It is a busy week coming up. All the Copenhagen stuff, and the States budget too. The JAN petition on climate change is going to the States on budget day, and at the end of the week there is the vigil in town. I have no doubt that on budget day we shall hear plenty of comment in the assembly to the effect we should tighten our belt, cut our cloth, and be prudent, not spending what we have not got etc. Whether the ensuing actions are consistent with the words is another thing, of course. Equally likely I suspect we shall be told, often by the very same voices, that cutting carbon emissions will be damaging to the economy and for all sorts of reasons a thoroughly bad thing to do. Which is curious when you think about it. We solemnly , almost religiously, apply physical constraints and rules to an abstraction like money, and then steadfastly refuse to apply the same reasoning in a physical phenomenon like carbon emissions.
So here is the key question. If we do agree to target emission reductions of say 20% by 2020 and 80 percent by some few decades after that, what does that mean for Government? In crude figures if the States are taxing us 20% then they are probably responsible for producing 20% of emissions. Even they cannot think everyone else will go zero emissions so they can carry on at their current rate. Serious emission targets imply paring down government too, unless of course you are one of those who is happy to pursue irreconcilably opposed policies at the same time by the expedient of simply labelling them as different policy areas. Magic!
- Crunch time.
-
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
st_ouennais- December 6th, 23:58
- 5/10 for 10:10
-
- st_ouennais
- September 1st, 6:50
Today the Guardian has launched a new campaign. It's called 10:10 and aims to get people and businesses to reduce their CO2 emissions by 10% by 2010. I fully agree with them that it is actions that matter now. I also agree we need to move people away from thinking that footling things like changing a few light bulbs is making any significant contribution. Where the Guardian's campaign is flawed in a major way is that it fails to demonstrate how its proposals will get us to the levels of emissions reductions we need to avert catastrophe. Indeed they almost demonstrate that it is not enough. In a separate piece there is a list of personal actions that can be taken, and an estimate of the CO2 emissions saved.Tot them up and you get to around 10 tonnes annually 'saved' out of the 14 tonnes they reckon is the UK average per person. Even if you did everything on their list that is only a 70% reduction. We need to get to 80%.
Not everyone can make those sorts of reductions. Millions of pensioners, a few more million unemployed, the long term ill, and those of us who have already slashed our carbon footprint simply cannot do half the things we are being urged to cut out because we've cut them already. No savings there. So to get to the average target, those who are consuming are going to have to reduce even more. It is one of my great irritations with UK media that we get this blinkered view thet we all live the lifestyle that journalists do. It's the same failure to view the wider society circumstances that always reports interest rates going up as a bad thing.
Even then we have to resolve the contradictory things in the Grauniad's proscriptions for us. Like we are urged to grow our own fruit and veg for July, August , September. We are also instructed to dispose of our freezer, and not to throw out food. Quite what are we to do with the surplus of our summer produce, then? And what of the injunction to shop online - where does that leave the local organic farm, with its farm gate sales and box scheme? Have we abandoned food miles? Or how about the exaltation to buy second hand. Clearly we cannot all do that for then there's no first hand to become second hand. If the Guardian's action list approach is to be of any practical use we need much more thought out policies and a selection of models that work for different circumstances from the singleton flat city dweller and the large family rural farm labourer.
Go for the 10% by 2010 campaign in by all means, it is far from a bad thing. But do not be fooled. Taking the first 10% is the easy bit. You can be sure if it succeeded politicians would be lauding that we are on track to meet our international obligations, by virtue of erroneous extrapolation. If you are convinced that climate change is that serious and that urgent, then understand this: society, our economic system and all that we think of as normal living will have to change, and radically. Even if you aren't convinced, the inescapable consequences of imminent peak oil will drive a similar set of changes whether you like it or not. The only real question is how well prepared we are collectively and individualy for the turbulent times that are approaching.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/sep/01/10-10-launch-ian-katz
- A new certification body.
-
- st_ouennais
- August 9th, 9:54
I reproduce an e-mail forwarded to me, that I think may interest one or two who pass by here. It's right where I have been doing some of my experimentation and thinking over the last 5 years.Hello
I am an organic grower from Climate Friendly Food, a not-for-profit social enterprise based in the UK. We run a carbon footprinting and low-carbon food certification service, run by farmers for farmers (including growers, market gardeners and community food projects). Our philosophy is based on dissemination and community empowerment, inspired by the Transition model. This will enable us to collectively plan for resilient low-carbon food systems.
In October 2009 we will launch, in the UK:
*
Free online carbon calculator for all livestock, arable and
growing enterprises practising organic techniques. The calculator
will measure carbon emissions and carbon sequestration through the
entire food chain
*
Low-carbon certification scheme, based on farmer-to-farmer
inspections, low bureaucracy and low cost
*
Carbon label can be held in addition to third party organic
certification or as a stand alone, appealing to smaller
enterprises who cannot afford organic certification.
This will mark the arrival of the most comprehensive carbon calculator for farmers and growers, and the very first low-carbon food certification scheme. Climate Friendly Food will launch its carbon calculator on Mon Oct 12th in Totnes with Rob Hopkins of Transition Network, Martin Crawford of Agroforestry Research Trust and Ben Raskin from the Soil Association as speakers confirmed so far. Climate Friendly Food supporters will cycle between organic farms through Devon and Somerset, finishing in Bristol and an appearance at the Schumacher lectures on Sat Oct 17th.
One of the main motivating factors of Climate Friendly Food is the carbon sequestration potential of rich-soil farming. Initial research indicates that such methods of food production may have the potential to turn back the carbon clock. As carbon emissions from the food chain make up around 30% of the UK's carbon emissions (a figure that will be similar for all industrialised countries), food is a vital part of international targets of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050.
