"I want our country to exploit all the natural resources we have. I want us to keep energy bills down and I want us to be part of that revolution, which can create thousands of jobs."
With these words David Cameron, at Prime Minister's Questions on 1st July, could have been expressing his support for developing onshore wind and other renewable energy resources - but he wasn't.
Instead he was responding to the question: "Given the Prime Minister’s commitment to localism, will he stand by and respect the decision made by Lancashire County Council this week to reject fracking, yes or no?". His answer started, "Those decisions must be made by local authorities in the proper way, under the planning regime we have. Personally, I hope that, over time, unconventional gas sites will go ahead, whether in Lancashire or elsewhere."
On Saturday 20th June 250,000 people marched together to protest against the impact that ''austerity' - government cuts now and planned for the future are having on people's lives, particularly the most vulnerable.
Activists from the Campaign against Climate Change, Friends of the Earth, Reclaim the Power and others came together in a 'climate bloc' because our chances of avoiding catastrophic climate change are also threatened by these short-sighted policies.
We have to invest in infrastructure across the UK that will give us a cleaner, safer, fairer future: renewable energy, public transport, warm homes for all. In doing this, much-needed jobs can be created. But instead, we are promised five years of cuts: cuts to the home insulation budget, cuts to bus services, cuts to cycling investment, and cuts to onshore wind subsidies, a vital form of clean energy. We can't afford to wait five years: scientists are telling us that urgent action is needed now to cut greenhouse gas emissions. Government must rethink its frantic cost-cutting for the sake of future generations.
On Saturday 20th June 250,000 people marched together to protest against the impact that ''austerity' - government cuts now and planned for the future are having on people's lives, particularly the most vulnerable.
Activists from the Campaign against Climate Change, Friends of the Earth, Reclaim the Power and others came together in a 'climate bloc' because our chances of avoiding catastrophic climate change are also threatened by these short-sighted policies.
We have to invest in infrastructure across the UK that will give us a cleaner, safer, fairer future: renewable energy, public transport, warm homes for all. In doing this, much-needed jobs can be created. But instead, we are promised five years of cuts: cuts to the home insulation budget, cuts to bus services, cuts to cycling investment, and cuts to onshore wind subsidies, a vital form of clean energy. We can't afford to wait five years: scientists are telling us that urgent action is needed now to cut greenhouse gas emissions. Government must rethink its frantic cost-cutting for the sake of future generations.
Obama of the United States and Xi of China have signed a bilateral climate agreement.
Much of the American and British media, and many Democrats in America, have hailed the deal as a key step forward. Many American Republicans have attacked it as going much too far.
Anything the Republicans attack has to be good. Right? No. In fact it is an appalling deal.
Let's look at the numbers.
The US has agreed to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 28% below 2005 levels by 2030. But 2005 was the highest year ever for US emissions. They have already declined 10% in 8 years. Obama is promising that they will decline another 18% in 15 years.
At the Campaign against Climate Change, we are currently supporting not one but two petitions to stop the government blocking wind energy projects that have already had local approval. Yes, that's right: blocking wind energy projects that have already had local approval.
That these petitions are necessary is mind-boggling. We all know that we are no longer in the days of 'greenest government ever' rhetoric. But you might have thought that the IPCC's recent dire warnings would have caused a moment's reflection, a touch of unease as to whether this is an appropriate response to the crisis facing humanity... apparently not.
The first petition, set up by Dan Grierson and hosted by 38 Degrees, refers to the Conservative Party's intended manifesto pledge to ban new onshore windfarms from 2020. The argument that they are doing this because wind farms are "unpopular" is a fascinating one, given the party's gung-ho support for fracking, a far less popular technology. DECC's most recent figures show a record 70% support for onshore wind, compared to 12% opposition.
Bob Crow died yesterday (11th March 2014), at the age of 52. Unexpectedly, of course. What everyone knows about Bob is that he was a fighter. He fought for his members, his class, and the railways. What not so many people have mentioned is that he fought for the planet too. In one way, it's simple - fighting for the railways is fighting against climate change and for the future of the planet. And railway jobs are climate jobs.
The latest IPCC report makes the choice that humanity faces yet more stark, both the clarity of the evidence and the urgency to take action. Yet those who have a vested interest in fossil fuel consumption continue to spread doubt and confusion. Here are some of the myths they propagate:
Myth No. 1: Scientists still aren't certain humans are causing climate change
The latest number put on scientists' certainty is 95%. What does 95% certain mean? That they are about as sure as that cigarette smoking causes cancer. And this is a good analogy for more than one reason. The tobacco industry and its paid lobbyists fought desperately to deny this science when it first emerged. Smoking is also a good example of how humans can be very very bad at taking sensible decisions and weighing up risk. But when it comes to cutting carbon emissions, it's not just our own health and wellbeing we're risking, it's all future generations. It really is time to act.
Shale gas is methane (natural gas) which is trapped in impermeable shale rock deep underground. The gas cannot flow through the shale, so simply drilling a well, as you would for conventional natural gas, is not enough. The shale rock must be cracked to free the gas, so large quantities of water, sand, and a range of chemicals are pumped in under high pressure (hydraulic fracturing or 'fracking'). Tens or hundreds as many wells are needed to produce as much gas as in a conventional gas field.
1. Proven global reserves amount to five times as much fossil fuel as could be burnt between now and 2050 and keep under 2°C of global warming. This basic fact is frustratingly often absent in media discussions about exploiting about yet another source to exploit.
2. Without effective policies to limit carbon emissions there is no reason to think that shale gas in Europe will push out coal – it is just as likely to compete with renewables.
3. There is a big question mark over whether shale gas exploitation is actually any better for the climate than coal burning. It all depends on how much gas leaks out during the process, since methane is a shorter lived but much more powerful greenhouse gas compared to CO2.
Yesterday, an emergency meeting was held at the Met Office to discuss the unusual weather patterns experienced here in the UK. Examining the frozen winter of 2010/11, the wet summer of 2012 (the second wettest since records began) and this year’s bitter spring, scientists pointed to a number of factors thought to be responsible for our ‘weird weather’ – most of which (rapid arctic melt, disruption of the jet stream, warming oceans, more moisture in the atmosphere etc.) could be attributed to climate change.
But despite scientific consensus and a growing body of empirical evidence affecting the every day lives of citizens of this country, there exists a continuing juxtaposition between the reality of the world facing climate change and the alternate reality inhabited by politics and the press.
The failure to secure necessary green amendments to the Energy Bill in the House of Commons at the beginning of this month, Osborne’s proposed ‘Dash for Gas’, and rumours of renewed plans to expand Heathrow, demonstrate a ‘business as usual’ attitude held by a select group of political climate deniers apparently determined to pursue a path to growth at all costs.
