Are We Closer To A Climate Deal?

The whole point of the People's Climate March was to convince world leader's that people what the politicians to meet the challenge of climate change head on.

300,000 marched through the streets of New York last Sunday in anticipation of the special meeting of leaders called by U.N. secretary general Ban Ki Moon for 2 days later.

President Obama even gave mention to the march in his speech at that meeting.

Ban Ki's intention was to add some momentum to the climate decision making process in the lead up to next year's meeting in Paris where we should get a final, international climate deal.

And it does appear that the U.S. and China finally seem to be getting the message: There is no negotiating with climate.

Both of them showed a new sense of realism and urgency. They appear to finally get the fact that it's getting late, and our generation holds the fate of all future generations in it's hands.

Unfortunately, it's a bit early to celebrate yet.

Firstly, a credible climate deal has yet to be agreed, and there are many sticking points to be worked through.

Secondly, politicians are famous for making promises they don't keep.

Thirdly, whatever Obama puts in place in his own country, can be overturned the next time a Republican gets into the Whitehouse: Because, as far as they're concerned, political dogma trumps anything else.

The only hope we have of a strong deal that get's carried out is if the people make it loud and clear that the politians have no choice but to listen to us for a change.

So, yeah, this week's been a promising one, but we need to keep the pressure up.

The People's Climate Marches have to get bigger and much louder. Our kids are depending on us.

Joining The People's Climate March In London

Well, we were there yesterday, how about you?

It was quite a day really. Huge numbers were there (I later found out it was 40,000). Emma Thompson (the actress) joined us (Er, the march, not my family). And with loads of people in animal-based carnival costumes, and a number of bands walking with us, there was often a carnival-like atmosphere to the march.

I'm sure the cynics would say the march was made up of hippies, tree-huggers, conspiracy theorists, and nut-jobs, but I didn't get that impression at all. There were a great many ordinary, concerned citizens like us, citizens who just want governments to stop talking and start acting on climate change.

Are Electric Cars The Future? Part 2

The Tesla Roadster (EV)

Electric vehicles (EVs) have been a regular subject in this blog. Mainly because they represent a technology that could help us head off the worst of climate change.

The trouble is, like all new technology, it has a number of issues it's got to overcome before it can reach it's true potential.

Around 2 years ago I looked at those issues in this post, and concluded that, with time they'd be sorted out.

The main problems back then were:

• The cost of buying an EV e.g. Some £22000 for a Nissan Leaf (after government subsidy of £5k).
• Limited range on a full charge (80 - 90 miles. Less in the Winter).
• Re-charging took several hours (up to 13).
• Very few charging points available.
• The perception that batteries have a short life and are very expensive to replace (Up to £7000).

 All pretty serious obstacles to EVs taking over from standard cars.

So, has anything changed since I wrote that post? Actually, yes.

For a start, as predicted, prices haven fallen (e.g. £16490 for a Leaf). If that's still too rich for you, then consider this: Comparing EV to petrol for 10k miles p.a. you save £3k per year.

This is because a) Electricity is cheaper than petrol and not subject to fuel tax; b) EVs are more efficient than their petrol equivalents; c) Servicing and maintenance is minimal as there are fewer moving parts in an electric motor (the only part which will require maintenance is the batteries); d) EVs are exempt from road tax (Source: Here)

Here in the UK, superfast charge points are being rolled out at many motorway service stations. They can charge batteries to 80% in 20 to 30 minutes (See here for more) - About the time it takes to have a coffee and visit the loo.

The gathering pace of the charge point rollout is mirrored in many countries in Europe. More about charging here.

The technology behind EVs and their various components is improving day by day. And it should receive a considerable boost from the introduction of a Formula E racing season (the EV equivalent of Formula 1). The inaugural 10 race season started this month in Beijing and is driven through the streets of major cities around the world like London, Berlin, Buenos Aires, and Miami. With major manufacturers and big money involved, there should be plenty of innovation coming to ordinary EVs in the new future.

Climate March: Time To Make A Difference

On Sunday the 21st of September 2014, we get the chance to show our leaders that we want them to take decisive action on climate change: The biggest climate march ever will be taking place across the globe.