Climate Friendly Food would like to extend its reach to countries around the world. We don't want to profit from it, more set up toolkits to enable people from other countries to replicate our systems. If the benefits from rich-soil farming can be recognised on a worldwide scale, we have a chance of stopping runaway climate change – as well as improving the health of our soils and people.
We have a funding application to Artists Project Earth who are wanting to fund one idea that is most likely to change the planet. Please could you spare a few moments to tell us about yourself and why low-carbon food is important to you and your organisation? We have enclosed notes below, which outlines our vision for Climate Friendly Food. If you would like to work with us we would love to hear from you. There may be a short delay in reply as I am on holiday for a week but we will be back in touch. Please feel free to forward this. The return email is climatefriendlyfood@googlemail.com
_*NOTES*_
*Climate Friendly Food International*
CFF will facilitate low-carbon food programs developing in other countries this will form an international network of initiatives that are resilient and self-replicating, based on a Transition model of positive information. The Climate Friendly Food model can be replicated by organisations in any country and our programme will support the growth of international partners. The calculator CFF has developed is international and our certification system can be replicated easily in any language.
CFF intends to undertake the following:
1.
*International ambassadors - *recruit at least three ambassadors,
ideally artists involved with Artists Project Earth, to help us
reach the widest possible international audience.
2.
*International Youtube broadcasts and free webinars –* organise
several web events to engage and inspire groups to develop a low
carbon food programme (with or without the Climate Friendly Food
branding)
3.
*Small start up grants to grassroots initiatives* – based on a
application / scoring process.
4.
*Create tool kits in English, French, Spanish and German –*
organise translation services to get toolkits online and
free-of-charge
5.
*Consultation toolkit –* include information about how to set up
online consultations, how to identify producers and consumers to
consult and sample questions
6.
*Calculator toolkit – *the farm business calculator we have
currently developed is based on international and national
datasets. We will identify how to research national datasets and
have information about the limitations of data since carbon foot
printing of food is very much in its infancy.
7.
*Certification toolkit based on Participatory Guarantee Systems –
*(see _www.ifoam.org <http://www.ifoam.org/>_* * for info about
this low-cost alternative to third party organic certification) *–
*offer templates in other languages of the three key documents:
*application form* based on compliance with the IFOAM Norms
(International Federation of Organic Agricultural Movements
Organic Standards), *farmer pledges* (bronze, silver and gold) and
*farmer-to-farmer inspection report*.
8.
*CFF to have its own web designer – *if groups are opting for our
branding we will organise and pay for their own nation CFF
website. If they want to set up a similar scheme but develop their
own procedures and branding style then we will also support them
9.
*Technical support and mentoring toolkit * - web links to
information about low-carbon farming and ways to encourage farmers
to support one another.
10.
*Launch, marketing and PR toolkit *
11.
*Demonstration farm tool kit – *there is no absolute model for a
low-carbon farm but demonstration and farm visits are powerful
tools for adopting pro-environmental behaviours. The demonstration
vegetable farm that we are developing in the UK will be fully
organic and have rich-soil farming techniques, green manuring,
agroforestry, (nuts, fruit and coppice), composting, biochar
production, renewable energy, electric tractors and electric
delivery vehicles. All vegetables will be sold to families on
low-incomes and it will have volunteering opportunities, training
and health & wellbeing promotion.
12.
*Offer 2 days equivalent advice per group via email or Skype*
Through offering leadership and capacity building in low carbon food programs we believe that within two years we can support a new world view for a food culture that is based on environment, health and social justice. One of our key messages is that carbon sequestration from rich-soil farming could be so powerful that it may have the potential to turn back the global carbon clock.
The development of this work is subject to funding applications. If they are successful CFF will begin the international programme in January 2010.
Contact
Management & Fundraising - Jenny Hall _climatefriendlyfood@googlemail.com <mailto:jenny@climatefriendlyfood.org.uk>_ (01744 894284)
Calculator & Website – Jonathan Smith _jonathan@climatefriendlyfood.org.uk <mailto:jonthan@climatefriendlyfood.org.uk>_ (01720 423663)
Calculator & Marketing – Mukti Mitchell_ mukti@lowcarbonlifestyle.org <mailto:mukti@lowcarbonlifestyle.org> (01237 431753)_
- A long farewell
-
- st_ouennais
- August 5th, 16:22
If you want to know how environmentally progressive your Jersey politician is, ask what they propose to do about the airport.
We know air travel is a disproportionately huge emitter of CO2 for the distance traveled. You might also be aware that concrete takes a lot of energy to produce and has high embeded energy, and all the CO2 that implies in its production. Specifically to Jersey we are currently expanding the airport again, and redoing the surface. I am told we also subvent about £5million a year to operators to induce them to fly here. So here we have a high emitting and loss making facility. Its obvious what we should logically do with it.
But the stakes in the game have suddenly been raised big time. Here's a recent quote from the UK's Lord Adonis "switching 46 million domestic air passengers a year to a new multi-billion pound north-south rail line was manifestly in the public interest". He believes that short-haul flights between Britain and Europe, as well as domestic air travel, should be progressively replaced by a rail network.
So where would that leave our provincial airport? It is like a telephone: one on its own is of no use whatsoever. The utility comes from having an effective network. We don't need a larger runway and subventions to foreign operators and a large empty shopping area if all our airport can do is air taxis to Guernsey and the occasional medical emergency to Southampton, assuming that remains open.
So all you very knowledgeable people who have given me the metaphorical brush off and not been prepared to contemplate the obvious when I have raised it in the past had better have a review of your position. You may have no choice in a few years time. Do your planning now for a very different world and be prepared to think the unthinkable as the rest of the world is.
