Bob Edwards wrote an astute comment on the blog this morning, suggesting that it is easy to get depressed about politics right now, but the way to deal with it is to actually do those things we are capable of that might help effect change. He's right.
So in the interests of full disclosure I put it on record that I have signed up as a member of Extinction Rebellion.
We face a climate crisis: indeed, that may understate the issue. And most people have not noticed. Nor will they take action unless the urgency of the situation is reiterated time after time, and then time again. In that case non-violent, deeply respectful, fully accountable, direct action has a place in creating the change we need. So I have signed up to indicate my support.
How often you will find me blocking roads I do not know. What I do know is that those who want radical change have to say so. And this is a way of doing so.
But I also accept that such gestures are not enough. I am making other commitments. For example, I am planning to radically reduce my meat consumption. And the already booked trip by air to Vienna next month will be my last to undertake a straightforward speaking engagement. Whilst when it comes to teaching and other such engagements I will now be looking for alternatives whenever possible, as a matter of course. The academic preference for flying hither and thither is something to be consigned to the past. I accept that being the change you want to see is part of the process of transformation, and that I have, wherever possible, to walk the talk now.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Thanks Richard.
I decided against taking any flights this year. There are plenty of places for good holidays in the UK, or that are accessible by train.
Some flights can still achieve a net social benefit though. Trolls love making a point about Emma Thompson flying over to give support for Extinction Rebellion, but the additional awareness she generated will far outweigh her emissions. We can’t stop all emissions right now, so using some as a Force Multiplier is absolutely ok, and probably required.
I have taken one flight for social reasons in 20 years
“I have taken one flight for social reasons in 20 years”
That’s some odd mathematics. Pun intended, as of course, one is an odd number.
But a serious question follows – after air travel, what’s the 2nd worst method of travel for the environment? I expect a member of the Green New Deal group to know! Or ask someone who does.
The return flight was cancelled: the Icelandic volcano erupted and I cam home by train and ferry
The maths is right
And I don’t play silly games – so please don’t play them or I will add you to the banned list
There is enough to do in life without dealing with wannabe trolls
Nick Neutral says:
” — after air travel, what’s the 2nd worst method of travel for the environment? ”
Given the bad press cows are getting in the troll media, I’d hazard a guess that the answer is ….ox cart (?)
Adam H says:
” Trolls love making a point about Emma Thompson flying over to give support for Extinction Rebellion, but the additional awareness she generated will far outweigh her emissions. ”
Trolls on the other hand since they are mostly ‘talking out of their arses’ are adding constantly to to emissions of methane which is one of the worst of the ‘greenhouse gases’. 🙂
Great news. Welcome aboard! I have no doubt you will be a real asset.
Also very pleasing to read of the positive steps you are undertaking on a personal level. Thumbs up!
Glad to hear you’re going to fly less. There’s a network effect from people making these changes 🙂
Much support in letters to the editor page, all supporting Greta and Extinction Rebellion, and adjacent, picture of World Coal Sack carrying championships with competitors humping 50 kg sacks of coal on their shoulders. I bet they’d appreciate zero carbon coal…….
It is a great pity that international rail travel is so much more costly than air travel. It is about three or four times more to go to Poland than by air.
Eric Walker says:
“It is a great pity that international rail travel is so much more costly than air travel. It is about three or four times more to go to Poland than by air.”
….and takes longer…..
Aviation fuel of course ‘attracts’ a very low level of taxation. If it was taxed as road transport fuel is taxed there would be lot less frivolous flying going on….. So much that goes on in our lives is shaped by tax policies which were directed to particular ends. Often the original intention is forgotten and we keep doing the same thing because ‘nobody’ notices, or we choose to skirt-over it.
You’d think somebody would run a blog dedicated to Tax Research…….. 🙂
I need to do another Tax to Save The Economy
Welcome to the cause! I have joined and support them too.
I may get to a few demonstrations, but mostly will be ‘raising awareness’, campaigning locally, basically doing little things, what else can individuals do.
I have preferred trains and ferries for years. I’m also saving up to buy a hybrid car. An electric car in rural Wales would be a nonsense at the moment because of the large distances between destinations and the lack of electric re-charging points, and relying on public transports or the railways only is also a nonsense here right now, though that may change in the future. We’re also campaigning for some pre-1960s tracks to be reopened and more electrification of diesel routes, in South Wales especially. Westminster is not keen to help fund that, and the Senedd is apparently short of cash. If it gets to have more tax raising power, the campaign may be heard.
Our house is well insulated and energy efficient, the garden full of birds and bees friendly plants, trees…and weeds. No pesticides at all. Just elbow grease.
Changing consumer habits can have an impact, and I have done that for years. I’ve never liked shopping and fashion annoys me, for many reasons; the clothing industry is a huge polluter and exploiter. I buy just what I need, classic quality made to last for years…and gets recycled.
Most of the harm is done at industry level, and lobbying MPs has limited results because they have limited power.
That’s where I get frustrated, so I’m aware the little changes to my little life are only to be able to look at my children and tell them I did try, and that individuals can do their bit but need to join others to be heard.
Still, if everyone changed some habits, industry would get the message.
Look at the car industry, it is feeling the pressure. More pressure is needed on all fronts, that’s why the Extinction Rebellion is a good move, and I sincerely hope they won’t just be a flash in the pan, and won’t be ‘recuperated’ by political forces with their own agendas. The two things need to be kept apart, and politicians need to listen.
Well done you! We are making changes 2 and have decided to buy no more coal and to buy no more beef. Small things I know but if everyone does something it all adds up….