This will be just 2 days before world leaders get together for a major UN climate summit in New York. Let's make sure they get the message that we them to do more than just talk.

Want to join the march? This link will help you find the nearest march to you.

Make a difference. Do it for your children.

Vacuum cleaners: Is Less Power A Bad Thing?

The EU have brought in a new rule that bans vacuum cleaners with wattages over 900W. It's part of a plan to improve energy efficiency in domestic appliances, and it won't stop at vacuums.

Will it work?

Well, the EU argues that more watts does not mean more cleaning power. The manufacturers would like you to believe that, which is why some of them regularly bump up their products' wattage, but it's not necessarily true.

What's actually important with vacuums is that they are efficient e.g. Getting the most suction per watt as possible. That's a design thing, and it's perfectly possible.

Naturally the manufacturers are up in arms about it, mainly because most of their ranges are now banned and they will have to re-design. The cost of that will either hit their profits or push up prices (Bet I can guess which...).

However, in the long run, lower wattage appliances mean better energy efficiency, cheaper electric bills for us, and lower carbon emissions. Do that all across Europe, for all appropriate appliances (e.g. Kettles wouldn't be), and the EU have made a big dent in their carbon cutting targets.

Fighting Climate Change: Will Meat Be Off The Menu?

Carbon emissions from global agriculture is comparable to those generated by all the world's transport put together. Each of them making up around 15% of total emissions.

The rearing of livestock makes up around half the carbon from agriculture. A phenomenal amount.

With an increasing world population, and a growing proportion able to afford meat, these emissions can only go up, making a huge contribution to climate change.

Additional environmental impacts arise from all the forests that are being cleared to provide land and feed for the expanding livestock population.

All this is environmentally and economically unsustainable.

So what can be done? Will we all have to become vegetarian?

Not really, say scientists: We need to eat less red meat, especially beef, because it takes a lot more land to feed a cow (e.g. 28 times more than chicken) kilo for kilo; eat less meat (how about having a meat free day or having fish instead?); and stop wasting food (not just us consumers but all the along the supply chain).

If we all did this, we'd not only be helping the environment, we'd be saving money, and eating healthier. It's a win-win-win.

What Will 2 Degrees Of Warming Mean For Us?

The World Resources Institute has created this handy 'infographic' to summarise 4 potential future scenarios from the IPCC concerning climate change.

They range from the likely best case scenario (+2 degrees C by 2100) to the worst case scenario of +4.8 C.

The best case will only happen if a strong global agreement on cutting carbon emissions is made next year, leading to emissions peaking by 2020 and falling steeply thereafter. A big ask.

But even this would leave us with an uncomfortable future. Here are some headlines:

• 24% more of the population will have reduced groundwater resources by the 2080's.
• 4 times as many people will be exposed each year to once in a century flooding by the 2080's.
• 35% of the world's coral reefs will suffer long term damage in the next few decades.
• Dairy production in Australia will decline by 2030.

This, of course, does not take into account any 'tipping points' which may be reached on the way to +2 C which may throw us into an even warmer world.

The worst case scenario (+4.8C), which will basically come about with business as usual, doesn't even bare thinking about: 

• 38% more of the population will have reduced groundwater resources by the 2080's.
• 12 times as many people will be exposed each year to once in a century flooding by the 2080's.
• 59% of the world's coral reefs will suffer long term damage in the next few decades.
• Heat stress for workers will reduce global productivity by over 20% by 2100.
• Ranges of many plants and animals will be reduced by > 50% by the 2080s. Widespread extinctions are expected.
• Impacts on agricultural production and food security will be so great that they cannot be adapted to.
• Soybean production in Brazil will drop by 44% by 2050. Growing coffee will probably not be possible in some parts of Brazil by 2100.

Any temperature rise more than 2 C is pretty much certain to trigger tipping points, so 4.8C is a minimum. If you want to get an idea of just how bad things could get at these higher temperatures try reading Six Degrees by Mark Lynas.

So, if anyone tells you we don't need to deal with climate change, tell them they're talking garbage.

Indicators Of Climate Change

Rising global temperatures (an average of +0.9C since pre-industrial times) aren't the only clue to on-going climate change.

