Feeding the Future

My post of yesterday on water leakage is a reminder that water is a key resource in our food supply. I recently came across some very interesting (and worrying) statistics:


Today, 800 million people go hungry.
By 2050 the world's population may have reached 10 billion.
About 30% of all our food ends up rotting on farms or in landfill.
In the UK households waste 20% of groceries simply because of confusion over labels ("best before" does not mean "do not eat after").
It takes over 30 times a much water to produce 1kg of beef as it does to produce the same weight of potatoes.
It takes 25kg of feed to produce 1kg of beef but just 2kg for 1kg of crickets. Let's eat more crickets.
There are some 50,000 edible plants in the world but just 3 (wheat, maize, rice) account for 60% of the world's calorie intake.
There are over 100,000 species of algae but we cultivate just 20 for food.
Vertical farming can use 95% less water than conventional cultivation.



Food for thought.

Why Do These People NEVER Give A Straight Answer?

My original:

Dear Mrs Milton

I was appalled to read in the Sunday Times last weekend (9 April 2017) indications that Britain will be scaling down its concern over climate change. I would be obliged if you would let me know whether this is true or not.

I quote from the Conservative Party manifesto of 2015: "We will push for a strong global climate deal later this year - one that keeps the goal of limiting global warming to two degrees firmly in reach. At home, we will continue to support the UK Climate Change Act"; also "We will work to prevent climate change and assist the poorest in adapting to it". How does scaling down concern over climate change align with these pledges?

As I'm sure you are aware, limiting warming to two degrees is already something of a stretch target; and because of the long residence times of most greenhouse gases in the atmosphere any lessening of GHG reduction has a ratcheting effect on global temperatures.

This apparent new stance would suggest that in trying to lessen the disaster that will be Brexit the government is now content also to wreck the environment for future generations.

Yours sincerely

Richard Bawden

Her (eventual) response:

I despair!

Phasing out single use bags

This is an interesting initiative by Tesco. It may have an effect but I wonder if pricing the alternative at somewhat more that 10p might be a good idea. And it, perhaps, needs coupling with other behavioural change initiatives. Whatever, let's hope it works.

Water Leakage - Feeble Targets, Feeble Action

I recently came across this article on water leakage from Edie. I have to say I find it pretty damning. I already knew that total leakage is colossal, especially from my provider Thames Water. What I hadn't realised was how feeble are the leakage targets imposed by Ofwat. On their web-site there are some catch all words about "encouraging a reduction in environmental impact from over-abstraction" but it all seems rather limp-wristed.

£50M Saving Through Sustainability - But I See Littering

Apropros not very much, I spotted this headline today:

World's largest brewer saves £50m through sustainability strategy

 That's all very well but what really struck a chord was the fact that on our recent village litter pick the winner of the "most frequent finding" award was empty Stella Artois cans. Guess what - the eponymous lager is produced by a wholly owned subsidiary of Anheauser-Busch InBev. Perhaps a little of that £50M could be diverted to tackling the mess their cans make of the environment?

Pigs might fly.

All ready for the dump.

Put Purdah Aside for Air Quality

Once again the High Court has come to the rescue and put the government in its place. I despair of the hubristic autocratical approach that appears to be the modus operandi of Whitehall. HMG has had plenty of time to produce and publish an Air Quality Plan. Its dithering has been shameful.

To argue that publication of the plan at this time would add "controversy" to the general election process is facile. The election has sufficient controversy associated with it already. Publishing the plan (or at least a draft) is merely doing the right thing.

All power to Client Earth.

A Ticking Off re CCS

Having been a (very small) part of one of the groups seeking funding in the second CCS competition I have a certain feeling of schadenfreude on seeing this report. DECC's handling of that competition was woeful and HMG's approach to CCS overall has been chaotic and incoherent.

Unfortunately I don't foresee much changing. There seems to be great antipathy in Westminster for evidence-based policy making and until that changes uninformed, wilful and mindless decisions will continue to be made.