part of the learing curve in charge - always retain the fear factor. Any good industrial psychologists out there?

Another Nuclear Step

The HSE has recently announced that the Regulatory Issue (RI) placed on the proposed control and instrumentation system for the European PWR has been closed and that the remaining concerns now equate to the status of a Regulatory Observation (RO). So, it looks as thought the GDA process is still on course.

Since my last post several colleagues have berated me for my support for nuclear - most of them pointing me to the recent Ecologist interview with Raul Montenegro. While I understand his argument about legacy issues, and cannot deny that they are serious in the case of nuclear, we are right now creating legacy consequences for our descendants by using fossil fuels. I cannot see renewable sources of energy coming on-stream quickly enough to provide for today's energy demands; and I cannot see that there is sufficient political will to reduce global consumption to the extent that renewables will be sufficient. So, do we leave our descendants to cope with inevitable climate change or do we present them with a nuclear waste problem that they may be able to contain? I propose the latter.

Persuading Consumers

Many thanks to Jon for pointing out the latest post on the Green Living Blog about branding the Green Deal. The post has some interesting and pertinent things to say - many of them very familiar from my time at the Energy Saving Trust. It's worth a quick read.

What it doesn't cover, though, is the value of peer pressure and the establishment of norms. I've recently observed this right outside my front door. Our home faces onto a piece of common land which, inevitably, attracts dog walkers. For years the excrement problem was just that - a problem - and an issue that was raised at almost every Village Assembly. Now, everything has changed. Almost every dog walker 'picks up'. There's never been any enforcement of anti-fouling legislation around here, and the number and location of litter bins has remained the same for years. It has simply become the norm.

Now, I admit that dog fouling is much more visible that, say, cavity wall insulation (apart from the tell-tale mortar repairs) but there must be someone out there who's clever enough to suggest how norming energy efficiency activity could take place.

Lighter Later - Undecided

I admit it - I haven't done my homework (the dog ate it, Miss). The Ligher Later campaign is urging people to contact their MPs ahead of the planned vote on December 3rd to push for a permanent 1 hour shift in the clock. Having got up pretty much in the dark this morning (7.00 if you must know) I can't subscribe, personally, to the "wasting daylight" argument. However, if the clamour from bodies supposedly in the know (those that have done their homework) is anything to go by then I'm not typical. This is one area where I shall simply watch with interest.

Short Term Rules

The latest CDP Europe 300 Report was published today. While I haven't ploughed through all 72 pages of the report (old age appears to be reducing my geekiness index) I was struck by the fact that although some 80% of companies have set an emission reduction target the majority of these expire in 2012 - just a couple of years away. And less than a quarter have targets beyond 2015. I'm not surprised. There's a parallel with the old agency theory stuff about the tension between actions promoting short-term gain and those needed for sustaining long-term value; and how they are incentivised. Emissions reduction is a long-term game and hopefully some of the laggards will take notice and act accordingly. One lives in hope!

Gas Plant Eligible for CCS

The Grauniad says that Chris Huhne will tomorrow announce that gas plants are eligible for the CCS demonstration programme. Is this a fig leaf to cover the embarrassment of the poor showing so far from coal plant? Certainly it is suggested that Huhne will not back the idea with mandatory teeth at the moment.

Future Car

The Future Car Challenge Brighton-London rally on Saturday was neatly juxtaposed with the London-Brighton Veteran Car Run on Sunday. It made me ponder that the love affair with the car really does seem to be on the way out. The vintage cars are loved, pampered, polished, cherished. What of today's cars, and those of the future? They seem to me to have entered the world of the utilitarian. Provided it gets me from A to B in reasonable comfort that's all that matters, seems to be the pattern. For the future car, then, the onus has to be practicality - exemplified by reliability and comfort - at the right price. What actually happens under the bonnet is a secondary issue. Therein lies the opportunity, and the threat, for future clean cars (and I see that Boris is launching a new charging network for EVs - now roll on de-carbonisation of the grid!).

Bottom of Bag is Further Away - and Cheaper

The Welsh Assembly's single-use bag charge is not now going to appear until October next year - and will be set at 5p rather than the 7p previously mooted. Will that make a big difference? A delay is unfortunate, of course, but I wonder how effective the charge will be anyway. Already the voluntary agreement involving many of the big retailers has achieved a near 50% reduction - will 5p make the difference to those who are immune to social pressures? I think not - for many the cost will simply get lost in the noise. That would, of course, be a pity - normalising behaviour is often the most effective change agent.

Calling All Green Megalomaniacs

Interesting new game launched in beta version by Red Redemption yesterday - Fate of the World. It puts the gamer in charge of an environmental organisation with the potential to save mankind from the excesses of climate change through emissions reduction or even (according to Edie) by introducing a virus to control the world's population. This is not as crass as the 10:10 video of climate criminals' executions but could still prove to be controversial. Having said that, this game has the potential to capture new audiences for the climate cause - and young audiences at that  - just the people who will benefit most from early mitigation and adaptation action.

Apparently the underlying prediction model was provided by Myles Allen who is head of the climate dynamics group at Oxford - so there should be some realism about the whole thing. This is important for breaking from any "fantasy" element into an appreciation of real-world issues. What is also important is that it should be a good gaming experience. This is why it will be bought in the first place and if it fails that test then no amount of worthiness will substitute.

What is quite exciting is the possibility that there will be more understanding of the complexity of the issues, of their inter-relatedness, and of the difficult decisions that have to be made by legislators.

Green Deal Timetable

There's a little bit more information about the great Green Deal on DECC's web site. It sets out the three stage process that we've all been expecting:
1) Survey to identify best options
2) Finance made available
3) EE package delivered.

What is not clear to me is to what extent the availability of finance is linked to the most cost effective measures (e.g. to make sure insulation measures are installed ahead of generation measures). Nor is it clear just who the "accredited finance providers" will be and what conditions will be laid upon them and around the loans. Edie suggests local authorities - which has been the thinking all along - but in this "age of austerity" will they have the capital to make such provision? Measures will be installed by accredited suppliers. Of course, some accreditation schemes already exist - such as MCS. This hasn't had the best of press - being regarded as expensive and bureaucratic by some suppliers, especially smaller companies, and not necessarily being all that transparent to the customer. There are some lessons to be learned here if HMG is going to go down the "universal green kit mark" route. I guess this will be a case of the devil being in the detail.

Which brings me onto the timetable:
Next month - Bill introduced
Autumn 2011 - Royal assent
Early 2012 - Lay secondary legislation
Spring 2010 - Detailed guidance (whoopee!)
Autumn 2012 - First green deals.
So - don't hold your breath.