Here's a run-down of some of the others:

• As the atmosphere warms decade by decade, so do the oceans, at a slower rate, but it's still rising. 90% of the heat from global warming is actually being absorbed by the seas.
• Glaciers and icesheets all over the world are shrinking at an increasing rate. 
• Average Spring snow cover in the northern hemisphere has decreased by 1.6% a decade since the late sixties.
• Average sea-levels have risen by more than 18cm over the last century due to thermal expansion as the oceans warm up, plus glacier and icesheet loss.
• Permafrost is shrinking worldwide, releasing methane, a potent 'greenhouse gas' into the atmosphere.
• In the US (and the UK) Spring is coming earlier. Sounds nice for us, but not so good for plants and animals which are struggling to adapt.

All this with less than a 1 degree C rise in temperature. Makes you think.

More detail here.

Food: What A Waste.

The latest projections are that the world's population will be around 9.2 billion by 2050. The U.N. estimates that, as a result, food production will have to double by the middle of the century.

It's a tall order.

One big problem is the amount of food we waste: One third of all food is wasted or around $750 billion a year (See here).


Food is wasted at all stages from the field to our forks and in all countries, rich or poor:

• During harvesting (e.g. Supermarkets rejecting whole crops because they aren't the right size, colour or shape).
• Storage (a particular problem in poor countries where food rots before it gets to the customer).
• Processing and packaging.
• Distribution (e.g. Choosy customers not buying blemished veg)
• Consumption (Including people throwing out food that passes it's Sell-by date even though it hasn't reached it's Use By date, which is what we should really be following).

The fault lies with everyone along the line but because food is relatively cheap, we don't bother putting it right.

Obviously, as the population grows, and food becomes more expensive as a result (demand vs. supply), people may start to change their behaviour.

Long before that point is reached though, the poor will struggle to afford it. Some would say that is already beginning to happen. In effect, the demand from the 'rich' (that's you and me) is limiting the accessibilty of food for the poor.
Here's another bunch of statistics (not necessarily directly related ...yet) from the World Health Organisation (WHO): World obesity has doubled since 1980; At least 1.2 billion adults are overweight and 500 million of these are obese (See here).

Meanwhile, approximately 870 million people are undernourished (See here).

That's wrong on so many levels.

We need to stop wasting food now, not when it starts hitting our pockets. In the long run it'll save us money, as well as help the poor, reduce our carbon foortprint and cut the amount of landfill.

The way we live at the moment cannot be sustained for much longer. We need to think differently, to live differently, if our kids are to have anywhere near the quality of life we have. And not being so wasteful is as good a start as any.

The Economics of Climate Change

If there's one reason why a global climate deal hasn't been reached yet, it's economics.

Developing nations want to continue developing. Developed nations don't want to be lose competitive advantage.

Poor nations want support for mitigation and adaptation. Rich nations don't want to spend too much on supporting them.

And, underlying it all, everyone knows there'll be a cost to cutting carbon emissions

But is that cost too much?

Well, climate deniers think so. They think it'll mean jobs losses, massive costs to governments and, as a consequence, tax increases for all of us. So it's a major part of their argument against doing anything about climate change.

But, as always, the climate deniers only see what they want to.

Doing nothing to curb emissions will mean global temperatures will rise by around 4C by the end of the century. That is 2 degrees more than what is generally agreed to be the maximum we can safely risk.

So far we've only experienced a 0.8C rise and yet we are already getting an increase in freak weather events: Super-storms; record breaking droughts and temperatures; and flooding to name just a few.

As the global temperature rises, we'll get more and more of the same, plus increasing problems from rising sea levels.

So we can look forward to:

• Failed crops across huge areas, leading to volatile food prices.
• Widespread flooding on a regular basis, inflating our insurance costs. Some people will find their properties to be un-insurable.
• Towns, cities, and infrastructure on coasts or rivers will need to be defended against flooding, meaning more tax for us all. 
• The health implications of heatwaves and the migration of diseases into formerly cooler climes will be enormous. That's more tax or more expensive health insurance for us all.
• Businesses will be hit hard by the flooding, heatwaves, increased insurance and tax, and the cost of climate adaptation. Some will go under, many will cut jobs to keep their costs down.
• We'll all have to pay more for water as it becomes scarcer.
• ....and much more besides.

