The Peter McManners Sustainability Blog

Cities fit for cycling

2012-02-13T02:49:00.000-08:00

Cities for People: Removing Cars from Urban Life.

This is the title of a paper I presented at the London School of Economics in 2007. My paper received considerable support and also opposition which I will explain but first, I will mention the Times campaign to improve safety for cyclists in London. Cities fit for cycling came about after Times journalist Mary Bowers was badly injured on her way to work. To succeed this campaign has to be more than pro-cycling it has to also be anti-car. My words will immediately incense car drivers seeking to defend their ‘rights’. Such reaction is understandable from city residents who know only the city of today but it is very short sighted. Policy that deliberately and specifically gives the city back to its people (on foot, by bicycle and on public transport) leads to better cities for everyone across society.

When I spoke at the LSE five years ago it was part of a conference about the future of cities in the developing world. I expected push back from delegates from the developing world objecting to my call to deny them the ‘benefits’ of car infrastructure and ownership. In fact these delegates were mostly in support; opposition was lead by World Bank officials asserting that investment in roads had the best return on investment. The real problem seemed to be that people living in advanced Western economies find it hard to envisage life with much fewer cars.

In London, at least it is acknowledged that there is a need for much better provision for cyclists but this is only a beginning; there is still huge opposition to reducing the reliance on cars, even though this is the sensible policy if only we think deeply and plan carefully.

On a personal note, I know first-hand the problem that has set off the Times campaign. Some years ago I was hit by a car, was badly injured and went through two years of rehabilitation. The driver was prosecuted, found guilty and fined but I do not blame him. The policy makers who design the infrastructure are to blame. The priority is simple and obvious; people should have more priority than cars.

UK Aviation Policy

2012-02-06T01:42:00.000-08:00

The UK government has a difficult and important task to craft policy for aviation. It is difficult because of widely divergent viewpoints and multiple stakeholders. It is important because aviation policy has long-term consequences with decisions taken now influencing the type of aircraft and the associated ground infrastructure that will be operating in the middle of this century. The key stakeholders, in approximate order of the political power they wield, are:

Business – concerned that in a globalised world it is important to have an efficient transport infrastructure.
Passengers – a large proportion of the electorate enjoy, and would like to retain, cheap flights.
Airlines – working to tight margins with fuel a high proportion of operating costs.
Airport Operators – concerned that they will run out of capacity, particularly in the South East around London.
Environmentalists – providing the inconvenient grit in the negotiations, concerned at the growth of emissions from aviation as a cause of climate change

Politicians tend to make decisions with input from focus groups, which in this case would be drawn from the stakeholder groups listed above. However if politicians were to take a principled approach, they would be assessing the priorities asking the question what is the key issue that has long-term consequences. Despite the protestations of other stakeholders, that issue is the rapid growth in emissions. On a principled long-term basis, the environmentalists have logic on their side. In reality that counts for little; the electoral cycle sets the timeframe and the first four categories of stakeholder have louder voices. What is very strange about this particular policy stalemate is that putting long-term environmental concerns as the foundation of aviation policy will lead to a golden age of aviation. The price is severe disruption in the short-term but the outcome is better for all stakeholders.

Fly and Be Damned: What now for aviation and climate change?

Politicians should read my book, and take a principled approach launching the next golden age of aviation.

The Great Transformation

2012-01-30T00:28:00.000-08:00

The 42nd World Economic Forum in Davos has closed and the rich, powerful and famous have returned home. The theme of this year’s annual meeting was ‘The Great Transformation: Shaping New Models.’ The opening day set the scene with accusations from Sharan Burrow, General Secretary of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) that widening income inequality and high unemployment, especially among young people, are an indication that the capitalist system has failed society. David Rubenstein, Co-Founder and Managing Director of the Carlyle Group, a private-equity firm offered a defence of capitalism using the old adage “Capitalism may be the worst economic system except for any of the others.” The problem, he explained is not capitalism but a lack of investment in education and failure to promote innovation and creativity. We have heard all this before but where does it leave us in the search for a new model of capitalism?

Has the Davos Economic Forum made progress with setting off a great transformation? I fear not; despite the good words and recycled arguments there was little sign of breakthrough ideas or even a willingness to acknowledge deep rooted problems with the global economy and world society. It seems to have become fashionable to talk about each of the challenges the world faces, complete the conversation and move on to the next issue. An example which illustrates the point is ‘climate change’. Already there is danger I will lose the reader at this point – “Oh no, not climate change again, we did that a few weeks ago, let’s move on”. Climate Change may not be the most severe problem we face but it is high up on the list of important and intractable problems. Following the Durban climate talks, there is now an agreement to start discussing an agreement to be finalised by 2015 to come into force by 2020. The conversation is regarded as closed and discussion moves onto more immediate urgent issues such as the financial crisis in the euro zone. There is confusion between what is ‘urgent’ and what is ‘important’.

It is time that world leaders stopped continually hopping between the issues responding to the apparent urgency of immediate crisis and use forums like Davos to focus on the really important issues and the tough choices that have to be made. The world badly needs real-world solutions and a new model for the economy and society. I argue that the new model is ‘proximization’; it is my model so it is not for me to decide if it is the best model but it is better than the alternatives. In a world of many problems and few solutions, ‘proximization’ of human society and the economy truly does offer the prospect of a great transformation.

More UK Airport Capacity

2012-01-22T09:24:00.000-08:00

Extrapolation of growth trends in aviation leads to the conclusion that the South East of England will run out of airport capacity sometime before 2020. But predictions of continued growth of conventional aviation are based on the assumption that aviation will remain largely exempt from policy to reduce carbon emissions (noting that the inclusion of aviation in the EU ETS will have little real impact).

The arguments put forward in defence of business-as-usual, range from ‘aviation is vital to the economy’ to ‘emissions are only 2-3% of global emissions’ so policy makers should look for reductions elsewhere. These are attractive arguments, allowing policy makers to ignore the challenge of drafting sustainable aviation policy. As the UK government shapes its new aviation policy through 2012, I hope it does not take this easy detour but tackles the issue head on and grasp the opportunity to move aviation into a new era.

Until policy makers carry out the research and deep analysis and that should underpin sustainable aviation policy, the current debate about building new airport capacity is at best premature, at worst just froth and posturing by vested interests. Green campaigners are no better, refusing to acknowledge that engineers could transform aviation to dramatically reduce the environmental impact allowing us to fly with a clear conscience – if politicians give the engineers an appropriate policy framework. Greens should be arguing to change policy, not arguing against flying per se.

The environmental impact of aviation can and should be reduced. This must be the foundation of sustainable aviation policy. Accepting this, would be a big step forward to a real debate.

Blue Monday

2012-01-16T00:34:00.000-08:00

High debts, high anxiety and highly polarised society are all good reasons to be blue, coupled with high pressure over the UK giving cold weather and Christmas holidays a distant memory remembered only by an expanded waistline. This is the day of year when we are at our lowest ebb.

Today is also the day of publication of ‘The Pursuit of Happiness’ a report by the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), commissioned by UK Prime Minister David Cameron. It is expected to refute the results of previous research reported in Green Outcomes in the Real World: Global Forces, Local Circumstances, and Sustainable Solutions:

‘increases in average individual income correlate with measures of quality of life up to an annual income equivalent to $10,000; the relationship no longer applies with increases to income beyond this level. We get richer but we do not get any happier.’

According to the Sunday Times, the team of academics who wrote the IEA report have concluded that ‘there is no evidence’ for a ‘satiation point’ beyond which income is not linked to an increase in happiness. This will be seized upon by those who believe that GDP is the only true measure of progress to justify a narrow focus on economic outcomes in government policy. Where the authors of the report are correct is that attempting to use government policy to control happiness is not likely to succeed but I stand by my assertion that GDP is too limiting:

‘I leave it to others to work out what might be the best parameters, but we can be sure that GDP will be a poor measure of how we are doing when it comes to building a sustainable world. Governments should move away from using growth in GDP as their prime measure of success. GDP is, indeed, likely to continue to grow but it is the wrong measure and the wrong target.’

Imagine that the IEA report writers did their research whilst traveling on the Titanic enjoying good food, good company and the prospect of a safe luxurious journey. Sitting in the Dining room it would be easy to refute ideas that something terrible might be on the way and ignore the safety briefing about muster points and lifeboats. If they had gone up to the bridge and surveyed the ocean, the cold, the icebergs and the speed of the ship, they might have drawn a different conclusion. Looking through the lens of sustainability, taking in a wide range of factors, is like being on the bridge of the Titanic. We need to slow down and ensure that we don’t smash the ecosystem on which we rely to live well; that means reining in consumption and moving away from the uncertain assumption that monetary wealth correlates with happiness.

Zayed Future Energy Prize

2012-01-09T03:42:00.000-08:00

The Zayed Future Energy Prize will be awarded at the World Future Energy Summit in Abu Dhabi, 16-19 January 2012.

‘Through the prize, we honour the legacy of environmental protection and concern for conservation established by Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan, the late ruler of Abu Dhabi and the Founding Father of the United Arab Emirates. By honouring and rewarding those people who are tackling the energy crisis today, we hope to educate and inspire future leaders and innovators. Creating a sustainable energy future is the surest way to combat the impending threat of climate change and global warming, and to ensure a clean, liveable environment for future generations.’

This prize is a fitting legacy for a good man. Sheikh Zayed was the founding father of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and President until his death in 2004. It was rumoured that he was the world’s richest man with control of something like 10% of the world’s oil reserves. Despite great wealth he lived a pious life and ruled with compassion and tolerance. He shared the wealth with his people and was a champion of conserving the biodiversity of the desert environment. This legacy of environmental sensitivity and concern for the conservation is the driving force behind Abu Dhabi's focus on clean energy.

The extreme wealth of the oil nations of the Middle East is a temporary aberration which will last as long as there remains oil to pump, or as long as the world remains addicted to oil. Which will come first, the end of oil or the end of the world’s craving? Either way the rulers of the Middle East have to plan a sustainable future for their people beyond the era of oil; and the rulers of Abu Dhabi are leading attempts to find a way.

Zayed Future Energy Prize is a small part of Abu Dhabi’s search for a sustainable future. The main investment into a more sustainable future is the Masdar project, reflecting Abu Dhabi’s vision for 2030. It comprises a number of elements including a research institute, a renewable power company, investment fund and the iconic centre piece, Masdar City. Aspiring to be one of the most sustainable cities in the world, situated close to Abu Dhabi, Masdar City is a ‘high-density, pedestrian-friendly development where current and future renewable energy and clean technologies are showcased, marketed, researched, developed, tested and implemented’.

‘The city, which at full build out will house 40,000 residents and hundreds of businesses, will integrate the full range of renewable energy and sustainability technologies, across a living and working community.’

Abu Dhabi has bold ambitions and massive oil wealth to be able to deliver the vision but it will still be a huge challenge. Whilst oil revenue flows, Masdar will grow and expand but it will have to be sustainable beyond the era of oil. Abu Dhabi has the potential to be an oasis of high-tech, high quality green living in the deserts of the Middle East. Each country will have to find its own route to sustainable living and it is perhaps fitting that the winner of the Zayed Future Energy Prize will be decided by a jury chaired by a world leader with a different challenge: Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson President of the Republic of Iceland.

Fly and be Damned

2012-01-02T01:56:00.000-08:00

From 1 January 2012, airlines are included in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. This requires airlines flying into Europe to hold EU Allowances to cover carbon emissions from their flights and operations. The bulk of these will be provided free based on the airline’s historical aviation emissions averaged over the calendar years 2004, 2005 and 2006. Additional allowances will have to be purchased. With the price of EU ETS Carbon Trading Permits hovering around €8, this will cost airlines up to €1bn ($1.4bn) in 2012 rising to perhaps €10bn ($14bn) by 2020.

The additional cost to airlines is minor compared with their fuel bill but the measure has met with a barrage of complaints from the aviation industry. US airlines are particular opposed arguing that the measures represent a tax and therefore contravenes international law that prevents countries from levying tax on aviation fuel. In a letter dated 16 December leaked to the Financial Times, Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State wrote to her counterpart at the European Commission, Catherine Ashton, to express US displeasure warning that the US government will be “compelled to take appropriate action” if ETS application to US carriers is not removed.

One of the more bizarre complaints comes from The International Air Cargo Association (TIACA). The group wrote to EU climate commissioner Connie Hedegaard claiming the scheme would divert investment away from cleaner technologies, such as biofuels or more efficient engines. This is an odd claim to make in an industry that pays no tax on its fuel. Taxing fuel or carbon, or both, is the way to drive forward investment in more efficient engines and more efficient aircraft. To attempt to persuade politicians otherwise makes the industry look ridiculous.

The airlines will pay up and get on with their business. The inclusion of airlines in the EU ETS will have very little effect on airline profits and very little effect on the emissions from aviation. The huge furore has been more about holding back future action over aviation emissions. The industry is terrified that the EU ETS could be a trip wire to a process leading to real action over aviation and climate change.

My immediate advice to the aviation industry is to invest in purchasing all copies of the first print run of my book Fly and be Damned: what next for aviation and climate change when it comes out next month. Delaying copies getting into the hands of the politicians will give airlines a little more breathing space. When politicians and policy makers digest its contents they will understand that the EU ETS is not the end but only the first small step on a long journey to a sustainable aviation industry.

The Mañana Prize

2011-12-17T11:06:00.000-08:00

The Mañana Prize will be launched tomorrow for outstanding commitment to putting off important actions that can be left until another day. It will be judged on the length of the delay and the seriousness of the consequences. It is a celebration of the human capacity for stoical denial in the face of adversity.

In borrowing the Spanish word mañana, I intend no disrespect for the good people of Spain; it is just such a good word for tomorrow. Playing the game of mañana to the full can justify putting off action almost indefinitely. Each day the problem festers, getting slightly worse, until someone eventually does something or the problem goes away. Putting off what does not have to be done today is a good tactic to avoid bother but it is not effective as a long-term strategy. When world leaders rely on mañana to get from one day to the next, from one meeting to the next, from one summit to the next, from one policy to the next; we should be very worried.

In looking for potential winners, special mention goes to the euro zone leaders who have been playing mañana for the last two years, since the fault lines in the euro were exposed. Decisive action should have been taken over a year ago – even allowing for the slow process of European diplomacy. Each day that mañana has prevailed the crisis has got deeper; the euro is now in a deep hole but still Europe’s leaders procrastinate. They are now waiting for sovereign debt default to force change which will be unpredictable and dangerous to the world economy.

Another strong runner for the Mañana Prize must be the UN brokered climate talks where the game of mañana has been playing for nearly two decades. At the close of the climate conference in Durban the organizers announced success. You would have thought this would be to cut greenhouse gas emissions, but no; the success that was trumpeted was an agreement to start talking about an agreement that could be signed in 2015 to start cutting greenhouse gas emissions from 2020. Two decades of delay, in the context of claims that climate change could be the worst crisis in human history, makes the UNFCCC a very strong contender for the Mañana Prize.

Meanwhile, amongst the stories that do not make the front page, the UK government has agreed that the state should be responsible for nuclear waste after a nuclear reactor has come to the end of its life and stopped generating power. This policy is needed to persuade private enterprise to build the UK’s next generation of nuclear reactors. The business case relies on passing the legacy of the waste to future generations sixty, a hundred or two hundred years into the future. Taking into account the length of the delay and the severity of the consequences, the UK government is currently the frontrunner for the first award of the Mañana Prize.

Disastrous Deal in Durban

2011-12-11T03:13:00.000-08:00

The main elements of the deal struck in Durban is that all the world’s countries will start discussions next year aimed at signing an agreement by 2015 that will come into force in 2020. The main benefit of the deal – as seen by some observers – is it has re-established the principle that climate change should be tackled through international law, not national, voluntarism. After two decades of talking, there is another conclusion that can be drawn; the world is not willing to make the compromises required for a legally enforceable and effective global carbon reduction plan.

The odds were always stacked against the main delegates in Durban who arrived with the brief to secure the best deal for their country. There is little appetite for compromising national self-interest in favour of the global good. This is not something that can be changed easily; it is deeply engrained in world politics that national self-interest dominates negotiations. This is the starting point from which the horse-trading commences and is why Durban was always likely to fail.

The bureaucratic machine of the UNFCCC will lumber on towards 2015 documenting in ever greater detail the collective failure of the world to act. World leaders can use this as an excuse not to take action at the national level until a global agreement is concluded. Spinning the output of Durban as a success is disastrous by leaving the impression that action is in hand; when clearly it is not.

The truth should be faced: the world has agreed not to agree to any action until 2020. Accepting this reality would be useful in passing the buck back to governments to decide on the next course of action.

Climate change is a clear and present danger which for some low-lying countries, such as The Maldives, is a death warrant. For other countries, the direct impacts may be less but no country will escape the disruption and potential conflict as change ripples through the ecosystem and world society. It is clear that climate change is a danger that we should be working hard to avoid; every government can see the danger and has growing support from their electorate to do something about it. If it cannot be done globally, action has to be national with each nation deciding what it can do that fits its circumstances and capabilities.

Action is needed despite Durban; national carbon reduction measures are required on a piecemeal basis with the advanced economies with sophisticated electorates in the vanguard leading the way. Of course this will put the economies of the leaders at a disadvantage, but rather than see this as a barrier, this must be recognised as the opportunity to force change in other areas where there are barriers such as trade agreements. Leading climate action at the national level will be difficult, but necessary, and require facing down opposition from countries that oppose. This is how to start to build a cohort of countries willing to take whatever action is necessary.

Don’t use Durban as fig leaf for inaction; use it as a call to leave the UNFCCC on the sidelines as the leaders get moving.

Climate Change and Globalisation

2011-12-04T01:18:00.000-08:00

Without a global agreement on carbon dioxide emissions, countries should take unilateral action.

To cut carbon dioxide emissions requires every country to make the transition to a low-carbon economy. The developed world will have to embark on a huge program to replace infrastructure that depends on fossil fuel. The poorer countries do not have such a legacy to contend with but should build their economies using low-carbon infrastructure – not copy the mistakes of the developed world. For rich and poor this will cost more until low-carbon becomes standard across society and the economy. This is the challenge we face.

The global action required is the sum total of each country’s efforts but individual countries that take a lead will put themselves at a commercial disadvantage in the global market place. Our response to this is to wait for a global agreement so that all countries move together. This can be seen in the UK, where the previous government took a lead by enshrining bold carbon reduction targets into law. The current government is starting to indicate that, unless other countries adopt similar targets, the UK will back off.

The Climate Change talks in Durban seem to be going nowhere but we should look for the positive in this. The Copenhagen talks of 2010 showed the direction of travel, and the Durban talks seem to be confirming, that a global agreement is not forthcoming. After two decades of talking the UN brokered climate talks is not delivering a solution. This should provide the foundation stone on which to build the policy going forward. This outcome is not what was envisaged when the UNFCCC was set up but this is the reality.

Without a robust global solution, countries will have to push ahead. The UK for example should be bold and stick to its targets. The consequence, within an open global market, will be that these countries will suffer a huge commercial disadvantage. These leading countries will have to adopt protectionist measures and be willing to face down opposition from the countries that are reluctant to act on climate change – which may include breaking WTO rules. This is the price of failure to close a global climate deal, but the cost will be less than continued inaction and stalemate leading to growing carbon emissions.

Ardent supporters of free markets will complain of course but the climate crisis requires a crisis response and when the policy framework of economic globalisation starts to crack it is necessary to adopt a different macro-economic model.

Living with limits

2011-11-27T02:11:00.000-08:00

I have been reflecting on the Grantham Institute for Climate Change Annual Lecture given by Martin Wolf: Living with limits: growth, resources and climate change. Sometimes ideas need to time to brew before their true value becomes apparent; this lecture was one such occasion.

The lecture outlined the positive sum game of economic globalisation with all the associated benefits of prosperity and alleviating poverty. This has been successful through the lens of economics and Martin Wolf, economist at the Financial Times, has been one the most eloquent proponents. He opened the lecture by declaring that he is no expert on climate but he went on to talk about areas in which he is expert explaining that, as the world reaches the limits of resources, the game cannot continue. The challenge is how to rein in expectations to live within limits. He closed by stating that he had no idea how this could be done and throwing the challenge back out to the audience.

After the lecture, the immediate impression was that he had told us nothing new, simply explaining that the world has a problem and we do not have a clue how to solve it. We adjourned to a reception where there were a number of useful and animated conversations about climate change, the economy, resources and the general theme of where next? We did not solve the world’s problems that evening, but strolling towards the train station with James Smith the new chairman of the Carbon Trust, we shared optimism that the job can be done but leaving open the question of how.

