One of my favourite photographers, Chris Jordan, has a new project: Midway – message from the gyre:
November 11, 2009
Midway – message from the gyre
Posted by Jeremy under art, conservation, waste | Tags: chris jordan, midway, photography |Leave a Comment
November 10, 2009
Climate change and national security
Posted by Jeremy under climate change, politics | Tags: military |1 Comment
To the dismay of environmentalists, it was Lord Stern’s review of the economics of climate change that really shook the British government into action. From which, presumably, we can only deduce that as far as the government is concerned the climate can go hang, but let nothing interrupt the economy. Still, better late than never.
Cynicism aside, we need those broader perspectives on climate change to really engage people. The economic, social and ethical sides of climate change and slowly being understood, and to that list we can now add security.
“Failure to recognise the conflict and instability implications of climate change, and to invest in a range of preventative and adaptive actions will be very costly in terms of destabilising nations,” a group of 10 leading military figures said last week.
The Military Advisory Council met to discuss the security implications of climate change, concluding that “climate change creates a common security problem that requires global and comprehensive co-operation.” They went on to call for an ambitious and equitable deal in Copenhagen, and called on armies to reduce their own ‘carbon bootprints’ (the US army is the world’s single biggest user of oil).
This statement caught my eye, because if it takes the economics to engage some in the realities of climate change, security could do the same for others. Republicans and conservatives more broadly often have little time for climate change, but consider security to be a priority. Climate change could be a huge destabilising force, responsible for millions of refugees, and we may have already seen the first climate change war. It could both trigger new tensions and multiply existing ones, and natural disasters could put additional strain on security forces.
I don’t usually care very much what military strategists say, but perhaps security questions could finally put climate change on the radar for some of those who are unconvinced so far.
- For more, see CNA’s National security and the threat of climate change website.
November 9, 2009
inoculating us against reality
Posted by Jeremy under consumerism, corporate responsibility, shopping | Tags: advertising |1 Comment
I saw an interesting juxtaposition of billboards on my way through the station forecourt this morning. The first was for the Prince of Wales’ rainforest project, Rainforest SOS, and right behind it was a billboard from the Brazilian tourist board. The fact that we can’t all fly on holiday to Brazil and save the rainforest at the same time seems to be lost on whoever booked the ads.
It’s a common enough problem though, salespeople failing to match ads in the same space or page, or not bothering to consider the copy that the ad will appear alongside. Even the most dire climate change news article can appear alongside the latest budget airline skiing deals, a report on debt can sit next to the latest credit card offers. The news tells us one thing, and the adverts tell us something entirely different. And since the adverts are always glossier, more colourful and altogether preferable, they act as a kind of suppressant, an inoculation against reality.
In time, I’d love to see the advertising of carbon intensive activities controlled a little. We don’t allow billboards or TV spots for cigarettes any more, for health reasons. Climate change is going to kill a lot more people than smoking, so why should we tolerate billboards for cheap flights?
Until these things become socially and politically unacceptable, companies and publications could at least start by taking responsibility for their advertising. No matter how many environmental correspondents they hire or what their stance might be, most of our media outlets are riddled with mixed messages. It’s just hypocrisy to claim an environmental agenda and then run counter-productive advertising. Ads “generate behavioural norms,” as George Monbiot wrote earlier this year. “Advertising is not neutral copy.”
It’s time for some bolder ethical advertising policies. I’m going to write to a few newspapers, starting with the ones I read myself, asking where they draw the lines. If you’re interested in writing to your favourite news sources aswell, let me know, and we’ll see if we can put together a picture of advertising standards and what we can do to raise them.
November 8, 2009
Over the past 50 years, Madagascar has become 10% hotter and 10% drier, and is currently suffering a major drought.
Green products might make us feel so good about ourselves that we think we can get away with other, less environmentally aware things – a moral offset, if you will – making green consumerism something rather unhelpful.
The first UK train ticket to cost over £1,000 has gone on sale. You could get a round-the-world air ticket for less than that.
Kellogg’s are so paranoid about the public perception that they make non-branded cereals for supermarkets that they’ve developed a way of branding the flakes themselves. I wonder how much the research into laser etching has added to each box?
November 7, 2009
This week, Tarzan runs out of trees in this amusing ad from wwf.
November 6, 2009
Picking up the bill
Posted by Jeremy under climate change, equality, film | Tags: germanwatch |Leave a Comment
Not sure where this comes from really, (other than Germany obviously) but it’s a neat little short film.
November 6, 2009
International Day for Preventing the Exploitation of the Environment in War and Armed Conflict
Posted by Jeremy under environment, human rights | Tags: conflict |[2] Comments
That’s today, according to the UN. It’s a pretty cumbersome name, but International Day for Preventing the Exploitation of the Environment in War and Armed Conflict raises an important point.
War is always a human tragedy, but that is often compounded when the land is dragged into the conflict. It can happen in all kinds of ways. Sometimes it is deliberate, such as the burning of crops or trees, polluting water sources, or setting oilfields on fire, as retreating Iraqi troops did in the first Gulf War. Other times the environment is collateral damage, when napalm is dropped on forests for example, or when oil spills from bombed ships . In the last round of fighting in the Lebanon, leaked oil from a Beirut power station affected 150 km of coastline, seriously damaging tourism and fishing industries.