One of the quickest and easiest ways to reduce pollution would be to reduce the speed limit on motorways and dual carriageways to 60mph and on A roads to 50mph. This could reduce emissions by about 20% and the difference this would make to most daily commute times would be negligible. For a longer journeys of 180 miles, the difference would be 25 minutes at most, probably less in real-world driving conditions. Added benefits might be some modal shift for longer journeys. The reduced national speed limits could be introduced almost immediately if the political will is there.
More could be done to encourage car sharing, single occupancy vehicles could be banned from congestion hotspots at peak times, businesses could be incentivised to introduce shared transport (including buses) for workers. A workplace parking tax for businesses in congestion hotspots could be introduced to encourage these changes. Businesses should have to consider the impact that its workers’ commuting and business travel and its transport of materials, finished products etc have on the environment. This may encourage some to relocate, to reduce the amount of business travel and to use different modes of transport.
An outright ban on new cars that emit more than, say, 150g/km of CO2 could be introduced and vehicles that exceed, say, 100g/km of CO2 could be banned from congestion hotspots during peak times. These CO2 limits could be progressively reduced each year. Technology exists today to easily meet these figures. The aim should be to progressively reduce, then eliminate, the use of fossil fuels in the transport sector.
Some may say that these steps are not ambitious enough but they would be a significant step in the right direction and would be quick and easy to implement.
In the longer term, reducing the birth rate would make a significant difference. Some may say that the Tories austerity policies and welfare reforms are facilitating this by discouraging larger families and by reducing life expectancy. I find their policies to be abhorrent but reducing the population clearly has environmental benefits.
Another significant contributor to pollution is gas used for heating, cooking and electricity generation. Replacing this with renewable electricity should be an ambition but would require massive investments, not just in terms of generating capacity but also in a massively upgraded national grid that would be needed to satisfy the demand. During the course of a year, I currently use six or seven times more KWh of gas than electricity. During the coldest winter days, I probably use twenty times more. If I were also to switch to an electric car, my electricity consumption would increase further still.
If I am typical of most consumers then the number of extra renewable generation and energy storage projects, and the rusulting massive upgrades to the national grid that would be needed for the UK to eliminate the use of natural gas would constitute the biggest infrastructure project in UK history by scores of orders of magnitude. How long would this take? Has any thought been given to the sheer scale of this challenge and the impact that all this infrastructure would have on our surroundings?
Governments undoubtedly need to do much, much more to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels but there also needs to be a bit more realism on the part of climate activists about the scale of the challenge. If we were to stop using fossil fuels tomorrow, as advocated by many, the electricity grid would collapse, almost all businesses would close, transport would grind to a halt, food supplies would be impossible, people would either starve or freeze to death, law and order would break down and there would be anarchy.
I recently asked a Green MSP to provide a sensible, costed plan to eliminate fossil fuels, to say what impact this would have on the national grid, to define the new generating and power storage capacty and to say where this would be located. Unsurprisingly, he had no answers. Slogans are easy. I don’t disagree with them in principle. Practical solutions are however extremely difficult, costly and will take a great many years to implement. We need a sensible, grown-up debate about how we can reduce pollution. I look forwards to that happening.
There also needs to be action taken on a global scale. Unilateral action by the UK would make very little difference to global pollution.
Work in all these coatings has been or us being done but none will be precise
But the key issue is your last
You might as well be a climate denier with that argument: the outcome is the same
Just wondering too: what’s the 2nd worst method of travel for the environment? I presume air travel is worst based on greenhouse gas emitted per mile per kilo transported.
Someone should do some rankings.
I have also joined, although I have no hair extensions (well not much hair at all actually) but as a major consumerist society we re very much part of the problem and also potentially a big player in the solution. Whatever that may be. Plus, when I went to the XR Marble Arch thing, I was impressed by some of the people I met and spoke to. It’s not as lightweight as the media plays it.
This activity might just catalyse/polarise some change and to misquote someone whose name I don’t know but died for his ideas ‘If you aren’t resisting, then you are a collaborator’.
I am hoping so….
Richard, my daughter would applaud you in your decreased use of meat and advocate you consider veganism. As for that, have a look at BeyondMeat, who produce a veggie burger that you can get at Tesco’s. An experiment was done with them with American cowboys and cowgirls and they were unable to tell the difference. Why? Don’t ask me. I don’t know.
I will have a look
Even M&S do plant based burgers now. I have to admit they’re pretty damn good.
Nothing wrong with flying surely it’s the fuel type.
I am not aware there is a choice?
Your right at-the-moment there is only offsetting that is viable ( not even sure about that tbh).
https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbOSzh6RRG4&feature=youtu.be
Early days I know but we keep the pressure on and couple this with the GND and we/they will find a way. They have to adapt or die, and I think they want to survive like the motor industry does.
BTW we have almost a complete roll out of PE80 pipe for Nat gas that is perfectly suitable for other gases like hydrogen. We can’t store electricity and batteries have a large CFP so for example 100Kwh batteries can take over a decade to achieve a net benefit on CO2 at least, versus a gas engine, so we need to look at what technology we have already, but fuel it differently. Heating boilers of which there are millions just in the UK can be adjusted to run on alternative gases, and currently are configured to run on at least two types now.
In the GND have you thought about incentives for research, I get the infrastructure part that has to come first as we are already having curtailment in the south west due to solar saturating the grid? The impact of this is no big roll-out of biogas reactors (producing electric and heat) are possible from the SW currently. This is one of the largest produces of dairy an therefore methane emissions a much worse greenhouse gas.
We have always mentioned R&D and innovation funding as the role of a Gren Investment Bank, and I think that’s the right way to do it as partnerships funded by a core, and seeking a return.