During a period of quiet reflection on Martin Wolf’s words reveals that a very useful foundation stone has been laid. Martin Wolf is a leading exponent of economic globalisation and a gifted communicator, who writes for the readership of the Financial Times – rather different to the greenies who read the Guardian. Martin Wolf has the ability to start a dialogue with the mainstream to persuade policy makers to back off from unquestioning adherence to the policies of economic globalisation. This is a vital first step in shifting the debate onto ground where it is possible to find solutions.

I wish Martin Wolf well and congratulate him on a lecture that is hugely valuable in defining the problem as the pre-stage of finding the solution.

Astride the Chasm

2011-11-21T00:49:00.000-08:00

The bond markets have calmed a little this morning after Spain elected a government with the mandate for cutting Spain’s deficit but this snippet of news should be treated with caution. The chasm opening up within the euro zone could become a long deep depression for Europe with a credible risk of bringing down the entire global financial system. When David Cameron and Angela Merkel met last week they represented the two sides of Europe; Merkel for the 17 countries in the Euro zone and Cameron for the 10 EU countries outside. They tried to find common ground but failed. Europe’s politicians stand astride tectonic plates as they slowly move apart. Each time the earth moves, their legs open a little wider until they are stretched so wide that it becomes impossible to step back onto one side or the other. They must decide which side of the divide they choose or risk being dashed on the jagged rocks below.

Angela Merkel wants to rescue the euro zone without Germany paying the price. For a single currency to work requires that rich regions transfer capital to poorer regions. Within a country with a single currency like the UK, the government transfers funds from the relatively rich South East region to the North East and other relatively deprived areas. In the United States, there are mechanisms that transfer funds from strong to weak states. Germany has done well out of the euro; its strong export-led growth has been driven by an exchange rate that is much lower than it would have been had Germany retained the Deutsche Mark. For the euro to survive intact requires closer integration between euro zone countries which should include transfers from the strong to the weak, from North to South, from Germany to Greece.

The popular view in northern Europe is that the hardworking and frugal Germans should not have to bail out the spendthrift and lazy Greeks but these stereotypes do not give the full picture. Germans and Greeks are not the same; there are deep cultural differences between Teutonic northern European values and laid back Mediterranean ways of living. This is part of the rich tapestry of Europe to be retained and celebrated not forced into some sort of homogenised amalgamation of European values.

Germany cannot have it both ways; reaping the benefit whilst avoiding paying the price. There are two options: to draw the euro zone together into a federal structure with all the responsibilities that implies, or to dismantle the Euro – fully or in part. Whilst politicians pursue a third way, of fudging the issue, they make their lives easier from one meeting to the next, from one week to the next, but the crisis gets deeper and the resolution harder.

Europe’s politicians should stop trying to hold Europe together with parcel tape; it won’t work. Clear-eyed analysis and bold decisions are required. A sustainable Europe needs a series of credible currencies that reflect the diverse nature of Europe. The euro will have to be split; the only question is into how many bits.

FAA sticks the boot in

2011-11-14T04:03:00.000-08:00

The US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has made an official submission to the UK’s Department of Transport’s consultation on Sustainable Aviation. It is unusual for a foreign government agency to get so closely involved in UK policy making, but in certain circumstances this can be useful in ensuring that policy takes into account a range of stakeholders including key allies and trading partners. In this case it looks like the FAA is lobbying to defend the status quo and resist efforts to drag aviation into the 21st century.

The UK is taking a lead in developing sustainable policy for aviation; which – if it is to be effective – must tackle deep-rooted resistance from a highly conservative and globalised industry. The current policy framework locks the industry into an outdated framework in which aviation fuel for international flights is free of tax. This anachronism dates back to the end of the Second World War when aviation was seen as a key component of building the peace and emissions from the small fleets of aircraft were not seen as a threat to the global climate. Agreed in Chicago in 1944, the Convention on International Civil Aviation still rules aviation today. Article 24 prevents countries from levying tax on fuel carried on board aircraft. No country will lead in taxing aviation fuel as airlines would reconfigure their operations not to need to pick up fuel in that country and shift long-haul hubs to other jurisdictions. There is a stalemate in which all commercial decisions are taken on the assumption that aviation fuel is tax-free and will remain so.

The green aircraft designs needed in the 21st century are on the drawing board but have little chance of getting into the air as the engineers have to compete with conventional 20th century gas guzzlers burning cheap fuel. Even the newest plane on the block, the Boeing 787 Dreamliner is just the final model of 20th century aviation, more efficient, yes, but nowhere need the efficiency needed in the future. The Dreamliner has a future beyond the introduction of a tax on aviation fuel, for passengers who can afford high ticket prices such as time-poor business passengers and the rich, but those of more modest means will fly in highly efficient, but slower, aircraft. To develop these new aircraft requires a proper business case by levelling the playing field through removing the tax exemption for aviation fuel. The oddity is that there is a much better aviation industry waiting to launch if only policy makers could understand fully the opportunity.

The FAA does not agree, according to the UK newspaper, the Sunday Times who have seen the submission. The Office of Environment and Energy at the FAA expresses their ‘serious concerns about the UK’s approach to aviation’ and climate change worried that the policy will constrain aviation rather than support sustainable growth. There is also dislike that the UK is taking a more realistic viewpoint to the extent that biofuel can replace conventional aviation fuel. My detailed examination of aviation shows that the UK government is not being bold enough in the policy it proposes. To me the FAA viewpoint looks like stuck in the past trying to defend the indefensible.

Advanced orders now being taken for Peter McManners’ next book Fly and Be Damned: What now for aviation and climate change?

Financial Transaction Tax

2011-11-07T02:32:00.000-08:00

The Financial Transaction Tax (FTT) proposed for Europe comes from muddled thinking but, oddly, if the objectives were clarified this could be a good tax, not just for Europe but for the world.

Chancellor Merkel and President Sarkozy have proposed a Financial Transaction Tax (FTT) levied at a rate of 0.1% and expected to raise €57bn. The UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne is opposed, arguing that such taxes need to be brought in globally if London is not to suffer at the expense of other financial centres. In the United States, Democrat Senator Tom Harkin and Representative Peter DeFazio are calling for a tax on stock, bond and derivative trades but the Republicans who control the House of Representatives have always opposed transaction taxes and will be hard to persuade of the benefits. I would like to see the deadlock broken by shifting the dialogue from raising tax to improving the operation of the financial system.

American economist , James Tobin put forward a proposal in 1978 to introduce a tax on all currency trades to limit the role of the speculator. He suggested that the receipts could be held centrally to help fund aspects of the work of the UN; it was this secondary objective that caught the headlines. The Tobin tax became the Robin-Hood Tax in common parlance.

In my book Adapt and Thrive: The Sustainable Revolution, I proposed a share transaction tax with the clear objective of reducing volatility and lengthening the time horizon used by investors so that the long-term planning needed for sustainable business becomes the norm. A Robin-Hood tax it was not. Investors that have to pay a small but significant percentage to switch ownership change their behaviour. Instead of grilling the management over their plans for the next quarter or the next year (a huge disincentive to adopting sustainable strategies) investors will examine the plans for the next decade and beyond. My proposal recognised the need to include in principle the major global financial centuries such as London, Frankfurt and New York but, crucial to acceptance, the revenue would remain with national governments to use as they see fit.

Financial markets provide liquidity and capital but an often quoted metric is that financial trading is one hundred times the level of trading required to support the real economy. Each successful speculative trade takes a profit from the market to appear in the bottom line of a hedge fund, investment bank or fund manager. If this is curtailed by the McManners tax then the market is more stable and supports the real economy better. Resistance arises because traders in the financial centres would see their incomes go down and there would be complaints that the tax was a drain on the market. What would we prefer; a stable market from which the government harvests some of its tax revenue or an unstable market in which the speculators rule?

Merkel and Sarkozy are misguided to argue for a FTT to raise money to bail out the euro zone; but a transaction tax to stabilise the financial system, brought in across all the main markets, with revenues retained at the national level, would be a step towards healing the financial system.

An Old Dream

2011-10-31T02:57:00.000-07:00

The Boeing 787 Dreamliner is the newest, most efficient and most luxurious aircraft in the hanger, but it is the last gasp of the old 20th century aviation industry rather than the beginning of 21st century aviation. Its launch in 2007 was the most successful commercial airplane launch in history taking orders for 677 airplanes worth more than $110 billion. The Dreamliner’s maiden flight took place on 15 December 2009 and it is now entering service in 2011, three years later than intended.

For passengers, the aircraft is a step forward with a higher cabin pressure equivalent to 6,000ft – compared with 8,000ft for most other high altitude passenger aircraft – so headaches and fatigue should be reduced. The passengers on board the first scheduled flight by All Nippon Airways (ANA) last Wednesday also liked the spacious feel of the larger windows. Passenger comforts that grabbed the headlines were the toilet with a window and a bidet with a variety of spray options.

For aircraft construction, new methods have been used including the use of carbon fibre composite materials. According to Boeing, it will use twenty per cent less fuel per passenger than similarly sized aircraft. The 787 is a further evolution of the standard design, squeezing a little more efficiency and improvements from a model with similar operating characteristics to the stable of aircraft it hopes to replace. In a highly regulated and conservative industry, in which fuel is largely free of tax, this is the safe direction. The 787 is not a dream, but a statement that aviation intends to defend business-as-usual for as long as possible.

There are other designs, such as blended wing technology and the use of buoyancy as a component of lift in hybrid air vehicles, which could make dramatic reductions in the emissions from aviation, but there is no business case to bring these technologies to market until society demands that aviation is transformed for the 21st century.

Boeing will be using commercial judgement in planning its future models but it will be very wary of taking any action that may undermine sales of the Dreamliner before banking the $110 billion of advance orders. Commercial reality means that dreams of greener aviation will be kept under wraps until the Dreamliner production line has been running for many years.

Peter McManners is author of Fly and Be Damned: What now for aviation and climate change? Advance Orders now being taken on Amazon.

Health and Coal

2011-10-22T01:06:00.000-07:00

News stories come into my inbox like a torrent of water from the base of a melting glacier in high summer. There are far too many to be able to read them all but dipping in can uncover some interesting dilemmas. One pair of news stories that I came across in quick succession last week was of a conference in London and a bill in the U.S. House of Representatives. I would like to have brought the delegates and congressmen and congresswomen into the same location for what I am sure would have been a fiery debate.

In London, the opening statement of the conference on Health and Security Aspects of Climate Change included the words:

Climate change leads to more frequent and extreme weather events and to conditions that favour the spread of infectious diseases. Rising sea levels, floods and droughts cause loss of habitat, water and food shortages, and threats to livelihood. These trigger conflict within and between countries. Humanitarian crises will further burden military resources through the need for rescue missions and aid. Mass migration will also increase, triggered by both environmental stress and conflict, thus leading to serious further security issues. It will often not be possible to adapt meaningfully to these changes, and the economic cost will be enormous. As in medicine, prevention is the best solution...We therefore call upon governments around the world to prioritise efforts to address the causes and impacts of climate change.

In the U.S., a bipartisan bill had been passed in the U.S. House of Representatives to establish a state-based regulatory framework for management and disposal of coal ash. Steve Miller, President and CEO of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE) commended the U.S. House of Representatives for passing bipartisan legislation that would establish a state-based regulatory framework for management and disposal of coal ash.

“We support this bipartisan legislation because it would establish a sensible program to regulate coal ash and ensure the environment is protected without unnecessary increases in energy costs or putting American jobs in jeopardy.”

Coal is one of the dirtiest of fuels and a major contributor to global carbon dioxide emissions. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is seeking to bring in regulations to limit emissions but whilst coal continues to be burnt it makes sense to use the ash in a variety of applications such as additives in concrete and fill material for road building. According to Miller, “This legislation [with regard to coal ash] represents the kind of balanced federal-state partnership that is needed for environmental protection. On the other hand, EPA is considering regulations for coal-fueled power plants that will raise energy prices, hurt families, and destroy American jobs.”

I note this juxtaposition of news stories to expose the disconnections as people argue their case within different policy stovepipes. Within the parameters of their own particular discussion they are making logical choices. One group of experts on human health is urging urgent action whilst an industry lobby group is protecting the very activities that need to be brought under control. We have been here before; remember the fight to deny that smoking was a danger to public health as cigarette companies defended their bottom line. There was little doubt who would win in the end but it took far too long, and too many people suffered, before the battle was won.

Airlines Fighting to Survive

2011-10-17T00:37:00.000-07:00

There is a fight going on within the airline industry which is only the first skirmish of a major battle. The conflict is over the EU bringing aviation inside its Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). Research by Thomson Reuters Point Carbon has concluded that it will cost airlines €1.1bn when they join the EU ETS next year rising to €10.4bn by 2020. Chinese and US airlines are particularly concerned at having to buy carbon allowances in order to fly into European destinations. The current outcry, aimed at Europe’s policy makers, is nothing compared with the fight to come as the tax-free status of aviation fuel for international flights comes under the spotlight.

That aviation fuel for international flights is free of tax is not widely advertised. It is neither in the interests of the airlines to point it out, nor in the interest of government to show how impotent they are to change the international legal framework, nor is it likely that airline passengers will vote for higher ticket prices. However society cannot remain indifferent forever to this major anomaly. It can be expected that eventually it will be removed and taxation of aviation fuel introduced to at least match the taxation on other transport fuels.

The measures being brought in under the EU ETS, presented as total consolidated costs, look huge but these figures are only massive because the industry burns such colossal quantities of fuel. The purchase of carbon allowances equates to just a few cents per litre of aviation fuel. The Sunday Times reports that the costs could be recouped by BA with an increase of 50p per ticket. Other estimates put the additional cost to airlines at between €2 and €9 per round-trip flight between European destinations. This is hardly going to make a dent in the affordability of flying, or the profits of the airlines, so it seems odd that resistance to this modest measure is so strong. The answer is to be found in my book Fly and be Damned (orders already being taken on Amazon).

I admire the tenacity of the airlines in defending the status quo. If the fight over the UE ETS dominates the headlines, it deflects attention from the bigger battle over tax-free fuel. To lose the skirmish over the EU ETS, after a bruising fight, might persuade policy makers to back off from further action. On the other hand, policy makers might read my book and see through the policy stalemate to take the action needed to launch aviation into the 21st century.

Sustainable Aviation

2011-10-10T06:09:00.000-07:00

The consultation period for the Department of Transport’s Document, ‘Developing a sustainable framework for UK aviation: Scoping document’ closes on 20th October. Philip Hammond, Secretary of State for Transport writes in the foreword:

‘The Coalition [government] believes that a modern transport infrastructure – which emphatically includes aviation - is essential for a dynamic economy as well as to improve our well-being and quality of life. But we also believe that transport needs to be greener and more sustainable...’

The document is a valiant attempt to find a context within which to develop aviation policy but the dilemma between ensuring ‘a dynamic economy’ and being ‘be greener and more sustainable’ is a major difficulty for the government.

A question that is asked within the consultation is:
‘What do you consider to be the aviation sector’s most important contributions to economic growth and social well-being?’

The answer I provided will not be liked within an industry that is slow to understand the strategic implications:

‘A narrow focus on aviation emphasises its current role in the economy. This question is an invitation to the industry to offer a defence of the status quo. From within the aviation industry, it should be expected that a strong argument emerges emphasising the ‘need’ for continued expansion. This has parallels with the power companies trying to defend their right to sell more power. It is now accepted policy that power companies are expected to encourage reductions in demand and make profits from selling less. Aviation is similar in that the obvious sustainable solution in the near-term is to reconfigure the economy to be less reliant on aviation and for the industry to make a profit from a highly efficient reduced capacity flight network.’

Photo by Jim Donahue

Cycling Cities

2011-10-02T04:49:00.000-07:00

Cycling can be the salvation of our cities but only if the implications are accepted that the infrastructure needs to change and restrictions applied to cars. The first costs money and the second clashes with the rights of car drivers. These are high hurdles to leap to make cycling practical and safe. There is also a third less obvious barrier, which can be just as difficult to negotiate: the rights of pedestrians. People on pavements and sidewalks do not like to be at risk of being knocked over by a cyclist. Let us examine the three hurdles of cost, car drivers and pedestrians.

First, money is tight so expenditure on major reconfiguration of the urban infrastructure will not be found easily. We must wait for the normal cycle of urban renewal so that when a new suburb is added, or an area is redeveloped, plans for bicycle provision are included. In these circumstances it is not a question of spending more but of spending differently to put the focus on people: good public transport, walkways and cycleways.

Second, the rights of car drivers should be moved down the policy agenda. This is a loud and powerful lobby but it is the broad rights of people that should be considered. I am a car driver, and I used to be a cyclist until I was knocked down by car and broke my back. The recovery from my injuries was slow and I do not now like to ride my bike on roads shared with cars. I want my rights as a car driver to be curtailed so that so that my right to travel safely by bicycle is restored. I accept that not all car drivers will agree, but if they could visualize how cities could be better it would help to win their support. Examples of high quality cycle provisions are required to bring the vision into observable reality.

Third, pedestrians have to be persuaded that a city that is friendly to cyclists will include spaces that are shared with cyclists. This is particular true in the short-term waiting for the next major redevelopment when the existing space used by both cars and pedestrians has to be reallocated to include space for bicycles. The paths of pedestrians and cyclist will cross; there will be cross words and the occasional bump but hopefully not the same severe injuries that cyclist suffer from cars.

Of the cities that I know well, Helsinki has the best provision for cyclists. It is possible to ride into the city centre from all directions on routes separate from cars. The Finns have planned carefully, invested well and it is understood amongst the city residents that on many routes cyclists and pedestrians share the same space. There is no feeling that the rights of car drivers or pedestrians have been infringed in making cycling easy and safe.

City planners should think bike and face down opposition from car drivers and pedestrians with confidence that people will like the better cities that result. If in doubt, visit Helsinki.

Secret Plans to Withdraw Greece from the Euro

2011-09-26T01:05:00.000-07:00

It is reported this morning by the BBC that the meeting of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), held over the weekend in Washington, has considered a plan for an orderly fault of Greek debt involving a 50% write down of the debt coordinated with extra funds to bolster European Banks. This looks on the face of it like another attempt to kick the can down the road delaying real action; but this time it could be different.

It is clear that Greece cannot pay its debts so is in effect bankrupt. World bankers do not want to admit this in public but it will have been at the top of the agenda behind the closed doors of meetings amongst the inner circle of IMF officials.

The 50% write-down plan buys time in that it looks possible that Greece could pay its way out of the reduced debt burden, but this does not address the core problem. From the viewpoint of outsiders, the demands for reform in Greece may look reasonable but inside Greece these are politically impossible. Greece needs the freedom to sort out its own affairs in its own way. Greece fiddled the figures to get into the Euro and it cannot now dig itself out of the financial hole except by leaving the Euro – in addition to defaulting on its sovereign debt.

I would hope that the IMF, ECB and central bankers now have a secret plan for Greece to exit the Euro in an orderly fashion – if this is still possible at this late stage in the crisis. De La Rue, the trusted bank note printer will have been given a contract (under great secrecy) to print Greek Drachma and these are now held securely in a warehouse in London waiting to be airlifted at two hour’s notice. The plan will include freezing Greek bank deposits immediately before the public announcement to prevent a run on the banks. There will then be a firestorm through the financial system as the reality takes hold but not as bad as people fear. There might be relief that the inevitable has come to pass and, if the plan has worked out how to prevent Italy following the exit route, it is possible that stability will return.

The secret plan to eject Greece from the Euro needs a good cover story. The discussion of a 50% write down on Greek debt might be a suitable distraction to give the ECB and central bankers the time they need to prepare.

Are the IMF and ECB kicking the can down the road, in desperation or with quite confidence that they have a secret plan for real action? Over the coming months the truth will emerge.

A Curse hanging over French Guiana

2011-09-18T13:37:00.000-07:00

The curse of fossil fuel is hanging over French Guiana. Tullow Oil, the London-based exploration company, has struck oil with its first well sunk in a new exploration block offshore. Commentators speculate that this could be the biggest new oil discovery of the year.

This small French ex-penal colony has a population of 200,000 and relies on income from an incongruous mix of its forestry industry and launching communication satellites for the European Space Agency. Agriculture is mainly along the coastal area including rice and manioc and further inland a small amount of marijuana mainly for local consumption. This beacon of stability in South America is about to be undermined in anticipation of the windfall profits from becoming an oil-exporting nation.

I lived in another outpost of Central America, Belize, for 6 months in the 1980s near a town called Punta Gorda. On first sight these were poor people but after a few months you began to realise that these were happy people with a wealth of natural resources, fruit from the jungle and fish from the sea. A Western eye could be fooled into believing that they need development but it is too hasty to jump to this conclusion.