Sometimes it is simply the movement of troops and machines, or the drain on natural resources from displaced people, or the breakdown of environmental management. Somalia’s coast is most famous for piracy at the moment, but one of its untold stories is the ravaging of its fish stocks. With no one to protect local fishermen, Somalia’s coastal waters have been plundered by international fishing fleets.
Damage to the environment can last far beyond the conflict itself, making it much harder to return a region to stability. Refugees may return home to find the land will no longer support them. I remember reading of Sudanese refugees unable to rebuild their homes, because all the trees had been burnt. The competition for food, water and wood can then fuel further tensions.
This kind of long-term damage can last for generations. In some situations, deforestation can lead to desertification, making regions permanently unfit for resettling. Saddam Hussein notoriously oversaw the draining of the Euphrates-Tigris Delta as part of his campaign against the Marsh Arabs, turning their traditional homeland into a desert waste.
When we think of conflict and the casualties of war, people are always the priority. Quite rightly so, but as the people depend on their environment, that needs protecting too. Even in ancient times, war was conducted with certain protocols. The Bible forbid the jews to cut down fruit trees when waging war against a city. The ancient Assyrians used to salt the land around the capital cities of their enemies, but it was reserved as their ultimate punishment. Despite this, International law is still rather hazy on the environmental aspects of war, and military objectives tend to overrule environmental considerations.
The UN hosts the annual day as an awareness raising event, calling for greater sense of responsibility. But really, couldn’t they have called it ‘war and the environment day’ or something?
November 5, 2009
It’s November already, somehow. We haven’t had a frost here yet in the south of England, but the first of those will put an end to any salads and herbs still hanging on. In their place come the hardier winter vegetables – cabbage, cauliflower, potatoes, carrots, leeks, sprouts, swede and parsnips. Look out for pumpkins too, while apples, pears and quinces round out the fruit.
If you’re foraging, there should still be plenty of varities of mushroom available, including puffball, honey fungus and oyster mushroom. If wild mushrooms aren’t your thing, perhaps hazelnuts, walnuts and sweet chestnuts are a better starting place.
How to tell a sweet chestnut from a conker? The chestnuts are almost triangular and pointed, and come in twos or threes in a green burr that’s much spikier than a conker pod. You can split them and roast them, or for a traditional recipe, steep them in hot water, peel off the skins, and then fry them up with sprouts and bacon. If you’re really keen, they can even be ground up to make a gluten-free flour.
November 4, 2009
Zero growth economy conference
Posted by Jeremy under development, economics | Tags: growth, steady state |Leave a Comment
The Quakers recently held a one-day conference on the zero growth economy, on what it would mean for the environment, the economy, and for society. The talks, presentations and papers from the conference are all online here, and are well worth browsing.
It’s an interesting set of material, and being the Quakers, social justice is paramount. The Green Economics Institute are there, Richard Douthwaite, Alistair McIntosh, and there’s a great talk on development and growth from Duncan Green, Oxfam’s head of research and writer of the from poverty to power blog. He argues that growth is essential for development, but only up to a point. After about $20,000 per capita, further growth makes no difference to levels of happiness.
If a zero-growth global economy would leave people in poverty, we can’t reasonably campaign for it. What we could do however, is ‘ration’ growth to ensure any further drain on natural resources goes to those who need it most. The climate change negotiations will have certain aspects of this, if it isn’t derailed by the wealthier countries.
There’s a growing discussion about growth economics at the moment, with some quite high profile organisations and thinkers joining in. It remains a tricky subject though, and this conference highlights some of the issues, one of which is the name – ‘zero growth’ isn’t actually helpful or practical. ‘Zero material growth’ is a better concept, but instantly sounds technical. Perhaps we need to find whole new ways of describing these things, ways that don’t raise the defences of the politicians. “If you want an audience in Downing Street” as Green says, “you can’t use the language of limits to growth.”
November 3, 2009
Have you made up your mind on climate change?
Posted by Jeremy under climate change, film, politicsLeave a Comment
Some depressing new figures from the Pew Research Centre show that the number of Americans who agree that climate change is happening has fallen by 20% in eighteen months.
Perhaps it’s the recession, making the economy the priority. After all, Americans are constantly told that acting on climate change will bankrupt the economy. Perhaps it’s the distraction of the healthcare fiasco, or maybe just the relentless tide of wishful thinking and anti-climate lobbying. Either way, we’ve got a problem. The country most responsible for climate change is moving in the wrong direction, increasingly convinced that it isn’t serious.
I believe climate change is happening, as you may have noticed, and I believe it is man made. I’m comfortable with being wrong about that, as I believe acting on climate change is the most sensible option, whether the scientists turn out to be right or not.
If you have yet to make up your mind about climate change, allow me to point you towards Greg Craven’s ideas. His point is that you don’t need to decide if climate change is happening or not to make a good decision:
If you want more, check out Greg’s book ‘What’s the worst that could happen? A rational response to climate change’.