In short, business-as-usual, will mean anything but. The costs of doing nothing will far out-weigh those of actually dealing with climate change in the first place.

Obama's Legacy?

For some years now, President Obama has been trying to make good on his promise to tackle carbon emissions in the U.S. However, he has been thwarted at every attempt to get it through the U.S. Congress, by the Republicans, who have killed off everything, no matter how watered down.

So the president is now tackling emissions via the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). They have proposed a rule whereby there will be a 30% cut from 2005 levels by 2030 (See the proposal here).

These include tough limits on coal-fired plants, so the ultimate outcome may be a huge switch to natural gas fueled stations which produce around half the carbon of coal stations for the same amount of energy.

First, though, there will be a year long consultation period, and then the various States have until June 30, 2016 to come up with their plans to implement the rule - A few months before Obama leaves office.

Individual States can achieve the reduction any way they choose, whether it's by more renewables, shutting down coal stations, cap-and-trade and so on. This flexibility will give the rule a much better chance of working, especially if there are legal challenges (Which, of course, there will be).

Interestingly, by using 2005 as the baseline year, the country's emissions are already down 15%, thanks to things like the shale gas revolution. There is so much more they can do to achieve the remainder.

Aside from cutting carbon emissions, the proposed rule will also have considerable health benefits as it will also reduce the air pollution produced by the coal-fired stations - That could save around $50 billion every year.

This won't kill off coal yet - The U.S. and the rest of the world is too dependent on it, and renewables are nowhere near taking over from it any time soon - but it may be the start of a lengthy decline.

The new rule will have much wider implications though. It makes a global climate agreement far more likely come late 2015 in Paris, and it will up the ambition of countries like China and India who have been dragging their feet, citing the american lack of effort as a reason. Already various countries and blocs have welcomed the news. Suddenly the U.S. are being hailed as heroes, with Obama at their head.

Of course, there's a long way to go before the rule is in place. The fossil fuel industry will fight it all the way, and the Republicans will no doubt try to axe it or the EPA the first chance they get, out of sheer spite, but Obama has a very real chance here of leaving a lasting legacy: Future generations (our kids amongst them) may look back on this move as the game-changer that gave them hope.

Re-boot

Wow, it's been a while since my last post.

There were several reasons for my lack of activity here: I was cheesed off by the lack of feedback I was getting; I was doing an on-line climate change course that was taking up my time; I was getting bored with covering the same old ground.

Well, I've decided to freshen things up with a new approach.

I will be attempting to avoid moaning about politicians, climate deniers, and all the other negatives connected with climate change, and concentrate on more positive aspects. Such as the science, the solutions, and progress towards a global agreement.

If you go to the tab at the top of this page called "The Reason For This Blog", you'll find that I'm not some extreme environmentalist hell-bent on destroying your lifestyle, I'm just a dad who wants his kids, all kids to have a decent future.

That doesn't mean we have to go back to the Dark Ages as some climate deniers would have you believe, it just means we have to act more responsibly.

Does The World Need Fixing?

I'm currently reading a book called Seven Ways To Fix The World by Christopher Barnatt. It's proving to be a really good read.

It's basic idea is: We humans are building up a lot of problems for ourselves; We need to solve them; and the only way we can do that is change the very way society functions.

The problems Barnatt lists are peak oil, climate change, peak water, food shortages, resource depletion, population expansion, and unchecked economic growth.

Most of these have been covered in my blog (and best summarised here), so you'd expect me to agree that the world needs fixing. However, a few things have occurred to me while reading the book.

• Since I first talked about peak oil (Here), it's become apparent that there are now enough reserves of oil to theoretically last a another couple of decades before peak oil is reached. However, because most of the new reserves are in difficult places (e.g. The Arctic and deep ocean), oil prices may reach unsustainable levels well before then anyway.

• The first 5 items on Barnatt's list are basically all a result of a combination of the last 2. There are just too many people on this planet demanding more and more stuff. This may sound like the same old, tired rhetoric the greens come out with but there's an important point here: Any one of those first five items will have profound consequences for all of us - The current global financial crisis is like a tea party compared to what they could do to us - and all of them will happen if we stick with business as usual.