A number of outsiders had moved into this part of Southern Belize to ‘get away from it all’. What they were actually about they were reluctant to say but it was a reasonable assumption that their business was growing marijuana for export to markets further north. In a sleepy town with ample remote jungle and good coastal access to export the drug, this was an ideal location. At the same time there was the first murder in living memory in this little town. The influx of money was starting to corrupt and undermine a way of life.

Oil production and growing marijuana are not the same; one is legal the other is not. Where they are the same is that they both bring monetary wealth, and with wealth comes the prospect of greed and corruption.

The people of French Guiana may find that oil is not the salvation it appears to be as the black gold starts to flow ashore and the discussions over money gather pace. Norway has shown how oil wealth can be used to improve the life of its people and secure long-term security. The Middle East has shown how oil wealth can corrupt and undermine society. French Guiana needs, as a matter of priority, good governance and long-term sustainable plans to ensure that the curse of oil does not strike down this South American colony.

Sustainable Development in the UK

2011-09-11T01:02:00.000-07:00

The UK government is in trouble for using the term ‘sustainable development’ in the Draft National Planning Policy Framework in order to justify the following statement:

‘... a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan making and decision taking. Local planning authorities should plan positively for new development, and approve all individual proposals wherever possible.’

The Bruntland Commission (1987) defined the term ‘sustainable development’ in the context of underdeveloped countries. Back in 1987 the concern was how to provide development without the associated path of destruction that the developed countries followed. There was an underlying assumption that there would be development so the need was ways to make it sustainable. This argument does not apply to highly developed countries like the UK.

The draft policy includes three threads:
planning for prosperity (an economic role)
planning for people (a social role)
planning for places (an environmental role)

This is the order of precedence used in the report and the bold highlighting has not been added by me; it has been used by the author to emphasise the guidance to local authorities and planning officials that:

‘... significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth through the planning system.’

This is a very clear example of the business as usual approach which I analysed in my book Victim of Success: Civilisation at Risk. In Chapter 13 (a coincidence of number choice) I wrote about ‘The Three-way Balancing Act’ between people profit and planet. I wrote:

‘I do not argue that we soften our focus on economics. Economic tools are quantifiable and measurable and the outcome of increased wealth is a tangible improvement. The problem is that a narrow focus on economics does not lead to sustainable outcomes. We need to bring the same level of rigour to the way we deal with social outcomes and protection of the environment.’

The UK government is leading the UK down the path that I described in the early chapters of Victim of Success on which we knowingly and stupidly continue down the path to destruction. There is no need; there is a better way; UK planning rules do need changing but the foundation assumptions of this draft (daft) policy is wrong.

Is Sustainable Development an Oxymoron?

2011-09-04T16:30:00.000-07:00

It was not intended that ‘Sustainable Development’ would be an oxymoron when it was defined by
the Bruntland Commission in 1987 as ‘development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’. In the context of examining how to encourage the development of poorer countries, it was argued that this should be according to the paradigm of sustainability. Making the assumption that underdeveloped countries will need to develop was a reasonable assumption at the time. Over recent years, the term ‘sustainable development’ has been used (and misused) as a term to justify further development in the belief that sustainable development must be good.

The deeper understanding of sustainability that is slowly emerging recognises that the assumption that there must be continual development (meaning expanding the industrial and built environment) is the wrong foundation on which to build policy. The term ‘sustainable’ is now, in many cases, a contradiction when used in conjunction with ‘development’.

Sustainability is about the effective management of resources now and for future generations. That means retaining a functioning eco-system; which means preserving bio diversity; which means keeping a sufficient proportion of land for nature. Development that slowly encroaches on the bank of natural land has to be constrained before lasting damage is done. ‘Sustainable development’ now fits the definition of an oxymoron: a phrase in which two words of contradictory meaning are used together for special effect; examples from the dictionary are 'wise fool' and 'legal murder'. To these we can add ‘sustainable development’.

Aquafuel

2011-08-29T15:13:00.000-07:00

"glycerine is... possibly the best fuel in the world. It isn’t toxic; it is water soluble; and it’s nearly impossible to ignite glycerine under normal conditions."

This is the claim made by Paul Day founder and Chief Executive of UK company Aquafuel. His company has succeeded in making a diesel engine run on glycerine (a bi product of biodiesel production) with much lower toxic emissions than an engine running on standard diesel fuel. On the face of it this is a useful process to utilise a product for which is there is little current demand. According to The Chemical Engineer magazine for every tonne of biodiesel produced, 100-110 kg of glycerine is obtained as a side product. The world supply of glycerine in 2008 was 3.2m t and the demand just 0.9m t.

It seems odd that anyone would try and run an engine on glycerine but this mad punt seems to have hit the jackpot. Where this story gets really interesting is if you decide that glycerine is better than bio diesel and, rather than try to produce biodiesel, focus on production of glycerine. It turns out that there is a strain of algae called dunaliella salina which grows in salt water and fills its body with glycerine to counteract the osmotic pressure of the salt. At high salt concentrations the amount of glycerine in the algae can be as high as 80%. Harvest the algae, extract the glycerine and there is the fuel of the future.

The algae can grow in the evaporation ponds used by the salt-making industry and there is no conflict with food production or land use. Aquafuel believes that places like Namibia could support a large industry with all the production powered by CHP units running on the glycerine and taken to market on ships powered by glycerine. This would appear to be a clean and sustainable fuel source.

I will be watching Aquafuel with interest over the years ahead and hope that governments drive up the taxes on fossil fuels to ensure that businesses such as Aquafuel are commercially viable.

The Politics of Denial

2011-08-21T13:56:00.000-07:00

According to a US report from the Obama Administration:

‘A family that purchases a new vehicle in 2025 will save $8,200 in fuel costs compared with a similar vehicle in 2010.’

The report titled, White House Driving Efficiency: Cutting Costs for Families at the Pump and Slashing Dependence on Oil outlines the Administration’s national vehicle program, increasing fuel economy to 54.5 miles per gallon for cars and light-duty trucks by Model Year 2025. For the United States this is a big improvement, but it should be seen in context. These are figures that can be achieved now in 2011 with current technology, if there is a will. The challenge is two-fold; persuading the car makers to adjust the range of the models they offer and the willingness of drivers to sign up for the more efficient models.

The report is attempting to sell the changes using the argument that it will cost less. For an immediate change in standards, effective this year, that might be so, but not in the timescale of 2025. Oil prices are set to climb; families should be buying more efficient cars to avoid the big price rises to come. It is disingenuous to spin these improved standards as savings when in reality fuel bills will be considerable higher in 2025. Is it the American drivers who are so dumb that they cannot be trusted with the facts? Or, is it that US politicians have a very low opinion of their electorate? Either way it is a sign that US political wrangling is divorced from reality.

The Whitehouse statement is an attempt at spinning necessary change as a denial that fundamental change is needed, implying that US drivers can carry on as before ― and will actually save money. In such a political climate, progress is made at a snail’s pace.

I recently sold my 12-year old Audi estate which would consistently deliver 55 miles to each gallon. Admittedly this refers to UK galloon so does not meet the US standards for 2025 but as an old European banger it gets close.

There is much to admire about the United States but it seems at the moment to be stuck on a political rut of denial, believing that the US high consumption can go on indefinitely with only marginal changes.

The 2025 vehicle efficiency standards are to be welcomed but are too little, too late.

My Nissan Leaf

2011-08-07T14:30:00.001-07:00

My electric car is a Nissan Leaf, one of about 400 sold in Britain since its launch earlier this year. I put my name down when Nissan first started to register expressions of interest and mine was one of the first to be delivered. We have driven about 2,500 trouble-free miles so far. It is a reliable, very quiet and I have to say rather dull family car. It is perfect for most of regular transport; my wife uses it for her commute (about 17 miles each way); I use it for my journey when I teach at Henley Business School (round trip of 32 miles). I take my children to their various activities, if we need to shop outside the village or off to see grandma in Oxford (55 mile round trip). These are all well within the range even with a very heavy right foot – the car has a respectable turn of speed and good acceleration, but if you use it do not expect to get anywhere near the claimed range of 100 miles. Flat out it will pull 90 mph and manage one motorway junction and back before the battery gives out. It is madness to compare an electric car with a conventional car (listen up Jeremy Clarkson). An electric car fits the niche of local transportation rather well; it is not designed for, and is not suitable for, long journeys.

We plan to keep the battery in tiptop shape so we seldom charge it beyond 80% using cheap night-time electricity ―unless we know we have a long journey coming up ― and do not use rapid charge. It is simpler and takes less time to plug it in each night than filling with petrol once a week. Our credit card bills are noticeable less.

Top Gear gave the car the sort of treatment you would expect; they ensured that the story had all the interesting angles, silent running of course and cheap to operate but also stranded after running out of charge. You have to be quite an idiot to get caught like this but then the presenters on the programme like to fit this description. It makes an entertaining story and good TV but does not provide a useful analysis – Top Gear is high octane entertainment not a consumer affairs programme.

My electric car fits my need perfectly. Whether the car is green or not is a different question. Using the current electricity grid, it is not a very green option but it is worth introducing the technology concurrently with driving forward decarbonising the electric supply. The greenest solution is of course to alter city infrastructure and support lifestyles that do not need the car. I suspect that by the time the government grant programme (£43 million at £5,000 a time to the first 8,600 electric cars bought) runs out in March next year the government will be able to pocket a healthy surplus. The government should thank Top Gear for obscuring the benefits of electric cars and ensuring that the grants are not taken up in full.

Bristol Green Capital

2011-07-31T13:37:00.000-07:00

More than 50% of the world’s population live in cities; making cities sustainable is therefore an imperative in building a sustainable society. Cities are complex in terms of both infrastructure and the range of social interactions that makes the city operate. It is possible to make cities work like living organisms; capturing renewal energy, fully recycling waste and providing a vibrant, clean and enjoyable place to live. They can also appear like cancerous growth growing into mega metropolises from which the natural world is excluded.

I have just spent a very pleasant weekend in Bristol at the Bristol Harbour Festival, a celebration of culture and leisure. Throughout the city there were outdoor events ranging from concerts and circus performances to street buskers and market stalls. The theme was fun, enjoyment and entertainment; the sun shone and everybody seemed to have a good time. The hustle and bustle of people in close proximity brings joy and fulfilment but if resources are insufficient this can switch to conflict and strive. It is vital that we make our cities sustainable to reap the pleasures of communal living on show at the festival.

The City Council’s intention is to become a green city was evidenced by numerous recycling containers and policemen on bicycles. Bristol came top of the Forum for the Future’s index of UK Sustainable Cities in 2008 but has since slipped to 4th behind Newcastle, Leicester and Brighton. This competition between city leaders, to be the greenest city, should engage a virtuous cycle as each city tries hard to outdo the other.

Green aspirations are not the same as delivering green solutions. Our hotel was a prime example of how to use excess energy to little good effect; we slept very badly until we opened the window, turned off the air conditioning and let the night air waft through the room. The recycling in evidence was collecting and sorting piles of trash with little evidence of true recycling. Bristol is doing well on the relative scale presented in the Sustainable Cities Index but if there was an absolute scale from 1 to 10 ― with 1 being unsustainable and 10 being fully sustainable― Bristol would score a 1.1.

To make our cities free from fossil-fuel dependency and resources delivered through long supply chains will be a tough challenge. Bristol should be praised for taking the first step but it must be seen as a small first step on a long journey.

Note:
The Sustainable Cities Index tracks progress on sustainability in Britain’s 20 largest cities, ranking them across three broad baskets: environmental performance; quality of life; and future-proofing – how well they are addressing issues such as climate change, recycling and biodiversity.

De-risking the corporation

2011-07-25T07:03:00.000-07:00

It is appropriate to write about risks to the world economy and the problems of the Euro zone in a blog about sustainability, not only because these are important issues but because there are close parallels between the Euro crisis and the challenge of sustainability. European politicians are taking decisions that will take them through the next three months or the next year. There is little time for the deep thinking required when the focus is on the immediate containment of the crisis. Business leaders are subject to the same pressure to deliver this quarter’s, or this year’s results. Deep thinking over the longer term has to wait until the company is doing well and short-term profitability is secured.

The operations of many businesses are unsustainable, dependent on long supply chains and relying on fossil fuels, directly and indirectly through the electricity supply. The action of many executives is to focus on the medium-term, hedging fuel costs and seeking insurance for supply chain disruption. The real solution is to think longer term, remove fossil fuel from operations and shorten supply chains to bring them under closer control. This is not primarily a CSR activity, or action designed in response to climate change – although such reasons can be cited to burnish the reputation of the corporation – these are strategic choices to de-risk operations and lay the foundations for long-term profitability.

Into Africa

2011-07-18T07:33:00.000-07:00

David Cameron arrived into Africa today on the 93rd birthday of Nelson Mandela, that giant amongst world leaders.

The message being preached by David Cameron is that trade is the way for Africa to fix its problems. He brings with him a 25-strong delegation that includes business leaders and the trade minister lord Green. Perhaps David Cameron is right; perhaps trade is the solution to the deeply entrenched difficulties that the continent faces. However, there is a higher-level policy under which Africa will find its salvation, ‘sustainability.’ Trade can play its part, of course, but only within the context of sustainability. I enjoyed greatly my time working in Africa and wrote in the book Green Outcomes in the Real World:

‘In discussion with a colleague, the topic of Africa arose. We had both spent time on the continent and shared a high regard for the people of Africa and would like to support measures that addressed some of the problems. I attempted to steer the dialogue towards my ideas about sustainability as the way to support improvement in people’s lives. I quickly ran into a problem. My colleague was an advocate of neo-liberalism and working on deep-rooted assumptions about the benefits of globalization. His concept of equity was based on the idea that everyone should have the opportunity to live a lifestyle that matched his own, on the implicit assumption that every society should be helped to follow the development path of the West, and that free trade, open markets and free flows of capital were the way to achieve this.’

In the next paragraph, I went on to write, in the context of sustainability:

‘The world needs other concepts to replace the old concept of globalization but, until we accept that economic globalization is no longer the appropriate basis for human development, it is hard to build new structures of thought. We are forever trying to add refinements to an edifice that is starting to show cracks, when the action required is to underpin our thinking with new foundations.’

Africa is at a crucial stage in its development, with a number of countries, particularly China, looking at this resource-rich continent with a glint in their eye. Today, David Cameron should be careful to ensure that the needs of Africa are uppermost in his mind in respect for the legacy of Nelson Mandela who remains an icon of unselfish principled leadership.

Energy prices set to soar

2011-07-10T14:04:00.000-07:00

The UK government is championing policy that means – according to the Sunday Times – that household energy bills are ‘set to double’. This makes a good headline, but relies on the assumption that household consumption remains steady as the price of energy doubles. The intention of course is to cut consumption; more expensive energy makes people careful with what they use. As the cost of energy rises, we should be looking for solutions that hold household bills in check through greater efficiency and frugal behaviour recognising that energy is a valuable and limited resource.

All professionals involved with buildings, infrastructure and industrial processes need a compelling reason to be frugal with energy. Future energy bills will be affordable, not through holding prices down but through using less energy. The logic is inescapable but politics is not a rational process. When the energy market pushes prices higher, it is accepted as beyond the politician’s control. When politicians set policy that will drive energy prices higher, politicians get the blame.

The announcement of an overhaul of energy policy expected this week comes hard on the heels of energy price rises. The rational reaction is to support tough policy because the recent increase in the cost of energy is an indicator of massive price hikes to come as energy supplies are stretched. Of course we need to move quickly to reduce consumption; that means policy to support investment; first, in energy efficiency (the biggest win), second, in generating low-carbon energy. The policy has to be to push energy prices higher; it is disingenuous for observers to argue otherwise.

Opposing tough energy policy is like lemmings opposing calls to slow down as the mass migration flocks towards the cliff edge. We are enjoying cheap energy; it makes no sense to keep it cheap and ignore the fact that the balance of supply and demand will drop off a cliff unless we take action soon.

The government should give people credit for having more intelligence than a pack of lemmings and ignore reports in the press to hold back on high energy prices. The rational silent majority expect higher energy prices; there will be complaints but people know this is the future. Let us have clarity; high energy prices are just around the corner; all decisions must be based on this unambiguous foundation to policy.

Saving Civilization

2011-07-04T04:10:00.000-07:00

‘If we dare not – or cannot – change society we will become victim of our own success.’

Victim of Success: Civilization at Risk ISBN 9780955736919

The Space Shuttle Atlantis will be displayed at the Kennedy Space Centre in Florida, but first it will take off on Friday 8th July for one last mission. If the Economist is right in its recent editorial, this will be ‘the end of the Space Age.’

The history of manned space flight began in 1961 when Yuri Gagarin completed an orbit of the Earth in the Vostok spacecraft and reached a pinnacle in 1969 when Neil Armstrong stepped onto the moon. The vision was that this was to be the start of humankind’s expansion to other worlds and other solar systems. The aim of the Space Shuttle programme was to make space travel routine, reliable, safe and cheap, with one shuttle flight a week at a cost of less than $2,000 dollars per Kg. In the end, the Shuttle flew once every three months at a cost of over $50,000 per kilogram and two out of six shuttles crashed killing the entire crew.

I hope Atlantis comes safely home to take up its place as a museum exhibit but I hope also that this does not signal the end of human aspirations to expand beyond the confines of Earth and establish colonies on other planets.

The attraction of continuing to explore space has lessened, but the imperative to do so has increased dramatically. Robot missions have explored the planets in our solar system and found inhospitable worlds where we could only eke out an existence in sealed domes. We now understand that our beautiful world is unique and although in the long future we may find another planet in orbit around a different star it will not have the abundant natural provisions of planet Earth. The prospect of building a new life far away has lost its appeal but the imperative to find another planet is strong because of our Lemming-like dash to exploit the Earth’s resources without regard to the state of the world for future generations.

It is time for real change.

Underwater Land Tenure

2011-06-28T11:59:00.001-07:00

Britain used to be joined to the European land mass by a land bridge until about 8,500 years ago when melting glaciers raised sea levels and formed the English channel. It is normal that over geological time the geomorphology alters, fortunately ever so slowly so that the changes from one generation to another are barely noticeable – or that is how it was. Human activity is now driving change faster than nature acting alone.

Britain’s southern coast is slowly dropping into the sea. If you buy a house with a spectacular sea view built on the cliff top there is a risk that it will collapse into the sea. This is not caused by human activity and although it can be delayed it cannot be stopped by human protection measures; this is the natural process of change at work. A house built further back from the cliff edge may not have such good views but the owner can be confident of passing a house with value and a future onto their children and grandchildren. There is a balance to be struck between enjoying the best view in the owner’s lifetime and being able to preserve the family’s inheritance.

The situation for small island states is altogether more serious and in this case humankind is culpable. The Maldives and other tropical atolls are typically no more than a metre above sea level. Sea levels have risen by about 20cm over the past century; scientists predict this trend to continue, and to accelerate, as emissions of green-house gases continue to rise unabated. Under international law, an inhabited island can claim territorial rights but this does not extend to small rocks - or to an island completely submerged by the sea.

The owner of a house on the edge of England’s south coast has traded a beautiful outlook now for a collapse that they can hope will be beyond their lifetime. The industrialised nations are making a similar trade, burning fossil fuel in the knowledge that many small island states will cease to exist as a consequence. In the former case, the house owner is playing with the inheritance of their own children. In the latter case, rich nations are destroying the inheritance of the smallest nations on the planet. Compensation is likely to be paid but how do you value the loss of, not just a house, but a location to call home and a state that ceases to exist.

Climate Change as an Opportunity

2011-06-17T07:32:00.000-07:00

Two observations have grabbed my attention over the last 24 hours to lift climate change out of the doom-and-gloom locker and into the in-tray for bold action to make the transition to a low-carbon society.

First, Sir Nicholas Stern, the economist who led the UK study that showed that it would be cheaper to act sooner rather than later to counter climate change, gave a lecture in Dorchester last night. He started by laying down the foundations slowly, carefully and eloquently, with a distinct lack of histrionics. The science is rock solid; climate change is serious; business-as-usual will lead to catastrophic disaster.

Nicholas Stern went on to explain an optimistic scenario of coordinated action to address both CO2 emissions and poverty. In his view you cannot do one without the other. The message was clear that action is required now; further delay would make the transformation more difficult and keep society on the road to disaster.

As is often the case, it was the comments at question time where the really interesting information came out. He was asked about how people could be persuaded to accept a hair-shirt solution of reductions in consumption and restraints on lifestyle. In his reply, he explained that the financial down-turn of 2008 led to a small reduction in CO2 emissions, but this was insignificant in relation to the scale of what is required. His conclusion is that reducing growth and reducing economic activity is clearly not the solution. The solution is a transformation in the infrastructure of society which he called the ‘Energy Industrial Revolution’.

Meanwhile, this afternoon, I listened to a Press Conference on the closing day of the UN Climate Change Conference in Bonn. My attention was drawn to comments made by Jϋgen Lefevre representing the European Union. He explained that climate change had started as an environmental issue. Now, Europe is starting to look on climate change as an opportunity to help lift Europe out of the financial crisis. The agenda is opening out to a broader agenda of economic development.

Both Sir Nicholas Stern and Jϋgen Lefevre are pointing towards aspects of the broader agenda that I termed back in 2007 the ‘Sustainable Revolution;’ of which the Energy Industrial Revolution will be a part. The Sustainable Revolution will bring economic activity and jobs. Building a low-carbon society improves quality of life and reinforces energy security. The environmental imperative to act is strong, but the outcome is good for the economy and good for society.

What a shame that this carefully explained message from the experts is drowned out by misinformation from a few vocal people who want to resist change, hold back progress and grab the headlines.

Hope and Reality

2011-06-10T10:17:00.000-07:00

Last week, World Environment Day came and went with hardly a murmur in the world press. The next day, Monday 6th June, delegates gathered in Bonn for the UN Climate Change Conference. Again, it hardly earned a mention; the world is pre-occupied with a whole range of problems ranging from Libya and Syria to the troubles of the Euro zone.

In the Middle East, long established dictators have reached beyond the ‘normal’ tools of repression to treat their own population with almost unimaginable cruelty. There is no going back for the old guard; if they lose control they will surely suffer retribution. They have no choice but to ratchet up the violence until even their own inner circle decide enough is enough. There is hope that turmoil in the Middle East will lead to an Arab Spring as democracy and respect for human rights sweep through the region. Hope and reality are not the same.

In the Euro zone, the levels of sovereign debt racked up by the Southern European members of the Euro zone are so great that default (referred to by the softer term ‘restructuring’) is inevitable. The Euro zone is desperately talking up the prospects that its members will muddle through somehow. These hopes give a warm feeling that the problems are solvable, but this denial of reality is not helpful to finding real solutions. Real solutions require clear vision and tough choices. Hope and reality are not the same.

The climate meeting in Bonn is subject to the same collective delusion that permeates world affairs. It is hoped that through the copious quantities of documents and years of talks that solutions can be found to bring climate change under control, without making substantive changes to the way we live and the way the world economy operates. It is hoped that that a successor agreement to the Kyoto Protocol (which runs out in 2012) will tie the world into a plan that will prevent dangerous climate change. Hope and reality are not the same.

Real solutions require clear vision and tough choices. World leaders must take off their blinkers and get to grips with the real choices about the future of world society and the planet.

World Environment Day

2011-06-06T01:39:00.000-07:00

World Environment Day (WED) has been held each year on 5th June since 1973 with the aim expressed by the UNEP to, ‘stimulate worldwide awareness of the environment and encourage political attention and action.’ The theme this year is, ‘Forests: Nature at Your Service.’

A selection of reports from around the world starting with this year’s host country, India:

The Times of India
‘Bollywood actors Priyanka Chopra and Rahul Bose are to compete on the World Environment Day to motivate people to do their bit to save the mother earth. The Bollywood stars are facing off in a new video for the ultimate Environment Day Challenge - where they are calling individuals, groups, families and schools, even entire communities - to post details of their green activities online. "And for Priyanka and Rahul, this is where the battle lines get drawn. When registering a green activity on the site, people will have the opportunity to pledge their activity to either one celebrity or the other," said a statement issued by UN here.’

The Daily Times, Pakistan
LAHORE: The World Environment Day was observed in the city on Sunday with little enthusiasm, and with majority of the citizens appearing unaware about the day’s importance.

The Sunday Times, UK
I read the main section of today’s paper cover to cover and glanced through all the supplements. I cannot be certain that hiding somewhere there was a mention of world environment day but there was nothing I could spot. Have we lost interest?

Around the world there are examples of people taking action:

Costa Rica: A major success story in reforestation (having increased its forest cover from 22 percent in 1995 to 51 percent by 2010), Costa Rica is hosting participants from 15 neighbouring countries for a training course on sustainable forest management.

Nepal: UNEP is supporting a clean-up expedition to remove an estimated 9 tons of litter in and around Mount Everest. Enlisting some 60 climber volunteers, the long-term aim of the initiative is to develop more sustainable waste management facilities and recycling plants in the region.

Congo, Brazzaville: A major international summit on tropical forest basins held from 31 May to 6 June focussing on the sustainable management of forest ecosystems in the Amazon, Congo and Mekong Borneo basins.

I am left to wonder whether this will be enough. Have most people have become inured to the environmental degradation going on around them such that few people even know that 5th June is World Environment Day.

Electric Cars on Motorways

2011-06-01T00:02:00.000-07:00

Electric cars are only good as city cars – right?

Small, low speed and short range are the type of statistics that come to mind but this image is changing. The electric car that I drove for 6 months, the prototype BMW E-Mini, was fast, cornered well and looked cool. It only had two seats (the batteries filled the space occupied by the rear seats) but for a sporty short range car it was good. It also performed well on the motorway between the two junctions of the M4 close to home; ‘a friend told me’ that with the foot to the floor and it would reach 90mph before the speed limiter kicked in. At the same time the battery indicator moved very quickly moved into the red; it was not a car for long range fast motorway driving!

For an even better driving experience, there is the Tesla, a fast sports car. The Tesla is beyond the pocket of most people, so not many will be sold, but the main impact on the industry is to change the image of the electric car. The fundamental problem of limited range remains but for the Tesla this is a whopping (by electric car standards) range of over 200 miles.

Does range limitation condemn the electric car to the role of local run-around? It works as a second car for two-car households and for the playboy wanting to look green and cool driving from the harbour where his yacht is anchored to a local restaurant but long journey’s are out. This may be about to change.

My favourite motorway services on the M6 is the family owned Tebay, the perfect place to stop on the route to Scotland. The management at Tebay have recently fitted a fast charging point for Tesla cars. This will allow Tesla drivers to stop as part of a grand tour provided the driver includes a long lunch, as a complete fill of the battery (even with the 70 Amp fast-charge point) takes three hours.

For those fortunate few that drive a Tesla, it would be wise not to plan a social event at Tebay services for fellow electric car enthusiasts; it would have to be a very long lunch indeed if everyone needed to queue for their turn at the changing point!

I drive an electric car; they are the future of local road transport but people are slow to understand that they are different. My blog entry for 7th March says it all...

The myth of the ethical consumer

2011-05-23T00:17:00.000-07:00

Recent research led by Timothy Devinney, professor of strategy at the University of Technology, Sydney has found that most people will not sacrifice product function for ethics. The research team concluded that proponents of ethical consumerism want to believe that people make socially oriented choices that override a general appraisal of product features and functionality but that this is a delusion. This looks to me like common sense, but it is useful to have hard research to back up my gut feeling.

The ethical consumer is an elusive person. I pay a premium in my local shop for eco cleaning products as I want the shop to stay in business; it is a short walk from my front door and over the long-term I will save by spending less on transportation, but the product has to work well and the premium has to be small. Even though I am a passionate advocate for sustainability I will not be persuaded to buy a sub standard product just because it claims to be green.

Green and ethical factors will become increasingly important to close sale transactions ranging from major corporate contracts to the sale of individual items. Such factors will be the deal clincher but green will not override the prime metrics of value-for-money and fit-for-purpose. First-class green products will dominate the market place in the future; second-class products that are green will sink without trace.

Companies should not plan to rely on ethical consumerism to underpin the business. Customers want quality and value; sustainable business is about delivering the required quality at a competitive price using sustainable processes. The payback comes from being ahead of the next ratchet up of government regulation and gaining some protection from the next hike in the price of energy and other resource inputs. There are numerous reasons to put sustainability at the core of business strategy but being able to sell to ethical consumers is very low down on the list of priorities.

The Government Litmus Test

2011-05-16T01:38:00.000-07:00

At today’s cabinet meeting, the UK government has an important decision to make over the carbon budget for the period 2013-2023. Which way this decision goes has significance beyond the particular issue; it will set the tone for the remaining term of the coalition government and either reinforce David Cameron’s intention expressed a year ago ‘to be the greenest government ever’ or show that the vision has been killed by realpolitik.

The Committee on Climate Change (CCC), the independent body of experts to advise the UK Government on setting carbon budgets, has put forward its recommendations. Chris Huhne, the Energy and Climate Change Secretary want the recommendations adopted. Vince Cable, the Business Secretary is opposed; worried at the impact on competiveness for UK industry if the UK adopted more ambitious targets than the rest of Europe.

The discussion today in 10 Downing Street is between the policy required to make progress towards a low-carbon Britain and protecting the current economy. This dilemma is right at the heart of sustainability. In a complex modern economy everything connects, every action has a consequence. Looking too closely at consequences leads to stalemate and inaction. There is always a good reason why something cannot be done.

The differences between the society we live in today and a sustainable society are huge. It is not just the need to change energy systems, to replace conventional power stations with renewable sources; it is also about demand reduction leading to different ways to design our cities and different ways to live. This is not a reversion to the past but a leap forward to a new age of prosperity measured by quality of life in place of crude economic measures.

The changes are revolutionary, and to get there requires a revolution, the Sustainable Revolution. Governments need to adhere to principle and face down the doubters and representatives of special interest groups. To agree a tight carbon budget at the meeting today, in line with the proposals from the CCC, mean that the revolution has a chance to proceed. Significant watering down or back-peddling will put progress on hold and mean that the difficulty and disruption in the long-term will be greater than necessary. The sooner we embrace the revolution the less disrupting it will be; delay because of the perceived difficulties makes acceptable solutions much harder to find.

This is the Litmus test for this government’s green credentials.

Where is the ethical consumer?

2011-05-09T00:25:00.001-07:00

A lot of hype surrounds the opportunities to supply ethical consumers, but who are they, and how big is this new customer segment? Ethical or green consumers are people who search out green, low-carbon, fair-trade and sustainable products. Such customers read the labels carefully to understand the product, and how it has been produced, and select the product with the greenest and most ethical credentials. There is a confusing array of logos to help them make their choice, spanning the range from the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) to the Fair Trade mark and a variety of recycling symbols. Some of these are backed up by robust certification; others can be displayed with little independent evaluation. The assumption is that a growing number of people use such labelling to change their buying behaviour.

I take a close interest in the labelling of products because it is a fascinating and evolving area and I have a very critical eye. When I spot a product with a lot of unnecessary packaging and a prominent recycling symbol, I am not impressed. When the symbol has written beside it the words, ‘packaging not currently recyclable,’ I am even less enamoured. Do the manufacturers think that my subconscious will spot the recycling symbol without reading the words; or that I will warm to the knowledge that the company is aware that it needs to improve but so far has done little to correct its operations?

I am the green marketeer’s least favourite customer. When I spot a green-spin marketing campaign my antennae are searching for substance. Where the company has made real progress and implemented sustainable change, I am suitably impressed and likely to pay a small premium. Where I sniff the aroma of ‘greenwash’, I take delight in digging deeper if there is hypocrisy to expose.

As the cohort of people who understand the sustainability agenda grows, companies that don’t get it will inflict deep self-inflicted wounds. The slick glossy advert using pictures of beautiful nature in a superficial context will come back to haunt old-school marketing executives. Some of the advertising campaigns that have used a green theme in recent years will have ridicule heaped upon them as real sustainability moves into the mainstream.

Water - Clear Gold

2011-05-02T02:48:00.000-07:00

Water when you have copious quantities is worthless; if you don’t have any it is more valuable than gold.

Water is available in abundance on our planet and we assume that it will always be available when and where we need it. People who live in desert regions know this not to be so. On a journey from one oasis to another you have to carry enough to make the journey, trusting and hoping that the water at the next oasis is clean and potable. Living in the wet and winding isles of Britain, water has never been much of a concern. When the reservoirs run low in a long hot summer hosepipe bans are introduced to conserve supplies, but we can be confident that the water will continue to flow when we turn on the tap.

After the hottest and driest April since records began we have been basking in delightful warm weather. The farmers are not pleased at this critical stage in the development of their crops. We hope and assume that the weather will break and the dry soil brought back to life but what if our weather patterns are changing? It is highly unlikely that Britain, an island surrounded by water would become a desert but we should be aware that in places where rainfall is less certain, there is a real danger that small changes in climate lead to drought and the formation of deserts. If is possible that the UK crops could fail we would be worried; if the crops failed two years in a row we would be very worried; in the third year of no rain we would be feeling very vulnerable indeed. These are the thought we must entertain if we are to have empathy for people living in vulnerable regions.

Our local water company, Thames Water is making preparations. Last year the Beckton desalination plant was commission to make water from the Thames estuary and process it into potable water. This is the technology more normally associated with desert regions and uses energy to desalinate the water. Climate change lead to less rainfall, leads to more desalination plants using more energy leading to more carbon dioxide emissions, leading to further pressure on the climate. Am I the only person to query whether we should break this self reinforcing cycle?

There is one way to break this particular cycle; nearby there is the Beckton sewage works. It would use much less energy to take the water coming out of the sewage works and process that back into the system as potable water. Clear gold from sewage – why not?

‘Black Gold’ to ‘Dirty Oil’

2011-04-22T05:45:00.000-07:00

Whilst the world economy is critically dependent on oil, the sticky black liquid is referred to as ‘Black Gold’ and a passport to wealth and security for any country fortunate enough to be blessed with large easy-to-extract reserves. For Norway this has certainly been the case; the country has been prudent with its oil revenue and built up huge reserves which should underpin the country’s finances well beyond the end of oil. For the Middle East, oil is beginning to look like a curse, allowing autocratic (and sometimes despotic) rulers to remain in control. Oil revenue allows them to buy off opposition and purchase weapons to enforce their rule. In addition, the economic imbalances of oil leave many exporting countries ill-prepared to pay their way in the world beyond the era of oil.

When the world makes the transition away from oil (inevitable, only the timing is uncertain) the image of oil will shift from ‘Black Gold’ to ‘Dirty Oil’ – the term already in use by environmentalists for the oil extracted from the tar sands of Canada. This image makeover is small but important, as it will signal real commitment to reducing oil dependency. Instead of countries outbidding each other to purchase black gold they will compete to lead in the technologies that make dirty oil unnecessary.

It is unlikely that the world will learn quickly to live without conventional oil whilst there are supplies that are easy to extract. As the oil price rises, making unconventional oil commercially viable, the energy intensive extraction techniques and environmental damage will be highlighted. A well head in the desert is not a particularly negative image; it is associated with power and wealth. The large expanse of wasteland from oil sand extraction, where once there was virgin forest, is a powerful negative image of dirty oil.

The shift in perception from ‘black gold’ to ‘dirty oil’ is just terminology but in a world dominated by ubiquitous media, images are a very powerful force (as advertisers know well). There is no alternative in the short-term to reliance on oil but the path to a sustainable future becomes much clearer and more politically acceptable when the image in people’s minds of ‘black gold’ is replaced by ‘dirty oil’.

Prosperity without Growth

2011-04-11T03:49:00.000-07:00

I have been off my blog for a couple of weeks whilst I hit a deadline to finish the manuscript of my next book. That is now with the publisher so I have time to withdraw from my shell and engage with the outside world again, spend time with the family and read what others are writing.

The paperback version of Tim Jackson’s book, Prosperity without Growth: Economics for a Finite Planet landed on my doorstep last week for me to review. This is well timed and I am looking forward to reading again Tim’s ideas. His original report for the SDC (under a similar title) raised a number of important questions about the way we run the economy and the priorities that are set. These are very important questions that need to be debated to discuss how the management of society could be different.

The first stage is to question what we have. Anyone who believes that the economic system is perfect has been living on another planet for the last few years. For those who believe that it is the best system available in an imperfect world, this is a valid viewpoint but at best lacks ambition and at worst is plain wrong.

The rescue of the economy following the financial crisis has been a process of papering over the cracks and restoring confidence. If an estate agent was selling the world economy, the financial edifice would look impressive, large and gleaming with a new coat of paint but buyers should take care to examine the foundations and check what lies behind the new wallpaper. A qualified surveyor would need to be employed to do a full structural survey, who may report that the house appears to be in good order but without access to the basement or the authority to peel back the wallpaper there is no way of being sure. When I talk with economists I get a range of views. I met one in Helsinki who believed that the crisis was now behind and the world economy safe. If you have a role in selling the house, then nothing is wrong, but if you an expert impartial observer you would be very wary of claiming that the crisis is past.

Prosperity without Growth raises important questions; we need to peel back the confidence building statements of central bankers and mainstream economists to look for the answers to how the economy can support a sustainable society.

Electric Cars –To Buy or not to Buy

2011-03-28T01:09:00.000-07:00

To buy, or not to buy: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The fumes and noise of conventional cars,
Or to take arms against our carbon troubles,
And buy an electric car.

Buying an electric car is a very small step to a greener lifestyle. The contribution to carbon reduction is minimal (until the electricity supply is decarbonised) but change has to start somewhere. The future will include electric cars and someone has to act as trailblazers to work out how an electric-car lifestyle works. There has to be a coming together of people’s expectations with the cars for sale. The car makers have to refine the technology using feedback from the early adopters to get the product optimised.

Current electric cars are being designed to deal with the expectations of conventional car drivers. Looking inside the bonnet of the Nissan Leaf, there is an aluminium cover that gives the appearance of a conventional engine; there is no need of course; the electric motor is a small item hiding away underneath.

Over time the designers will not need to masquerade their design to look like a conventional car but be able to take pride in being electric. The challenge requires innovative and cool design that appeals to the car-buying public.

I like the Nippy BMW E-mini but it is not a production car and is not on sale. I would like to buy a Tesla but that would be an expensive indulgence and not much use as a family car. I have decided to buy the slower, rather dull but practical Nissan leaf. I look forward to learning more about living with a production electric car.

Of course in all this discussion of electric cars, the much bigger step towards greener behaviour is not to use the car, by shopping locally, living close to our place of work and using the bicycle for short local journeys. The bigger challenge is not designing better electric cars but designing society better to be less reliant on the car.

National Climate Week

2011-03-21T02:43:00.000-07:00

Here in the UK, today is the start of Climate Week with people across the country putting on events. The international climate negotiations grind slowly forward and show little prospect of an effective agreement anytime soon. Real action will come from individual governments that decide to lead despite resistance from laggard nations.

To deal with the challenge of climate change requires action from everyone, not waiting for top-down direction that is very slow in materialising. Every person, every community, every country and every region has to decide on their response. ‘We won’t do much until you act’, is not a defendable statement. ‘We act and expect you to follow’ is a much stronger mechanism to garner support and drive change.

In my local community, I co-chair the Pangbourne and Whitchurch Sustainability Group (PAWS) and we have a series of events through this week. This weekend we had an information desk in Pangbourne Village High Street and it was also our re-use day. People could put outside their house anything they no longer needed and other people could walk through the village to take it away. My pile of surplus clobber was gone within two hours leaving just one item that failed to find a new home – an old grill pan with evidence of burnt food fused into its base. So there is a limit to what can be reused!

This afternoon I will be speaking at a young people’s forum in which representatives of our local schools will be discussing what they think we can, and should, do. On Thursday evening, I will be chairing a Climate Change Open Forum in the village hall with world climate experts Sir Brian Hoskins and Professor Nigel Arnell.

PAWS is an example of action from the bottom up (perhaps it is also an example of what the government intends from the concept of ‘Big Society’). Within the group as co-chairman I can take very little of the credit, ideas arise from within our membership and working together we translate them into action. This is how to make real progress.

Our Windy Islands

2011-03-14T02:27:00.001-07:00

The British Isles is one of the best locations in the world for wind, free energy that will not run out for as long as the sun shines. The sun heats the land and the oceans, warming the atmosphere and causing the complex weather patterns that swirl around the planet. There is no prospect of the sun going out any time soon so wind is one of the energy sources we can bet on for our future energy needs. If the sun does expire, humankind will need to find another planet, in another solar system, for human life to continue. This is the stuff of science fiction but indicates the challenges to come. To ship the world’s population off planet Earth to a place many lights years away will be a colossal undertaking. In the here and now, we have the much simpler challenge of climate change.

Tackling climate change requires the development of low-carbon technologies, deploying them in new infrastructure and changing the way the society and the economy operate. From a logical and engineering perspective this is doable; we can fix our addiction to fossil fuel. The biggest challenge is changing attitudes; we humans are irrational creatures and it is a complex business persuading us to behave differently. This is particular true of renewable energy from wind.

I first came face-to-face with the irrational no-turbine-anywhere-where-I-might-be-able-to-see-it attitude in 2008. The location being discussed (high ground near to Newbury in Berkshire) could now have a turbine or two supplying the town but the proponents of the project have backed off. The opposition from residents in the vicinity was vociferous and illogical. To state you do not like the look of wind turbines is a valid viewpoint but the arguments that are concocted to object to wind turbines are often disingenuous such as trumpeting the health hazards of living near one.

It is interesting to make a comparison with power lines. We accept power lines across our country as a blot on the landscape because without them we will not be able to turn on the television or boil the kettle. Power lines are a well documented hazard to human health but it is not a big danger, and we should not be unduly worried out it, but it is a bigger danger than that from wind turbines. We are happy to ignore the hazard of power lines but use the small theoretical dangers of wind turbines to stop them being erected.

We should realise that wind turbines are in the same category as power lines. These are necessary pieces of infrastructure so we can continue to watch the telly and boil the kettle. Instead of opposing them we should be planning where they go so that wind turbines become as ubiquitous as power lines.

Britain may have the best sites for wind turbines in the world, but Britain is also the worst place to get permission to proceed. We should be embarrassed at a planning system that allows a few irrational and very vocal people to drown out the voice of reason.

Electric Cars 3 of 4 - Charging Points

2011-03-06T23:38:00.000-08:00

The Electric car and the infrastructure it needs are different to conventional cars. This much is obvious, but what the new system looks like is causing policy makers difficulty. They are getting trapped into the concept that electric cars replace conventional cars-one-for-one instead of realising that this is a game-changing transformation.

Policy makers are assuming that the electric car need to fill up (as a petrol car needs a filling station) so on-street charging points are assumed to be needed. This is seen as a barrier to sales of electric cars so considerable investment is planned to provide them. They fail to understand how electric car drivers (l am one) behave.

Electric cars are charged overnight from cheap-rate electricity whilst the car is parked at home and the owner is sleeping. We venture in the morning out being careful to plan our day to stay within the range of the battery. If there are on-street charging points they will presumably be expensive day-time tariff so not attractive. How about going outside my safe range? This is not something I will do because there is likely to be a charging point; I need a guarantee that there will be a charging point. I can go outside my safe range to visit a friend for lunch and agree to charge the car in their driveway. I am not going into a town outside my range planning to use a charging point unless it is reserved for me. Someone else might be parked at it or it is broken and I am stranded.

A network of public charging spaces will see very little use and are a wasted investment.

What would be very useful are charging parking spaces at work sites. These can be reserved for a particular employee allowing them to commute safely beyond the range of the battery. The infrastructure here would ideally include a roof over the car park with solar panels feeding into the grid and providing a good deal of the electricity going into the batteries of the cars parked beneath.

Forget the public charging infrastructure; instead channel tax incentives to business to fit solar panels to their car parks and charging points for employees.

Oil and Freedom

2011-02-28T00:29:00.000-08:00

Western policy in the Middle East has been dominated by the politics and economics of oil. With the world economy addicted to the thick black liquid our leaders have supported whichever regime would keep the supplies flowing. This was pragmatic realpolitik of the worst kind. As the people of the Middle East rise up and demand freedom, the West has important choices to make: which side to support? Which faction will keep the oil wells flowing? Who will give new contracts to the international oil companies?

Whilst the oil flows out of the Middle East and cash flows in, leaders can buy a corrupt peace. Staying in power does not need popular support; he who controls the oil income has the weapons and the power. Colonel Gaddafi pays mercenaries from North Africa to be his personal body guard and act as a force loyal to the paymaster to kill Libyan people who oppose him. This is not a man we should support and it is good to hear the UK PM, David Cameron stating clearly that it is time for him to go.

The question I want our leaders to ask is, “what is the future beyond oil?”

The time has come to migrate away from reliance on oil and turn to the future, both of our society and of the oil-rich countries of the Middle East. It is possible that these countries develop new business based on the production of renewable fuels from the desert. They have the oil income to invest in such a future but, whilst we support autocratic tyrants, this income is going into the overseas bank accounts of the few. When the oil era ends, the current leadership will leave and their families live off the income of oil for generations into the future, leaving their countries impoverished.

We should reflect what will be left in the Middle East. The world needs to pull back from blind support for autocratic rulers and take a principled approach to international relations in the region. The revolution now burning through the deserts could set the future for generations to come. We should not fail the people of the Middle East now as they try to find their own way forward. There is more to life than oil.

Electric Cars 2 of 4 – Electricity from...?

2011-02-21T01:26:00.000-08:00

Electric cars are zero-emission at the point of use, freeing up cities from the pollution of petrol and diesel engines. Instead of cyclists breathing in nitrous oxide, fine black soot and other pollutants to go with their healthy exercise, they will be able to fill their lungs with clean air. This is the way of the future for city living but there is a problem; where does the electricity come from to charge the cars?

I carried out some back-of-the-envelope calculations working out a comparison between the carbon emitted by my E-Mini and my other car a ten-year old Audi diesel. I took into account the Kilowatt hours of electricity used to charge the battery with the range achieved and compared this with the miles per gallon of my old car. The two were comparable in the overall carbon emitted taking into account the carbon dioxide emitted in generating the electricity.

I used an average figure for the carbon intensiveness of electricity in the UK. I did not take the easy option of claiming that the photovoltaic panels that cover both the south and west elevations of my house were charging the car. Not so of course; the car charges at night with the panels generating during the day, but let use consider the overall figures. I generate approximately enough electricity averaged out over the year to cover my electricity needs. I cannot claim the electricity twice; I need it for the house so I do not claim it for the car.

I was on the podium at the Low-Carbon Vehicle Conference last year in a discussion about electric cars. An electric car advocate did not like my comment that until we decarbonise the electric grid electric cars do make a useful contribution to carbon reduction. They are useful in getting part of the future in place, to deal with user-acceptance issues and develop the technology, but no more than that. He claimed that the figure to use in my comparison is the carbon intensiveness of night-time electricity generation when nuclear power stations carry much more of the load. On this basis, my electric car is lower carbon than my old diesel car. However if we all rush out to buy electric cars, the older coal fired power stations will have to come back on power at night. The marginal additional electricity from electric cars will be from high carbon generation.

Meanwhile, it is reported that London black cabs are being brought into service that run on electric power from hydrogen fuel cells. Hydrogen is another clean fuel with only water coming out of the exhaust pipe. One fill and a cab will be able to drive a whole shift driving over 200 miles. This overcomes the range limitation of batteries. This looks like another useful component of the future city transport infrastructure; but where does the hydrogen come from? Answer: Electricity (used to split the hydrogen from water).

There is no avoiding the challenge of decarbonising the electricity supply, without making progress here both the electric and hydrogen car are dead.

Peaceful Revolution

2011-02-14T01:06:00.001-08:00

This week has been a momentous week: President Mubarak of Egypt has been forced to stand down by his people and China overtook Japan as the world’s second largest economy. This could be the beginnings of massive upheaval in the world’s main oil region and a reconfiguring of the world economy.

The peaceful revolution in Egypt is a good sign, reflecting well on all concerned. The protesters should be admired for their perseverance, determination and restraint, deciding that violent protest was not their way. The police need to be understood, having been asked to retain control against a tide that could not be stopped; many of the junior ranks are now angry that they ended up on the wrong side and vilified unfairly. The army should be admired for their even-handed and sensitive handling of the protests. President (ex-President) Mubarak should also be respected for not pulling all the levers at his command to try to retain power. These have been dangerous times for Egypt. One incident, one mistake such as an accident between a tank and a protester and the mood could have turned.

Meanwhile China continues to grow its economy and reach out to extend its influence across the world to secure the supplies its ballooning economy requires. The continents of Africa and South America are targets for Chinese investment. China is not running aid programs; China is after natural resources and we should be concerned what the consequences might be for these poor countries. As China rises up in the new world order it will be hard to restrain its rampant demand.

This could be the start of a revolution, which I hope will morph into the Sustainable Revolution. It is only the cushion of oil money that keeps the autocratic rulers of the Middle East in power. As the world plans a future beyond oil, there will no longer be a need to prop up unsavoury regimes to secure supplies.

In China there are signs that damage to the environment is now a concern and China may lead in showing a way beyond conventional industrialisation. The West may help the transition by adopting cradle-to-cradle manufacturing and stop the one-way importing of stuff from China that is used for a while before finding its way into land fill.

The coming revolution could be dangerous but we can also be optimistic that if sustainable policy comes to the fore the changes will be for the better.

Electric Cars – The User Perspective

2011-02-07T03:49:00.000-08:00

It is possible that in my lifetime all cars will be electric and even the classic cars of the past will have to be fitted with an electric motor to be allowed on the public road. There will remain petrol-head rallies where the gas guzzlers of the early 21st century are allowed to rev their engines and zoom off trailing smoke out of their exhausts. These will be nostalgic events like attending a steam rally with the smell of burning coal as the old traction engines chug around the showground. Modern cities do not have steam traction engines and in due course petrol or diesel cars will not be allowed.

Driving an electric car is a different experience to driving a petrol or diesel car. It is better in that it is quiet, clean and zippy. It is easy to make electric cars quick; high torque electric motors are small and deliver maximum torque throughout a wide range from spinning slowly to high rpm; that means no need for gears. The more power that is used the greater the drain on the battery. That leads on to the disadvantages; the range is limited to the capacity of the battery.

In cold winter weather, the range tumbles as the heater also draws power from the battery. More advanced models in the future may use heat pumps, in effect running the air conditioning in reverse, but the engineers have some catching up to do. Conventional cars now have plenty of waste heat and diverting it to heat the car is simple. There has been no need to have efficient electric heaters.

My experience of driving the E-mini for six months taught me how to live with an electric car. First, plan your journey to confirm that it is within range. Second, if the journey is close to maximum range and the weather is cold, dress up warm so you do not need the car’s heater. Third, if the return journey is outside the range you need a guaranteed place at the end of the outward leg to be able to recharge.

Most days I was driving well within its maximum range of about 90 miles. Provided the journeys are predominantly local range is not an issue. If you need to go on a long journey, hire a conventional car or go by train.

Quotes from Davos

2011-01-31T00:28:00.000-08:00

The delegates from the World Economic Forum have caught their flights and returned home. A lot of words were spoken giving a snapshot of the state of the world. Here is my selection:

“I call Cancún a big step for the community of nations.
But unfortunately, it’s also at the same time a very small step for the planet.”
Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Bonn

“Our [WTO] accession is good for the world. It is 10 years of sharing benefits and joint development – although some countries were doubtful whether we were able to honour our promises... About 10 years have passed, and the answer is on the wall. Our exports have increased by 4.9 times, imports have increased by 4.7 times, and GDP has nearly doubled.”
Chen Deming, Minister of Commerce of the People’s Republic of China

“I will not call China and India as 'emerging'. We are 're-emerging', because together we contributed 52% of the GDP of the world, until the 17th century... It is a re-balancing of the world economy. It is historical distortions getting corrected.”
Anand Sharma, Minister of Commerce and Industry of India

“We [in Greece] have been doing everything by the book. We’ve done what the recipe says. So why aren’t the markets responding?”
George A. Papandreou, Prime Minister of Greece

“Chancellor Merkel and myself never – and listen to me carefully here – never will turn our backs on the Euro. We will never drop the Euro…The Euro spells Europe. The Euro is Europe.”
Nicolas Sarkozy, President of France

“We will need to work together to manage the world economy so that it functions to meet our needs, rather than satisfying our greed. This means we will need to inject more compassion into our economic and social policy; that is not only fixated on growth, but on achieving growth with equity. And with promoting a caring and sharing society.”
Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, President of Indonesia

“It is not enough to have one’s own freedom. You have to respect the freedoms of others. This is the principle which is true for relations between democratic states.”
Dimitry Medvedev, President, Russian Federation

Sustainable Fish Supply

2011-01-24T01:13:00.000-08:00

Last night for dinner we had delicious meal of salmon fillet in a watercress source. My wife had taken care to buy salmon with the Marine Stewardship Council logo certifying that it was from a sustainable fishery. As we had had a busy day, this was a pre-packed dish from the local supermarket. Looking at the packaging with the MCS logo and recycling information we are led to believe that we have purchased a sustainable product.

There must be people who, with the best of intentions, are making product purchase decisions in the belief that they are living sustainably. I make no such claim over last night’s meal. The packaging was an aluminium tray that we are told can be recycled. How many people wash out an aluminium container and take it to be recycled? We do, but it is a hassle and I am not surprised that most people will throw it in the garbage. The plastic film cannot be recycled. The outside cardboard in the only bit that is easily recycled.

Sustainable packaging would a minimum of packaging and the packaging would be either biodegradable or able to be burnt cleanly. This is not what is offered. For ease of logistics, ease of sale and ease of consumer consumption, the fish is delivered in an unsustainable package.

A more fundamental complaint is that the fish has been caught in Alaskan waters of the Pacific Ocean. I accept that these are certified sustainable fisheries, but can it be sustainable to ship the fish halfway around the world? I wonder if a North American reading this blog is tucking into a portion of salmon caught from a fishery in Scottish waters. I should be eating the Scottish salmon and my American friend that from Alaska.

Companies indulging in superficial sustainable branding should be very careful, the public are getting more knowledgably and less willing to be conned. Before printing packaging that announces the sustainability credential of a product, check the facts. Best of all, omit the packaging.

Reporting and Promoting Sustainability

2011-01-16T06:44:00.000-08:00

What gets measured gets done.

Measuring the sustainability performance of companies is important to making progress. The insight that management guru Peter Drucker published in the 1950s is still valid today.

Two useful frameworks are: the OECD’s Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and the Sustainability Reporting Framework developed by the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). It is to be welcomed that the OECD and GRI have announced a partnership to give guidance to companies worldwide on how to conduct their business responsibly and report on their sustainability performance.

The big idea is that transparency through reporting on environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors drives the sustainability of individual organizations and, ultimately, the global economy. GRI's key goal is to make sustainability reporting mainstream.

"By working with OECD, we can help responsible multinational enterprises lead the way to a sustainable future," said Mervyn King, Chairman of the Global Reporting Initiative's Board of Directors.

"This MoU not only attests to the excellent co-operation that already exists between the OECD and the GRI but also to a common determination to assist enterprises to become more responsible corporate citizens," concurred Richard Boucher, OECD Deputy-Secretary General.

It is good to see these initiatives come together to give global enterprise a framework to use. Whether it works will depend on two things. First, will corporations discuss sustainability as an item high on the agenda of board meetings? Second, will investors factor in sustainability into their decisions over where to invest and which shares to hold?

Measuring and reporting is effective if it is at the core of managing the enterprise. If the measures are reported in separate glossy publications that come out of corporate affairs, aimed at improving the corporate reputation, it is likely to be ‘greenwash’. The Annual Report signed by the chairman and CEO is more likely to be a true reflection on the company’s performance and aspirations for the future. This is where I will be looking.

Sources:
http://www.globalreporting.org/Home
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/58/12/41201742.pdf

2011 - The Year of Action

2011-01-07T06:29:00.000-08:00

What is all this fuss over global warming? Last month was the coldest December in Britain since records began. We now have proof that global warming is a hoax.

Credit should go to the media that this is not the message that has been broadcast. Those UK climate sceptics who want to use this cold spell as ammunition have either understood that this would be wrong or the media have ignored them. There is good reason for this; it looks as if, on a global basis, 2010 was also the warmest year on record.

The UK's harsh weather was caused by unusual conditions with a sustained high pressure weather system that blocked mild westerly winds and brought cold air south from the Arctic. We know that one month, in one region, is not an indicator of global climate trends, but the cold does enter our subconscious. Global warming loses its urgency when the current struggle is to stay warm and keep from sliding off icy roads.

A better way to view climate change is the increased variability (such as the jet stream coming down from the north instead of from the more usual west) and more incidents of extreme weather events such as the floods in Australia.

We should not be looking for a clear point at which the climate flips to something very different and we can say that the climate has turned. If we reach such a point, there will be no way back. There will be an increasing number of weather events to support the predictions of the scientists. Does each of us need to have their house flooded and suffer from food shortages before calling for real action?

We can see the dangers of continuing to rely on the fossil-fuel economy. Of course it must be dismantled and replaced by something different. Yes, it will be hard to transform the economy; it gets harder every day we delay. 2011 should be the year of real action...

Surviving the Climate

2010-12-19T12:48:00.000-08:00

Heathrow has been closed all day to give the ground crew time to clear all the snow and ice from the taxi ways and aircraft parking areas hoping to resume normal operations tomorrow.

This is unusually cold weather for Britain. Unlike other countries of northern Europe, we are not geared up to cope. The maritime climate of our islands usually protects us from extreme cold (and from extreme heat). As the climate becomes less predictable with more extreme events Britain should fare better than most countries.

This cold weather reminds us how reliant we have become on the complex infrastructure of society. To stay warm, the central heating must keep running which means the gas must keep flowing. Gone are the days when the UK had enough gas under the North Sea to have energy security under our control. We now rely on pipelines that cross Europe from Russia and on LPG tankers from the Middle-East.

There was a time when we would have gathered and stored enough wood to keep the fires burning until the spring. Survival was under our control. The food stored locally would tide us over until the next crop. Now the markets are global and we rely on global capacity for our survival. Whilst oil is plentiful and food is produced in abundance, prices are driven down. As oil demand exceeds supply and a series of droughts hit simultaneously on world agriculture we will wish we had not become so reliant on long and complex supply chains.

We can use this insight into a scenario of the future to improve energy and food security or wait until the crisis strikes...

The world is bunkering down for a festive Christmas with all the food we can eat and all the drink we can drink. As we enjoy this season we should reflect on how fortunate we are and when the New Year comes have a thought for ensuring that the future is safe in our hands.

Cancun Climate Talks RIP

2010-12-12T13:11:00.000-08:00

The Cancun climate talks delivered what was expected: a bland communiqué to hide the lack of progress. The world still does not have a plan to constrain carbon dioxide emissions. The Times got it right:

‘...climate talks have assumed a life of their own and many of the 15,000 delegates are already inquiring about the best hotel rooms in Durban.’
The Times 11 December

Of course we hope that over the next year the talks find a solution to addressing the risks of climate change. Wishful thinking is not enough. Whilst there is belief that the talks can succeed, the issue is parked to await the outcome, delaying the search for real solutions.

The talks are flawed because the discussion is focused on targets, not solutions. It is like trying to persuade a heroin addict to promise to inject fewer fixes without curing the addiction. The truth is obscured. The truth is that the world is addicted to fossil fuel. World leaders have to wake up to the reality of dismantling an economy built on cheap fossil fuel and build a new sustainable economy powered by renewable energy.

Targets are not enough. The entire edifice of the modern globalised economy has to be looked at and revised. If this is accepted, the discussion leads to a very uncomfortable place. The economic success of recent decades is put at risk. Solutions do not come easy; but there are solutions. The search for green outcomes in the real world requires rethinking the priorities for society and changing the principles with which we manage the economy.

The climate talks should continue in South Africa, a year from now, but we should not be fooled into expecting too much. The solution is to take fossil fuel out of society and out of industry. The implications are massive; the investment required is huge; the challenge is immense.

If you are one of the 15,000 people about to book a hotel room in Durban for December 2011, be prepared to argue for deep-rooted change. If you plan to continue to argue around the periphery of the issues then you should forego the flight and stay at home.

21st Century Challenges

2010-12-06T01:11:00.000-08:00

Can the UK ever be Sustainable?

That was the questions posed at the Royal Geographical Society under their excellent series of events titled ‘21st Century Challenges’ putting the spotlight on the big important questions of today.

Sir Stuart Rose, chairman of Marks and Spencer, said:

“In today’s climate, more so than ever, putting sustainability at the very heart of your business is not just the right thing to do ethically, it makes commercial sense too. A sustainable business means a business that can thrive in the long term - it forces us to look over the horizon, accelerate innovation and respond to the challenges that lie ahead.”

Mr Benn, former Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, said:

“Our biggest challenge as a world is to learn to live sustainably. In the years ahead, families, communities, businesses and countries that work out how to do this will be in a much stronger position. We need to help each other to do this.”

Andy Hobsbawm, founder of Green Thing, said:

“Creativity has a huge role to play in changing the way people think about the resources they have at their disposal. We aim to turn green living from something people feel they ‘ought’ to do into something they ‘want’ to do.”

These sound bites are from people with a track record of taking action and deserve to be listened to.

Meanwhile, I noticed that Colombia's president, Juan Manuel Santos, has been forced to cancel his scheduled trip to the United Nations' climate change conference this week because of devastating flooding – even though global warming itself could be causing the disaster his country faces.

"I cancelled the trip I was taking to Cancun, [Mexico] ... to attend the international conference on climate change, which is what is affecting us, but I cancelled this meeting," President Juan Manuel Santos said in a statement reported by CNN.

Colombia is considering declaring a state of emergency to devote more resources to response and rescue efforts, Santos said, noting the number of victims throughout the country could climb to 2 million.

Columbia’s president has put action before further talks – he has a point.

The Sustainable Revolution at a Tipping Point

2010-11-29T00:38:00.000-08:00

We will look back from the future and identify 2010 as the year when the Sustainable Revolution began. The group of us who are interested in sustainability, and debate what it means, is much larger than five years ago. That is a start but hardly a revolution. There are two incidents in 2010 that will mark 2010 as special; one big and one small.

The big change is the euro crisis. Anyone who thinks the crisis has been solved is deluded. There will be change, and like a revolution it will not be easy to control. Any one of the highly indebted southern European countries could be the first to cave into market pressure and be forced to default on its sovereign debt. In such circumstances this would surely mean also leaving the euro. The change could be more controlled, and much more dramatic, such as Germany deciding to pull out of the euro project.

What has this to do with sustainability? This is the start of understanding that deep rooted sustainability is about fundamental change to society and the economy. Before the financial crisis I wrote about the globalised financial system with the words that ‘more connections bring greater resilience and reduce the chances of collapse, but if collapse does come, there will be no hiding from the consequences.’ More recently, before the euro crisis, I speculated that ‘one or more members will explore the possibility of exit to regain greater financial control.’ These thoughts are not reaction to crisis but come from a carefully considered analysis of the economics of stable sustainable societies.

The euro crisis could be the start of reconfiguring global finance to build a more resilient global economy. This is the big change and a crucial aspect of the Sustainable Revolution.

The small change is David Cameron’s instruction to the Office for National Statistics to devise a measure of quality of life. This does not seem like an important issue, but it is a stage on the journey towards a sustainable society. We must bring ecosystem integrity on to the balance sheet and devise appropriate measures for society that include health and happiness. The Sustainable Revolution will make the old measures of development based on pure economic measures, such as GDP, obsolescent.

What does the Sustainable Revolution mean for policy makers, business and the general public?

Sustainability can be seen in many different ways. For some people it is imperative that we reduce the impact we are having on the environment. Other people see the marketing possibilities or the need to protect and enhancing the reputation of business. For yet others it is all about government regulations. All of these are true but more than anything else sustainability has to be at the core of every important decision taken.

We must take off the blindfold of how society operates now, to see the world as it should be, then look for the opportunities to make the transition. The Sustainable Revolution is finally upon us.

Record Breaking Ambition

2010-11-22T03:35:00.000-08:00

South Africa is in the news for a record team effort in stone clearance of the mudflats at Hakskeen Pan. A track 20 km long and 1 km wide has to be cleared of stones ready for an attempt on the world land speed record in 2012.

Richard Noble and his driver Andy Green already hold the world land speed record of 763mph set in the Thrust SSC in 1997. They now plan to put the record out of reach by breaking the 1,000 mph barrier. This exceeds even the official air speed record at low altitude (no longer competed for). The project is being run on a shoe-string budget of approximately equivalent to three week’s expenditure by an F1 racing team. Why put so much effort into, and take so much risk, to break a record you already hold?

This project is both ludicrous and inspiring. If we can do this we can do almost anything. Making houses energy efficient, de-carbonising the energy supply and making transportation sustainable, are easy tasks in comparison. The Bloodhound, as the ‘car’ is called, is not to be admired for its fuel efficiency or miles-per-gallon. It is to be admired as a statement of human ambition, innovation and drive. We need more of this...

Biodiversity – The Mouse in the Corner

2010-11-08T00:05:00.000-08:00

Two weeks ago I wrote about biodiversity being the ‘Elephant in the Room’ and hoped that the Nagoya Biodiversity Summit might signal the start of ‘discussion of real-world solutions to the world’s most pressing problems.’ I hoped for too much. The world is regarding the vital issue of biodiversity loss as if it was only a mouse in the corner –easily trapped and killed at a time our choosing.

The Biodiversity summit has come and gone. A new ten year strategic plan has been agreed. This appears to be action. It is worth looking back on the previous decade to see the progress made against the targets agreed at the Convention on Biological Diversity’s COP6 in The Hague, Netherlands in 2002. The Parties responded by adopting the 2010 target of significantly slowing biodiversity loss by the end of the decade. The conference President and Netherlands State Secretary of Agriculture, Nature Management and Fisheries Geke Faber stated that it was necessary to move from policy development and dialogue to action. How have we succeeded eight years later?

On 1 November 2010 Mr Ahmaed Djoghlaf, the Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity was back at the Hague at the Conference on Agriculture, Food Security and Climate Change. His words should have sent shocks waves around the world. He reported:

During this 2010 International Year of Biodiversity, the news is not good. In May the third edition of Global Biodiversity Outlook showed that species worldwide continue to disappear at up to 1,000 times the natural background rate of extinction. The report further warns that without concerted action massive further loss of biodiversity is projected to occur before the end of the century and that ecosystems are approaching tipping points beyond which they will be irreversibly degraded, with dire consequences for human wellbeing.

The talking continues. The talk of moving to action, is just talk.

Green Outcomes in the Real World

2010-10-31T13:04:00.000-07:00

My book that came out this month is based on ideas that go back to 2004. I was meeting with a group of people in one of the leading business schools. I initiated a discussion about the nature of how we run society. I floated some questions around why we do what we do. I do not now remember the detail but it was around two themes: whether we need a throw-away society and how to make the transition beyond oil. I was hoping for a debate or a discussion. My hopes were short lived. The reaction was: oil is not running out and we already do recycling – let’s get onto something more important.

I remember the interchange well, not because of the detail of what was said, but because of the force with which the group expressed their opinion. The general thrust was that these issues are not of interest to us and do not belong to us. We are busy people with companies to run; leave these discussions to others.

In 2010 the debate has at least begun. The financial crisis has helped to illustrate that the system we have is not perfect. We are reluctant to look closer and see that the system is flawed. Covering over the cracks is all that has happened so far but the fault lines are still there.

My book goes far further than anyone on the faculty of a business school has dared to go. Some of the thoughts have appeared in the green thinking community but not connected into a real-world context. Take this book out of the library and find out if these issues are of interest to you and ask the question, does it matter to me?

Modern civilization is the pinnacle of human achievement. Through the nineteenth and twentieth centuries human ingenuity built the greatest civilization of all time. Our technology is advancing at such a pace that it seems there is nothing we cannot achieve. One of the secrets of our success has been the development of economic theory to provide a sound basis for organizing society and allocating resources efficiently. The particular idea that has accelerated progress and brought such wealth and material improvement in human lives over the last three decades is economic globalization, but the time has come to consider a new direction for society.

Preface to:
Green Outcomes in the Real World:
Global Forces, Local Circumstances and Sustainable Solutions

Biodiversity – The Elephant in the Room

2010-10-18T00:21:00.000-07:00

At least the elephant is so large and well known that special effort will be made to keep this species – if only in zoos and places in the world where it is used as a working animal. For many other species there is no future. Experts warn that the planet is now in the grip of its sixth mass extinction phase - the first that is man-made.

The 193 members of the UN's Convention on Biological Diversity are gathering in Japan today aiming to tackle how to curb the world's rapid loss of animal and plant species and the habitats they live in. This is a more important debate than climate change but does not gather the level of support it deserves. I will be watching closely over the next 12 days for any sign of real progress. I am sure that there will be progress in recording which species are at risk. There will be renewed effort into trying to find and indentify species that are so far unknown to us but may be extinct before we have had the chance to catalogue them. Whether we do more than watch more closely, as the mass extinction proceeds will be the test of progress towards stopping it.

Meanwhile, an issue that filled airtime last week, reported on the BBC, is research into the colour of wind turbines. Apparently, insects are attracted more or less to different colours. White or grey is commonly used to help the turbine meld into the sky and be less intrusive for human view; but these colours have the opposite effect on insects. Insects are attracted to it; and birds are attracted to the tasty meal of a nice plump insect. A white revolving turbine blade covered in insects and a flock of hungry birds; the consequences from a bird lover’s perspective are not good.

There is a solution. The research found that insects are attracted least to the colour purple. We could therefore paint all wind turbines purple. A purple revolving turbine blade (shown in pictures to accompany a planning application) and a group of local residents; the consequences for wind turbine applications are not good. If we put this problem to a UN convention we could end up with a compromise: white and purple stripes. That would both attract the insects (and therefore the birds) as well as raising the ire of local residents.

I hope that the UN conference on global biodiversity has rather more success than such gatherings normally achieve. The world needs to be woken up from distracting arguments over the colour of wind turbines to the discussion of real-world solutions to the world’s most pressing problems.

Unlock a new Level of Climate Action

2010-10-10T11:50:00.000-07:00

Listening to press conferences after each of the climate talks over recent years is to listen to well crafted positive gloss of officials trying to present abject failure as progress. UNFCCC Executive Secretary, Christiana Figueres, speaking at the closing press conference on Saturday after last week’s climate talks in Tianjin, China, said:

“I told you at the press briefing at the beginning of this week that governments this week had to address together what is doable in Cancun, and what may have to be left until after Cancun. They have actually done that.”

The bickering between China and the West has left very little in the ‘doable’ category. Even so, the fact that parties have some sort of agreement over what it might be possible, to agree upon in the Cancun climate talks in December, is seen as progress. In a sense it is progress. Discussions about discussions are better than no discussions about discussions. I agree with Ms Figueres as she went on to explain the critical importance of “turning dry texts into a set of keys that unlock a new level of climate action - among rich and poor, business and consumers, governments and citizens.”

We can expect a lot more positive gloss and well crafted words in the lead up to the Cancun climate talks. I have a view on whether the world leaders will ‘unlock a new level of climate action’ but I will keep that to myself for now. Let us give them every encouragement and then hold them to account for the outcome.

Looking Forward to Sochi

2010-10-03T23:21:00.000-07:00

Russia uses over three times more energy than the European average. As a major producer of gas and oil, it can afford such extravagance. Fortunately there are people in Russia working to shift the country to a greener future. The new national energy strategy until 2030, approved by the Russian government in November 2009, aims to reduce Russia's energy dependence by boosting faster growth in sectors consuming less energy and investing in energy saving technology.

In the nearer term, Russia aims to showcase its new capability to be green at the Sochi Winter Olympic Games 2014. Russia wants to use the winter games to be a model for sustainable development for the whole of Russia. Sochi also may act as a future concept for "Green Games".

The city of Sochi has set some tough targets to be carbon neutral and zero-waste. People involved in sustainability know that these are achievable targets but we also understand the enormous difficulty in matching action to aspirations.

The Media Village will be one of the highest profile venues. It is to be built with environmentally-friendly building materials and will incorporate energy- and resource-saving technology. After the 2014 Winter Games, the village will become one of the centres of sporting and cultural life in the surrounding holiday resort of Sochi.

In January 2010, Theodore Oben, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) representative expressed his satisfaction with the steps taken by the Organizing Committee.

As the calendar switches into another winter, I wish the Sochi team well. Over the next four years, I hope they can deliver what they promise and set a benchmark for the rest of Russia, and Europe, to follow at the Winter Olympics 2014.

Unsung Heroes

2010-09-27T00:11:00.000-07:00

BP has finally sealed its Macondo well in the Gulf of Mexico. This is a time to celebrate and salute the unsung heroes who have been working diligently for months to tackle one of the most urgent and difficult engineering challenges of our time. We all hope that the ecosystem of the gulf can recover without lasting damage.

‘Macondo Prospect’ is now the most infamous well in history. The well’s formal reference is Mississippi Canyon Block 252 (MC252). The code name allows the oil company to refer to the well in the early stages without disclosing the exact location. Whoever selected this code word must be regretting their choice. The name ‘Macondo’ is the name of the cursed town in the novel "One Hundred Years of Solitude" by Gabriel Garcia Marquez. The fictitious town of Macondo is frequented by unusual and extraordinary events that involve the generations of the Buendía family, who are unable or unwilling to escape their periodic (mostly) self-inflicted misfortunes.

How avoidable and self-inflicted this disaster was, investigations will discover. The high profile characters involved in this real-life story have had mixed fortunes. The CEO of BP has lost his job. This was always likely, but speaking out, whilst the crisis was still unfolding, to plea for his life back, ensured that he would be axed. Barack Obama fared better. His strong demands for action were what the public wanted to hear. We forget that neither Tony Hayward nor the US President have solved this crisis.

The heroes were the engineers. The water is 5,000 feet deep (1,500m). This is too deep for divers to operate. The workers are the submersibles and their robotic arms. The engineers have had to devise new methods and design and build new equipment all in the space of weeks. They do not appear on the cover of Newsweek or fronting press conferences. They have worked long hours and succeeded to deliver extraordinary solutions to an unusual event. I salute the unsung heroes – the engineers.

The Economist's Trap

2010-09-20T00:27:00.000-07:00

There is a fundamental rule used by economists that is accepted almost without question. That rule is any new process must cost less. If it costs less, then the process should be adopted; if it does not, then it should rejected. I have heard senior respected economists using the argument and to question it is regarded as heresy. People without qualifications as economist or accountants are told that they just do not get it. It is some economists who do not get it; putting the narrow parameters of their profession before more fundamental issues.

An example is the mantra that any new energy source must be cheaper than coal. This puts an impossibly high barrier against many renewable energy sources. You can argue that it is not the economists who are at fault. It is society that must decide that coal is a dirty fuel and demand that cleaner sources are found. One dramatic approach, through regulation, would be to ban coal. Another approach would be to provide subsidy to other energy sources to bring the cost down to less than coal.

As we discuss the options, the economist reminds us again that it must not cost more. Their assurances are that energy need not cost more through a range of measures. This is economics used as politically convenient fudge. If you carry out a real economic analysis you discover that the transition to clean energy will lead to higher energy prices. If the transition is made quickly (in accord with the advice of climate scientists) then energy prices need to rise quickly. This is the economic reality that needs to be reported, debated and then acted upon.

The economists who insist that energy should not cost more are setting a trap for politicians and bring their profession into disrepute.

The Accountant's Trap

2010-09-13T01:12:00.000-07:00

Three months ago Connaught, a construction company, was in the FTSE 250 with a market capitalisation of over £600m. Now it has collapsed, its shares are worthless and the administrators are picking through the books to see what can be salvaged. Many private investors who piled in towards the end to pick up cheap shares in this once strong company have lost their money. The firm’s founder, Mark Tincknell also bought more shares earlier this year in confidence that he could turn the company around. This was a company founded by hard working people who brought in external experts and became caught in the accountant’s trap of massaging the figures instead of running the company.

Connaught was a family firm started by Bill and son Mark Tincknell in 1982 with £10,000 of their own money and operated from a shed. Their expertise was in construction and repair. They did not have business training and employed business professionals as the company grew. In 1998 it floated on the AIM with a £14m market value. Under the continued leadership of Mark Tincknell as chief executive the turnover grew to £300m with profits of £20m. Mark may have left it the experts to put together the accounts but he was driving the business he knew, repairing properties.

In 2004, Mark Tincknell stepped down and handed control to a business professional. Turnover took off and debt jumped from zero to £200m. Loading the company with debt is what the accountants and financiers like because of the tax advantages. According to the Sunday Times, these figures were further pumped by my capitalising bid costs. This means that the money that is spent preparing a tender is shown as an asset on the accounts. This is an accountant’s wheeze that can reflect reality if the bid is ongoing and there is a good chance of the company securing the contract. If the contract has gone elsewhere then this is a loss and should be shown as such in the accounts.

I make the assumption that as the company grew it could afford more expensive advisors and employ more business savvy executives. The result: a pumped up set of figures totally removed from the business reality.

It is a sobering thought that Connaught would be worth more today if the founders had kept operating from their shed rather than hand control to the accountants and business professionals.

I suggest that there are three lessons to draw from this:
1. Business leaders should focus on running a sound core business.
2. Listen to accountants but do not let them take control.
3. Complicated accounting to massage the figures and pump the share price are skilful dodges. The more expensive the advisor the more wary you need to be of the advice.

Organic and Local

2010-09-05T23:49:00.000-07:00

We spent Sunday afternoon with Iain Tollhurst as he guided us around his organic farm just outside Whitchurch-on-Thames on the other side of the river to us. From here we have a supply of organic fruit and vegetables delivered to our door every Thursday. The carrots are often crooked and earthy but we carried out a blind taste test within the family. There is no doubt that this food tastes better - and is better for us.

Most organic suppliers deliver in boxes because they stack well in the back of a van. Tollhurst Organics deliver in bags because – apparently – they can be carried more easily on a bicycle.

Iain Tollhurst manages his farm with incredible insight into how nature operates. There are no fertilizers or insecticides – as you might expect, but also he does not use animal manure. He does not rear animals so cannot be sure that manure from other farms would match his high standards. Instead, on a seven-year rotation, two of the years are used to grow green compost. These crops are simply used to recharge the organic content of the soil, trapping nitrogen and other nutrients.

Iain Tollhurst’s commitment to working as part of a sustainable system is impressive. He only supplies the local area avoiding food miles. He tells a story that when approached by people outside his patch he not only will not deliver but he will not sell to people that travel from outside the local area to collect. For someone who has to live on the income from his business this is putting his sustainable principles before commercial logic.

Every community should have an Iain Tollhurst to feed their local community not only for high quality food but also to conserve the biodiversity of the local countryside.

What is Sustainability?

2010-09-01T02:09:00.000-07:00

Nearly a decade years ago I attended a seminar convened by the South East England Development Agency (SEEDA) – an organisation soon to be wound down as the government’s spending cuts bite. The subject of the seminar was “Sustainability”. There were presentations on a range of issues around the three legs of sustainability: ‘people’, ‘planet’ and ‘profit’.

The person sitting beside me complained quietly in my ear, “What is all this talk about the environment?” He expected to hear about financial sustainability. He wanted information on balance sheets and how to secure financial stability for his company. He could not be persuaded that embracing the broader agenda of sustainability would have long-term financial benefits, reduce risks and set the circumstances to ensure long-term survivability of the business.

The term ‘sustainability’ is now much more widely known but deep understanding of what it means remains elusive. All too often ‘sustainability’ consists of a superficial assessment of environmental and social impacts to be used as a thin veneer over decisions taken overwhelming under the influence of economic factors.

Sustainability is people, planet and profit – in that order of priority.

The dangers of learning by Doing

2010-08-16T01:57:00.001-07:00

Two American researchers, Peter Madsen and Vinit Desai examined firms, private and public, that launch rockets designed to place satellites into orbit around the Earth. They looked at all orbital launch attempts between the deployment of the first Sputnik in October 1957 and March 2004. Their research, reported in the Academy of Management Journal, showed that when a satellite fails the company learns from that failure and is more likely to succeed with future launches.

This is interesting and valuable research and we should apply the findings to the biggest problem we face today. That is pending economic and ecosystem collapse. The logic that this will be the outcome if we continue with business as usual is hard to dispute. But we seem to be determined to experience failure before we will learn. The research shows that to experience ecosystem collapse would indeed be a good opportunity to change our processes and learn to run society rather better.

This is the nature of humans to learn more from experience than lessons drawn from logical deductions. So, failed rocket launches proved a better teacher. For one satellite it is a big bill picked up by the insurance company; for our planet this is a learning experience we can ill afford.

Return to the English Riviera

2010-08-09T02:29:00.000-07:00

The new Lifeguard lookout station on Bournemouth beach is an icon of sustainable living.

At a macro level, it is sign that British people may return to the English Riviera. It takes a lot less carbon for a Scot to take the train south, or for a southerner to drive to the end of the M3, than to fly to the beaches of Spain.

The experience will not be as exotic. The Punch and Judy show at the end of the pier is particularly British. So are the lines of beach huts, each larger enough for a few deckchairs, a selection of beach equipment and a camping stove on which to make tea. Each family can sit reading the newspaper, take an occasional swim and more often simply doze. Here it is easy to find British beer, the newspapers are today’s paper bought for the cover price and the girls speak English. On a sunny day, Bournemouth is better than Benidorm – if it is the simple pleasures you seek.

At the micro level, there is the lifeguard lookout station. It sits on the sand with solar panels providing the power for the public address system and radios. This example could be replicated across the town with every roof covered in solar panels providing the power for beer coolers, ice cream cabinets, televisions, amusement arcades and all the equipment needed for a beach holiday.

People will not flood back to Bournemouth whilst flying further south remains so cheap. The reliable sunshine of the Mediterranean is a strong draw but when flight prices rise to match the environmental impact, coming back to the English Riviera will not seem so bad.

Sustainable living may be different but need not be worse.

Indian Solar Aspirations

2010-08-02T15:08:00.000-07:00

India is richer and more powerful than at any time since the days of the British Raj. Last week, the UK Prime Minister, David Cameron, visited India, to a county now very much in control of its own affairs. He hoped to strengthen relations and secure access for British companies to a booming economy.

The hangover from British rule includes a British style bureaucracy and English as the common language to link this vast country of multiple local languages. The British also exported the beginnings of industrialization based on fossil fuels. For a country with reliable sunshine there is no need to copy the practice in northern Europe. As India makes its own way in the world, it is also embarking upon changing the way it generates energy.

India aims to generate 1,000 megawatts (MW) of solar power by 2013, according to The Times of India. The country currently produces less than 5 MW every year. The solar mission is part of the National Action Plan on Climate Change. The mission, if approved by the Cabinet, will entail three phases with the ambitious targets. A package has been proposed to reform the power sector that could lead to annual production of 20,000 MW from solar by 2020 if the first phase of the solar mission goes well.

In the first phase, between 2010 and 2013, the government is also proposing to generate 200 MW of off-grid solar power and cover 7 million square meters with solar collectors. By the end of the final phase in 2022, the government hopes to produce 20,000 MW of grid-based solar power, 2,000 MW of off-grid solar power and cover 20 million square meters with collectors.

Solar lighting systems would also be provided to 9,000 villages by providing soft loans which would be refinanced by the Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency.

India is expected to be a powerhouse of the world economy in the 21st century. It is good to see India making such ambitious plans to navigate a path towards a more sustainable future.

Ministry of New & Renewable Energy

A Cut Too Far

2010-07-27T09:27:00.000-07:00

On Thursday DEFRA announced that funding would be withdrawn from the Sustainable Development Commission (SDC) from next financial year. From the view point of an official given the task to identify savings to meet the government’s ambitious plans to cut expenditure, this is a simple decision. The SDC is a quango that is not directly responsible for front-line services; therefore it should go. If we lived in a sustainable society – as I hope will be the case within the next decade or two – the SDC would indeed become irrelevant. Now, as we struggle to understand the policy choices required of the transition to a sustainable society, the SDC is vital.

Governments have to find ways to bring sustainability experts inside the decision making process. In the United States, President Obama appointed climate expert Steven Chu to be Secretary of Energy. The UK government established the Sustainability Commission (SDC). This organisation is outside government, to be free to carry out the analysis unencumbered by existing policy or political constraints, and with the ear of government to be able to influence future policy. In the current financial climate it is not surprising that, along with many other quangos, funding for the SDC has been withdrawn. I hope that this decision will be reviewed because the logic for the SDC remains strong. I argue that the SDC can leverage greater savings elsewhere in government than its £3 million budget.

Withdrawing funding from the SDC is a cut too far. This will leave government departments reliant on external consultants. There is a growing army of consultants who have been rebadged as sustainability consultants to satisfy demand. These are green in every sense. I hope they learn quickly; there are important policy choices to make and the need for deep thinking has never been greater.

Blame it on the British

2010-07-19T00:31:00.000-07:00

The weather here in Hong Kong is 30 degrees and humid. It feels warm and sticky, but not so much as to be unpleasant. Walking out on the streets, in many of the places where there would be a set of steps to climb, there is an escalator. A series of covered escalators and moving walkways beside Shelley Street ascends a whole hill. My immediate reaction was to question the need for such automation of personal mobility. I soon found out that using the stairs, you break into a sweat. I can see the advantages of relaxing, strolling slowly and let the escalators take the strain. Escalators can have a role in city design in the tropics, to persuade people out of cars and taxis and onto their feet.

Tropical temperatures suits humans rather well; this is where our species has its roots. Unlike at northern latitudes, where we need clothes to stay warm, at these latitudes it is only modesty and fashion that means we wear clothes at all. That is why I found it strange that the air-conditioning in my hotel room was set to 16 degrees - requiring a thick duvet on the bed. This is just as strange as finding the heating in my hotel room in Helsinki back in the winter was set to 25 degrees. If 25 degrees is the ideal indoor temperature in Helsinki, why not use the same temperature here in Hong Kong –saving energy of course. The converse is also true; if 16 degrees is the ideal indoor temperature in a luxury hotel in Hong Kong, why then not use such cool temperatures in hotel rooms in Helsinki in the winter?

The reason, I was told, for cold buildings throughout the affluent areas of Hong Kong (so cold as to be unpleasant) is because this is what the British expected in their days of colonial rule. If that is true, it is high time to throw off the daft demands of colonial masters and run Hong Kong as a sustainable city should be run. I adjusted my hotel room to 25 degrees throughout my stay and slept very well; I did not of course then need the duvet.

A Car for the 21st Century

2010-07-12T04:53:00.000-07:00

Last year’s World Forum on Enterprise and the Environment addressed the question, ‘Is there a model for low carbon growth?’ This set the scene and started a dialogue. This year the forum took on the more specific sub theme of ‘Low Carbon Mobility: Air, Sea and Land’. A big chunk of carbon is used for mobility. Making progress in this area is vital to de-carbonizing society.

The World Forum, organised annually in Oxford by the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, could grow to have the same significance within the green business community as the World Forum in Davos has amongst world leaders and economists.

The discussions, over three days, showed the strength of delegate’s concern that we must lead change. We discussed a range of issues and a variety of responses. Many delegates shared my approach that we must be bold and move fast. This was illustrated well by the launch at the forum of the T25, a new car from Surrey based Gordon Murray Design. Gordon Murray, of F1 fame, has brought the technology of race cars to the production of a small fuel efficient car. Unlike F1 cars, it is also designed to be affordable - although the price has not yet been announced and it is not yet available for sale.

The body of the T25 is made using the composite techniques of the F1 world but without the carbon fibre to keep cost down. The driving position is in the centre and the controls are in the steering wheel - just like an F1 driver. Two passengers sit back from the driver either side with their legs extending forward beside the driver. In the conservative world of car design, this a radical move. The design is green and cool; the perfect combination to make an early impact in the market. The T25 will be followed by the T27, an all electric version. This shows what forward-looking bold thinking can create.

Solar Decathlon

2010-07-05T08:30:00.000-07:00

The Solar Decathlon here in Europe 18 to 27 June was organized by the Spanish Ministry of Housing, in collaboration with the Universidad Politecnica de Madrid. Seventeen energy efficient houses competed. The winning house, Villa Solar, produced three times more energy than it used with the energy surplus going to the grid.

Our house here in southern England is also a mini power station, although much more modest than Villa Solar. Now, in midsummer, I am proud that we are generating more power than we use. However we live in an old-design house and making the full transition to an energy neutral house will be hard. If we commissioned a new house now, I have total confidence that the engineers and architects can respond to a brief that requires it to be energy neutral. If customers state this as their requirement, it will be so. Of course the house will cost more. Better houses (that are cheaper to run) do cost more and it is about time we got used to that idea.

Depressingly, I met an academic, who teaches building design, who thought that the government’s long-term targets were not achievable. My assurance that it is possible if you throw away the old design text books fell on deaf ears. I received a reply along the lines of “This is how we teach, how I have taught for years and I am the expert.”

Despite such intransigence, I believe that the house building industry is up to the challenge. Not the large house builders who want to complete quickly and sell on. They do not yet detect a demand strong enough. They will keep their blinkers on to defend their immediate profit margins. It is the small builders building premium houses for the wealthy end of the market that will lead the way.

Over 190,000 people visited Villa Solar during the competition. I would have liked the university lecturer I met to have been one of them. I suspect he was sat at home thinking of other tactics to prevent him from having to rewrite his lecture notes.

Shrewd Operators

2010-06-28T00:17:00.000-07:00

This week I have been invited to join with 150 world experts at the second World Forum on Enterprise & The Environment at Oxford University. Last year’s event opened a debate about tackling the challenges of climate change. This year the theme is Low Carbon Mobility: Air, Sea & Land.

The opening discussions set the scene. Mikhail Gorbachev spoke about the pressing need for action. He explained what some of us know to be true but few accept, that ‘the era of absolute economic growth driven by cheap fossil fuel is drawing to an end.’ He urged us to reach out for the truth, not bend to pressure from special interest groups. He explained how he had sat down with President Regan to diffuse the Cold War. This principled and bold approach is what the world needs now to address the climate crisis.

Steven Chu, the US Secretary of Energy, outlined his view of how to tackle the low-carbon challenge. President Obama has made a shrewd choice to put this expert climate scientist in a role that is pivotal to changing the direction of US policy. I detected that the need to stay engaged with US opinion means Chu has had to rein in his aspirations. For example, he was not drawn on the issue of increasing fuel prices. He, too, is shrewd in the way he is plotting an achievable path into the future.

This is no time for looking at the world through rose-tinted spectacles or launching grandiose schemes that are bound to fail. The world needs shrewd operators to navigate through the challenges we face in order to make progress in the real world. World leaders need to be bold like Gorbachev and appoint experts like Chu to take us towards a more sustainable future.

Wherefore art thou E-Mini

2010-06-21T04:43:00.000-07:00

O E-Mini, E-Mini, wherefore art thou E-Mini?

The departure of the prototype E-Mini from our driveway and out of our lives has left me feeling bereaved and sad. This is the first time that I have had affection for a car. Cars are transportation: full stop. It was only a car, I tell myself; but I have to admit to harbouring other emotions.

The E-mini has drawn attention. I have taken every opportunity to use this introduction to start a conversation about the make-up of a future sustainable society. I have found my words, more often than not, falling on deaf ears. Why then have I loved the E-Mini? Because it has engaged people who have not the slightest interest in matters environmental.

In my focus group of ‘E-Mini pioneers’ (the term used by the BMW marketing team), I was a loan voice expressing the need to decarbonise the electricity supply before electric cars will be truly green. No one shared my concern. I suspect that this is a true reflection on most people’s level of interest in the bigger picture of building a sustainable society and sustainable economy.

The E-mini is liked because it is cheap to run - at a time when fuel prices are climbing once again as the economy picks up. The E-Mini is liked because it offers the possibility of maintaining lifestyle after the oil has gone. These are real-world reactions, and the real world is where we live.

On Saturday, at the Oxford mini factory, each of us who handed back the keys of ‘our’ E-Mini expressed sadness to lose the car. I will return to an old flame. My 11-year old diesel Audi has much the same carbon footprint as the E-Mini (based on the current mix of generation capacity on the electric grid) but it has greater range and more carrying capacity.

I am sad because my excuse to engage the uninterested in discussion of the nature of a sustainable society has been taken away.

Kick BP’s Ass

2010-06-14T08:30:00.000-07:00

BP continues to work to stem the flow of oil into the Gulf of Mexico from the well head deep under the sea where the drilling rig Deep Water Horizon had been operating before it exploded and sank.

Like many multinational corporations, BP dropped its national identity some years ago. It became simply ‘BP’ rather than the old ‘British Petroleum’. This change of name reflected the truly global nature of the company in geographic reach, ownership and governance. BP does not answer to any one government. However BP does have to work with the governments where it operates.

Where the country is small and weak, it may not wield much power against the corporate colossus. Where that country is the United States, BP has to tread carefully.

The US government does not like the polite and over optimistic tone of Tony Haward, the CEO. It matters little that the best engineers, drawn from across the industry, are doing remarkable feats under testing conditions. The public face of BP – which US commentators continually refer to as British Petroleum – needs to be someone who is seen to ‘kick ass’.

The facts that the US addiction to oil is driving exploration ever deeper off shore, and that the drilling rig was owned by a US company, are ignored. Until this terrible disaster is brought fully under control, many Americans will continue to refer to BP as British Petroleum. BP would do well to put a tough American to face the media and make it clear that this is a shared disaster. There will be more mishaps as technology is pushed to its limits to satisfy our craving for oil as the ‘easy oil’ runs out.

The regulations will be beefed up: deep offshore drilling will require double blowout preventers and other safeguards. This will not be enough. The safest solution is not one we like very much. It is to wean the world off oil...

Knowledge is Building

2010-06-08T16:00:00.000-07:00

Following my depressing venture two weeks ago out to engage with the general public and finding that sustainability was low down most people’s agenda, I went on holiday. It was half-term and we had planned our getaway for some time but it suited me well to wind down a little and to reflect. I took with me the task to write an exam for the business school with regard to the global business environment. It was relatively easy to write the exam. Reflecting on the financial crisis and its ramifications was more straight-forward than dealing with how to achieve a sustainable society. People understand that there is a financial crisis, and when politicians speak about the need for action, people listen. Until recently, this has not been the case for sustainability.

On my return from holiday, my first meeting was with one of the leading management consultancies. We discussed my ideas about a Sustainable Revolution and how to achieve it. Five years ago, if I were to attempt such a meeting, eyes would have glazed over. It would have been necessary to retreat or lose the attention of the audience. Things have changed. The people I met may not have agreed but they listened and asked sensible questions. These are influential people who are now engaged in the debate. They know that sustainability is a growing issue but do not yet know how to deal with it.

Knowledge is building. Perhaps we have had the case of ‘the blind leading the blind’ whilst we started to consider the issue of sustainability. Now, some of us now see clearly where we should go and we are leading people who are starting to learn the best route forward. There will still be wrong choices and we will find dead ends but the process has begun. The Sustainable Revolution is coming.

Joe Public Doesn't Care

2010-05-24T04:21:00.001-07:00

I spent an enjoyable but fruitless day championing sustainability at an outdoor event in Berkshire. The event itself had nothing to do with either the environment or sustainability – that should have warned me. Our stand brought together a number of local sustainability groups aiming to spread the idea of sustainable communities. We hoped that amongst the crowds of people passing through the event we would grab the attention of a useful proportion. How wrong we were.

I had arrived in my electric car which then formed part of the display. The car attracted some attention but the interest was confined to the sort of questions Jeremy Clarkson would ask, such as how fast it can go, how well it corners and how far it will go on a full charge. My interest in testing the prototype BMW E-Mini is the potential such cars have to be a part of a low-carbon transport infrastructure. I tried this thought on the people who stopped and their eyes glazed over.

This was a genuine random sample of people and the results are interesting; and also disturbing. Joe Public is not going to change through free choice. Change will come because costs for carbon intensive transport increase and reduce for low-carbon alternatives - with regulation removing some choices entirely. This is how change will be delivered.

Further along the line of stands I spent some time talking with a salesman seeking to sell replacement windows. He had been in the window trade for over 30 years. He was convinced that there was no longer a place for wooden windows except for the rich who can afford to paint them every few years (his words). He sold exclusively plastic windows. Whatever happened to the idea that if money is tight you paint your own windows over a few warm summer weekends?

Further along there was a line of amusements stalls aimed at children offering prizes - all cheaply made. This was a depressing display of consumer detritus likely to end up in the bin within the day.

From this experience the conclusion I draw is that most people do not care about the concepts of sustainability. It is up to those of us who do care to lead change and push society onto a sustainable path. It can be done but we should not expect active support from the majority.

The Old and the New

2010-05-17T04:11:00.000-07:00

I attended the Annual General Meeting and of our local scout group on Friday with the family. The organisers had arranged a quiz evening with food to ensure a good turnout. As the social event was buzzing around me I reflected on the advances of the modern age juxtaposed with the historic context.

The wood framed building had been rebuilt in recent years but much of the timber had been reclaimed and reused from an earlier building on the site. A number of the beams went back even further to buildings many centuries back now only briefly mentioned in the historic record. Tree-ring analysis dated one batch of timber to 1540. The quality carving indicated that this may have comprised the Manor House (long since demolished and now forgotten).

Timber with multiple uses over many centuries is an example of good sustainable construction. My thoughts then extended to the modern Formica-topped tables at which we were sat. These ‘monstrous hybrid’ materials are almost impossible to recycle successful and often end up in land fill after a life of 10-20 years.

After the meal all the paper plates and plastic cutlery were gathered into black bin liners and loaded into the large wheelie bin behind the village hall. This is an example of the convenience of modern catering making life easy for us all. What would a 16th century observer make of it all? They would recognise the wood beams and marvel at the gadgets like the Public Address system and data projector; but I don’t think they would be impressed with our wasteful ways.

The new occupant of Number 10

2010-05-10T02:08:00.000-07:00

I assume that in London’s most famous address, 10 Downing Street, Gordon Brown has packed all his personal possessions into boxes and is ready to leave. He has a constitutional duty to remain until an alternative government emerges. It would be presumptuous of David Cameron to have his bags packed ready to move in, but he must feel confident that this will be his next home. His call for change is what the country needs.

Now, there is a chance for deep-rooted change - if our leaders grasp the opportunity. Difficult times demand bold action. Otherwise, there is a danger that the same tired policies will continue but with a different spin and slightly altered priorities.

Politicians, and most of the electorate, are fixated on our economic ills. The apparent priority is to get the economy back on track. Other problems, such as environmental stress caused by continued high levels of material consumption, are being sidelined. It does not have to be like this.

Rescuing the economy, and stepping rather lighter on the planet, can be on the same route if we choose our direction well. Green stimulus measures are what are needed. This is far more complex than the simple economic levers used so far to counter the crisis. There is a difficult challenge to design appropriate government policy that links with, and influences, behaviour change to move closer to a sustainable society (that includes, of course, a sound economy). It can be done; and this is what the new resident of 10 Downing Street should focus on.

A Greek Tragedy

2010-05-03T10:54:00.000-07:00

An agreement for a financial rescue package for Greece has finally been brokered. Any further delay and Greece may have been forced to default on paying out on bonds due to mature in the near future. For a Euro-zone country to default on its national debt is unthinkable – or so we thought. This is an important stage in the development of the Euro. Is it a stable well run currency vying with the US dollar for reserve status; or is does it represent an unwieldy merger of disparate economies that is bound to unravel? These are important questions for Europe; and for the stability of global finance.

Discussions have been slow and tortuous. The internal politics of Greece has made it very difficult to agree to implement the tough austerity measures demanded by the IMF and the EU. For Germany – providing a large chunk of EU new loans – this is a bitter pill to swallow. The Germans take pride in running a prudent economic policy and ordinary Germans have had to put up with belt-tightening. To see this result in bailing out the profligate Greek economy is galling; Angela Merkel may reap a political backlash in the coming elections.

This whole sorry tale of Greece and the Euro is a Greek tragedy. It will end with Greece leaving the Euro. After this agreement the inevitable is delayed but not for as long as people might hope. As soon as it becomes clear that the Greek government does not have the domestic support to implement the full austerity package (nor the stomach to get a grip of tax evasion), and the EU looks likely to reject further requests for yet more loans, there will be a rush to dump Greek Euro debt and to withdraw funds from euro accounts in Greek banks. The final act could be messy and dramatic.

I write in my book, Green Outcomes in the Real World, coming out in the autumn:

‘There is little prospect that the euro will be dismantled any time soon, but it is likely that one or more members will explore the possibility of exit to regain greater financial control. Implementation would be a challenge for both the country and the European Central Bank, but once one country had acted as trailblazer, others might follow.’

Greece and the European Central Bank should have trail-blazed an orderly exit at a much earlier stage. Further delay is dangerous.

My generation

2010-04-26T15:02:00.000-07:00

My generation, born in the 1950s and 60s are now in power and it is our wisdom that is guiding decision making. We have experienced three decades of economic growth, rising consumption and materially better lives. We have no direct experience to warn us that there may be problems ahead. Scientists tell us about the possibilities of climate change but the evidence is now tainted. Recent polls suggest that only 25% of the population believe that climate change is real and caused by humankind. There is relief amongst many people that they can latch onto the idea that climate change is a hoax. Whether climate change is real, or not, we will find out in the decades ahead. The inability of world society to respond to this threat is symptomatic of deeper problems. My generation are living in denial of the need to make changes to reduce the impact of society on the global ecosystem.

I have been out and about in Berkshire schools talking with sixth form pupils. This has given me huge optimism that real progress towards a sustainable society is possible as they come of age to vote and influence those in positions of power. The younger generation are open-minded and thirsting for knowledge. They are also concerned about the future and not afraid to ask searching and difficult questions.

The younger generation have a different set of observations to guide them. They see a shortage of jobs, a lack of opportunities and an older generation better at generating hot air than taking real action to protect the integrity of our planet’s ecosystem. We owe it to them to start making real progress - and start soon.

Foreign holidays as a Right

2010-04-19T00:43:00.000-07:00

According to the Times:

‘An overseas holiday used to be thought of as a reward for a year’s hard work. Now Brussels has declared that tourism is a human right and pensioners, youths and those too poor to afford it should have their travel subsidised by the taxpayer’. The European Union commissioner for enterprise and industry, Antonio Tajani, is reported to have said, “Travelling for tourism today is a right.”

There has been a massive increase in low-cost flying based on cheap aviation fuel. If airlines had to pay a similar amount of tax, as motorists pay to drive their cars, then the mass aviation market would be forced to contract. Instead of curbing unsustainable aviation, the EU is seeking to expand tourism (presumably on cheap flights) to the poorest members of society. The aims are laudable: to encourage a sense of European identity by understanding other countries within the union; but what has happened to the idea of reducing the carbon impact of our holidays?

For now we are enjoying clear blue skies in southern England for the first time that I can remember. This has been courtesy of the ban on flights in response to the risk of volcanic ash thrown out by the volcanic eruption in Iceland. The skies are free of vapour trails and high cloud generated by aircraft. We have just has a very quiet and sunny evening meal in the garden.

We should reflect whether the time has come to charge the full environmental cost of flying. The EU would have to think again about its budget for tourism for the poor and disadvantaged. We might then observe exchanges taking place between adjacent countries to allow people to travel sustainably and engage with neighbouring societies. This would be a more useful way to give the poor a taste of alternative culture than further subsidies on flying.

Threats and Opportunities

2010-04-12T00:48:00.000-07:00

The classic view of the external business environment, taught at business schools everywhere, is through the lens of ‘threats and opportunities’.

Responding to ‘threats’, is about looking to the future in order to survive the cut and thrust of a constantly evolving business landscape. Responding to ‘opportunities’, is about looking to the future to grow the business to exploit new markets, new technologies and new ways to do business.

I believe in looking at the world as a series of opportunities. Focussing on threats, leads to defensive strategies and risk-averse tactics. Focussing on opportunities, leads to risk taking and support for innovation. These latter behaviours are the ones that I favour.

These same deep-rooted mental approaches apply also to government and to all of us. People, who focus on the threat of climate change, are digging themselves into a defensive rut of narrow thinking that attempts to squeeze carbon out of the processes we now operate. People, who focus on the opportunities that arise, are getting on with the work of transforming society to sever society’s reliance on fossil fuels.

There is a huge difference between shuffling forward in a timid manner driven by fear and leaping forward taking the problems that arise in our stride. I would rather be running a little too fast than shuffling far too slow.

Paying in Energy

2010-04-05T12:47:00.000-07:00

Iceland was lauded prior to 2008 on having clever entrepreneurs who could covert the nation from a remote island reliant on fishing to a major speculator in the realms of international finance. I remember the praise that was heaped on these financial wizards. The Icelanders bought a lot of UK companies and earned respect from overseas observers – although not from me. I was very wary of the alchemy that was being pursued. Conjuring up money and profits by playing the financial system does not fit my definition of sound business.

I like businesses based on innovation and genuinely novel ideas that seek to do something better or more efficiently. These companies deserve to prosper. It might be nothing more than the old and very successful business model built on community values that encourages hard graft from a loyal work force that are valued for who they are and not only the work they do.

The Iceland business model was more smoke and mirrors than hard graft. I was dealing with my parent’s affairs before the crash and was advised to put their savings into Icesave to get the best interest rate. It was advice I ignored. In hindsight, the UK government decided to back the deposits in Icesave so perhaps it was safe but it did not take much due diligence to see that this was a dodgy operation. It might have been better to let people learn the lesson that dodgy investments are to be avoided.

The UK government chose to bail out the savers and now seeks recompense from Iceland. An interesting idea has been floated by Gijs Graafland, the director of the Amsterdam-based Planck Foundation, that Iceland could pay back this debt in energy. Iceland straddles the fault line between North American and Eurasian tectonic plates and has good geothermal electric power potential. The power could be generated and passed to the UK through a new 750-mile underwater cable. That would be an innovative and useful idea.

Little Known Fact No 3 – Bottled Water

2010-03-29T00:02:00.000-07:00

UK bottled water consumption reached 34 litres per person in 2008, up from 27 litres in 2001. Bottled water consumption is projected to reach 40 litres per person by 2015. In the US, bottled water is drunk at an average rate of 105 litres per person up from 67 litres per head in 2002. In Italy bottled water consumption has grown from 194 litres per head in 2002 to an estimated 200 litres in 2008.

The UK market has a lot of room to grow if the market follows the lead in other countries. People are responding to health advice that drinking water is good for you and are concerned that the water they drink is pure and healthy. This is big business with a large, and growing, resources bill for the bottles and their transportation.

There have been a number of studies comparing the quality of bottled water with tap water. For Helsinki, tap water comes out with an excellent report. In fact there is one company bottling and shipping Helsinki tap water to be sold in the Middle East. London tap water may not get such glowing reports but it is healthy and safe to drink.

Carefully managing water supplies is vital to human health. It might be better to ensure that all our drinking water is safe and put the bottled water business (and the associated resource consumption) out of business.

That would then lead onto tackling another associated anomaly – that we use clean water for flushing toilets. We would not flush the toilet with Evian; why flush it with tap water? Flushing loos should reuse grey water from our washing activities.

Rather than bottled water, we need protected water sheds and more complex plumbing.

The Wrong Ice Conditions

2010-03-22T03:17:00.000-07:00

Sunday was a special day. I stood atop Suomenlinna, the Fortress Island that stands guard over the harbour of Helsinki. From there I looked out over the Baltic sea in one direction and across to the buildings of Helsinki on the other. Another high point on the island is surmounted by a church that doubles up as a light house. The regular pulses of light brought rhythm to the early dawn. Hopping across the snow in front of the church was a hare. The peaceful scene came at the end of a week when I had skied across the breadth of Finland from the Russian Border to the Swedish border.

The event was the ‘Border to Border’ ski marathon event. People from 18 countries came together to tackle the 440km route. The end point was Tornio a small town on the Swedish border. If all had gone according to plan; I would have ended by skiing across the Tornio River and right up to the lobby of the Town hotel.

It was not to be. Although this winter is the coldest for many years (dropping to minus 36 degrees C) the ice on the lakes and rivers was not as strong as it should have been. Heavy snows had come early in the winter whilst the ice was still thin. This had then provided insulation from the severe cold above preventing the formation of thick strong ice.

The ice on the Tornio River was strong enough to take skiers as evidenced by the large number of ice-hole fishermen sitting over their round holes in the ice with their short fishing rods. The problem was a river further to the east where there was water on the ice and snow on top of that. This river prevented us from going further. We were forced to end the journey a few km short of the full distance.

I still harbour the wish to finish the ‘Border to Border’ event at the doors of the hotel in Tornio, to take off my skis and walk downstairs and into the sauna to then relax. To fulfil my dream I will need to return another year when ice conditions are better.

Little Known Fact No 2 – Oil and Sheep

2010-03-08T02:26:00.000-08:00

Did you know; that in The Falkland Islands there are 160 sheep for every islander?
Did you also know; that for every sheep there is thought to be 120,000 barrels of oil reserves?

The foreign Office official position is that the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands depends on the wishes of the islanders. The war in 1982 was not about oil; but as the world faces shortages of black gold it may be a convenient time to drill for more in the waters off these remote islands. When the prime assets are sheep, the incentive to fight over the islands is low. If there proves to be commercially viable oil fields then the game changes.

In the unsustainable world in which we live the politicians will weigh off the cost of protection of this remote outpost with the potential revenue streams – sticking, of course, to the official line that it is the wishes of the residents that are paramount.

There is another possible outcome. The world could take the huge steps required to learn to live without fossil fuel. It seems preposterous, but it is feasible. Saudi Arabia understands the dangers and this is why the kingdom is so obstructive in negotiations over climate change and the need to reduce carbon emissions. Falkland Islanders should also not count their barrels of oil before they are pumped. If the world takes the required action to stop climate change, then the commercial and political case to make the Falkland Islands a new oil producing nation may never add up.

I suspect that there will be a window of opportunity for an oil boom in the Falklands. However wool from sheep is a better long-term bet for the Falkland Islands in a sustainable world society.

Hummer RIP

2010-03-01T01:43:00.000-08:00

"General Motors said on Wednesday that it would shut down Hummer, the brand of big sport utility vehicles that became synonymous with the term gas guzzler, after a deal to sell it to a Chinese manufacturer fell apart." —The New York Times, Feb. 25, 2010

In 2007 I wrote about massive change in society that I described as the Sustainable Revolution. My book Adapt and Thrive was published the following year. I predicted that the future of the Hummer brand would be a barometer of when the revolution was ready to take off.

“Driving an SUV will be a good barometer of where we have reached. Having one is a proud aspiration of many drivers now, but when fashion changes they will not enjoy the ridicule that will be heaped upon them. This will not be a clear-cut transition, as, even if we push the costs prohibitively high, there could be a small hard core who take pleasure in demonstrating their ability to pay. It will only be when they are shunned socially for their choice of vehicle, and the latest Hummer is no longer the thing to be seen driving, that the SUV will finally leave our city streets.”
Adapt and Thrive: The Sustainable Revolution, by Peter McManners 2008.

If I am right, then the death of the Hummer brand heralds the start of the Sustainable Revolution.

Little Known Fact No 1 – Canned Soup

2010-02-22T17:20:00.000-08:00

Did you know; that in January 2010 57 million cans of Heinz soup were sold in the UK, a rise of 11 million cans over the same period in 2009?

If soup was used a measure of economic performance, then an increase of 20% year-on-year sales would indicate that the recession is over; but there might be more to these head-line figures than appears at first sight. My mind wanders to pictures of the soup kitchens operating in the Great Depression of the 1930s, doling out hot soup to the unemployed. Perhaps the consumption of more soup is an indication of belt tightening and moving down market in choices of easy meals. I suspect that sales of tinned caviar will not have seen a corresponding increase.

Soup has the reputation of food for the poor (or cheapest starters on the menu) because it is so cheap and easy to produce, consisting mostly of water. It seems odd that such a stream of waste metal and the associated carbon emissions in moving the cans from factory to consumer is tolerated.

People like the convenience of opening a can of soup. Fresh soup takes more effort. Ingredients need to be chopped and then cooked. Powdered soup is another option but it is always second best - to the can. Fresh ingredients have to be bought; cans sit on the shelf awaiting their moment of consumption for months or years. A fresh and easy option would be a small pack of herbs to drop into a pan with chopped seasonal vegetables, but we are not prepared to wait the time.

If we pause and think about it, the can is obsolescent technology from a past era when keeping food fresh was a challenge. The time has come to regard canned food as old technology. There may be certain specific foods that require being canned; or specific arduous conditions such as military operations where the can remains the best option. But even the military would not waste logistic capacity on canned soup.

Economics or Fashion?

2010-02-15T03:58:00.000-08:00

Economists delight in working out the figures to support a rationale business case. If the proposal makes money (or saves money) enough to offset the expenditure then it is a sound investment. Anyone who lives in the real world – which is most of us – knows that there is more to life than rational economic decisions.

I committed to fitting solar Photovoltaic (PV) panels to my roof before the government announced the PV feed-in tariffs. I made the decision on the basis that this is what each building must have if we are to start to reduce carbon emissions. My decision was based on wanting to show leadership and ‘walk the talk’ to back up my calls for change. For me, it was not a rational economic decision, although I did have a suspicion that energy prices will climb high over the years ahead and that the expenditure might be a good hedge against such circumstances. The pay-back period, based on current energy prices, went way beyond the expected life of the system (30 years). It made no economic sense – but I wanted to fit PV despite this.

The UK government has now announced the feed-in tariff. Householders will be paid 41.3 pence per KW for retrofitted (36.1 pence for new build) starting from 1 April. The pay-back period for my system is now less than 20 years (based on current energy prices). There is now a robust business case to support a decision I took on a non-economic basis. Will that mean a flood of people following my example? No, people are not rationale in the way that economists assume for their calculations.

There is still deep-rooted opposition to PV panels on roofs despite the fact that they are a sound investment. What is needed is fashion change. When it is fashionable to have PV panels on the roof then people will invest in them to keep up with the Jones. Mine are hidden away out of sight on the side of the house and the generation meter hidden in the garage. Not much showing off to be had, but when I drive my electric car I can claim, with some justification that I am driving with zero emissions. That gives a certain warm glow inside that I am doing the right thing, but also, on this occasion, I am now behaving according to rationale economic analysis.

Fixing the Global Economy

2010-02-08T01:36:00.000-08:00

From a superficial glance, the global economy is looking much better. World leaders have given the economy a big boost with massive stimulus packages. Shares prices have recovered and if the size of bank bonuses is an indicator then the banking system is back in good health.

A quick fix was needed to prevent economic meltdown. Now that apparent stability has returned we need to take a long hard look at the economy - and society. People are starting to question capitalism and so they should. There are fundamental problems that can only be fixed by a major overhaul.

When the economy was booming people were reluctant to look beneath the figures. Now that the gearbox of the global economy has started to make some ugly noises we need to look deep inside at the mechanics. The return to stability may be little more than the actions of a bent second-hand car salesmen who has tipped sawdust in the gearbox to dull the noise. Such a short-term fix leads to a massive bill in the future.

We need to examine the purpose of finance and bring it back to support the real economy and society. This may mean taking apart the gearbox, cleaning it, fixing it where necessary and reassembling the pieces.

Being Responsible for the Future

2010-02-01T06:59:00.000-08:00

The stated aim of the World Economic Forum that closed in Davos yesterday was to:

“Improve the State of the World: Rethink, Redesign, Rebuild”

The discussions demonstrated some rethinking, but there little evidence of agreement over a coherent redesign, and therefore no shared vision of how to rebuild the world economy.

Not surprisingly, there was a lot of talk about banking and bankers, but the three issues that struck me from the final session were more fundamental than problems in the financial system. These are issues that reach right into the heart of the principles with which we manage the economy.

First, were reports of the call from President Nicolas Sarkozy for the need to add a moral dimension if we are to be able to save capitalism. I interpret this to mean that capitalism is not in itself a problem, but capitalism without a moral compass is. A number of speakers echoed this theme.

Second, there was a discussion over the relationship between stakeholder value and shareholder value. The business leaders at Davos seemed to accept (partly as a consequence of the financial crisis) that a narrow focus on shareholder value is not sustainable. If business neglects the needs of a range of stakeholders, and thereby loses the support of society, then the business will suffer.

Finally, a brief vignette caught my attention. The point of view represented was that the bail-out of the financial system had made the situation worse. The world economy was pictured as a car that has been prevented from driving off a cliff. However that car was now racing downhill even faster than before. This summons up a vision of the world economy charging into an even bigger car wreck as stimulus measures are withdrawn.

The results coming out of Davos are inconclusive. I offer my interpretation of the deductions that follow from the discussion. We need a moral compass; stakeholders are important and we must steer the economy onto a safer track. That means being responsible for the future, putting people before profits and in doing so retreat from a narrow focus on growth as the prime measure of progress. This is my conclusion, but it is unlikely to be the conclusion that we will read in the final reports coming out of Davos.

What to Discuss in Davos?

2010-01-25T03:40:00.000-08:00

The World Economic Forum Annual Meeting starts later this week in Davos Switzerland. This gathering of leaders from all walks of life has helped to shape the global agenda at the start of each year since 1970. This year, there are claims that climate change is a hoax and expectations that the financial crisis of 2008 is now over. So what is there left to discuss at Davos?

There are two categories of people who may be less in evidence than previous years – bankers and climate scientists. Bankers have fared worst; their reputation as masters of the universe has been shown to be less than accurate. Unwisely, they have further tarnished their image by awarding themselves a big slice of the bumper profits made on the back of cheap money provided by governments. This is insensitive at the very least. If they want to keep the tentacles of government regulation out of banking then they should have shown more respect for public opinion and taken more responsibility for their actions. Some bankers have been forced out (with their pension pots intact) but few have fallen on their swords or expressed contrition.

Climate scientists - and the chairman of the IPCC in particular - are also in the dog house. Exaggerated claims and sloppy research have made their way into the IPCC reports. These are vital documents that world leaders need to be able to justify taking action. The evidence that climate change is a threat to society is robust, but the presentation of the evidence to persuade a sceptical public has to be transparent and accurate. There are echoes of Tony Blair’s attempt to justify the war in Iraq by over stating the evidence (as we will hear more of on Friday when he appears before the Iraq inquiry). Such deception leaves a bitter taste and is best avoided even if the intentions are honest.

These are dangerous times as leaders gather in Davos. The crisis is far from over – the flaws in the financial system have not been fixed, just papered over. Climate change is real and we are not taking action to reduce the threat. There is plenty to discuss in Davos. We need to move beyond bashing bankers and scientists (no matter how well justified) and get on with the process of building a sustainable future for society.

The UK Reopens for Business

2010-01-18T02:20:00.000-08:00

Britain has been gripped by the coldest winter for decades. Many parts of the country have been paralysed; children’s education has been interrupted and many businesses have had to curtail operations. The thaw has brought welcome relief.

I lived in Finland 2004 to 2008 where such weather is normal and may last for months. The Finns are equipped for such weather; the society and the economy hardly miss a beat, except in the most severe storms. Here in the UK, some people argue for better contingency plans, more snow ploughs and larger stockpiles of salt.

It is ironic that this spell of cold weather comes hard on the heels of the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference. Climate change deniers have welcomed it with glee, claiming that this weather is proof that global warming is an elaborate hoax peddled by scientists wanting to keep their research funding. But weather is not the same as climate. Climate is all about long-term trends; weather is fickle and changeable. According to the UK Meteorological office, ‘the current cold weather in the UK is part of the normal regional variations’. Concurrent with cold weather in the UK, many places in the far north have seen temperatures above normal – in many places by more than 5 °C, and in parts of northern Canada, by more than 10 °C. According to the US National Snow and Ice Data Center, the cause of this warm weather in the Arctic is an ‘extreme negative phase of the Arctic Oscillation (AO)’ – a natural pattern of climate variability.

Cold weather in the UK does not disprove global warming nor lessen its dangers. There is a simple fact that cannot be ignored; if all other variables remain the same, an atmosphere with a higher concentration of carbon dioxide will absorb more of the sun’s radiation. The weather may respond in a number of ways but the overall trend towards a warmer planet can only be stopped, and reversed, by breaking the world’s reliance on the burning of fossil fuels.

As for the UK’s contingency plans for a long spell of freezing weather, what should we do? We could procure all the equipment to be able to run our country like the Finns run Finland. This is not warranted. It would be more cost-effective to close down our little island for one week each decade than to keep it running through the rare big freeze.

We should remember that the sledging has been great and the weather excellent for building snowmen and for snow sculpture. The McManners tribe constructed a Tardis in our back garden which makes it look as if Dr Who has come to call. The kids may not have learnt much at school but they have had a lot of fun. Let’s stop work and enjoy the winter fun on the few occasions we have the chance, knowing that, for the UK, it is the most cost-effective solution.

Learning a New Rhythm

2010-01-11T00:06:00.000-08:00

I was reminded of the power of repetition in returning to the river yesterday afternoon to race against the Durham University first rowing VIII. It is over 30 years since my last race in a rowing boat but the instinct came flooding back. The old boy’s boat went well (for a short period) but as expected the younger men won.

Rowing in perfect unison is a good analogy of successful society and a successful corporation. We each play our part according to a unifying rhythm. Once we have learnt how to operate we repeat the same actions over and over again reinforcing success and getting ever more efficient.

Novice oarsmen or women take many months to get the balance, a feel for the water and the rhythm that will take them through the race. Old hands like us could slip into old habits with ease. In the past, many hours, days, weeks and months on the river have honed our instincts into a perfect machine. These habits are not forgotten but it would now be tough to learn a new rhythm.

The thirty years since my undergraduate days has seen a huge expansion in the world economy and a huge increase in the pressure we are placing on the environment. The rhythm with which we run society is focused on economic outcomes. This rhythm has become ingrained and second nature.

It will be hard to change the rhythm to a different beat but change it we must. This new rhythm is sustainability. If you are not used to it, you have to concentrate hard or get caught in a number of traps. Take heart; sustainable policy and sustainable operations have a much more natural rhythm. Once learned it will run much more smoothly and intuitively, but putting aside the rhythm of the past will take time.

Opening the Decade of Change

2010-01-04T16:19:00.000-08:00

This is the beginning of the second decade of the 21st century when I hope and expect there will be a major shift in the way we run human affairs. Society needs new ideas and a new direction.

The Noughties (as the BBC called the last decade) has set the scene for change through demonstrating that continuation of the policies of the 20th century will not solve the world’s problems. As the new millennium dawned, it was hoped that there would be substantive progress towards the Millennium Development Goals. It was hoped that world leaders would embrace sustainability and reduce pressure on the environment. It was hoped that the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference 2009 would be the crowning achievement of the decade and solve climate change for us and future generations. It was not to be. Human society has found that, despite good intentions, the straightjacket of 20th century policies is preventing progress.

If there is one word that can describe the policy framework that brought economic success to the closing decades of the 20th century, it would be ‘globalization’. Our commitment to the concept of open markets, free flows of capital and deregulation has been dented by the financial crisis, but confidence is returning. The fact that the global economy has been rescued from immediate collapse gives breathing space to start work on medium-term solutions. We must use the opportunity well, not to reinforce the policies of the 20th century but to craft a framework fit for the 21st century.

I hope to see the concept of sustainability mature into a robust policy framework that is understood by all and implemented widely. The second decade will set the direction of the 21st century but only when we accept the need to leave the concepts of the 20th century behind.