From the channel that brought you The Great Global Warming Swindle... The press have been trying to stir up controversy around Channel 4's showing this week of a documentary called What The Green Movement Got Wrong, but actually it's a conversation that should be had. Will it be a mature debate about what we should rule in or out in the fight against climate change, or will it be like airing our dirty linen in public?
Monday 1st November
The Material World
On: BBC Radio Four
Time: 21:00 to 21:30
Quentin Cooper examines the science behind the news, including Indonesian disasters, the first electronics and pollution from space travel.
Tuesday 2nd November
Home Planet
On: BBC Radio Four
Time: 15:00 to 15:30
Richard Daniel and the team discuss listeners' questions about our world and our impact upon it.
Wednesday 3rd November
Lords
On: BBC Parliament
Time: 06:00 to 09:00 (Also 0930, 1930)
Future Energy Policy.
Recorded coverage of business in the House of Lords on Tuesday 2 November, a debate on future energy policy in light of the climate change challenge.
Thursday 4th November
One Planet
On: BBC World Service Radio
Time: 10:32 to 11:00 (Also 1530, 2030, 0130, Sun 0630)
One Planet looks at how we use our planet.
Live Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Questions
On: BBC Parliament
Time: 10:30 to 11:30 (Also 0100)
Live coverage of questions in the House of Commons to Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Secretary Caroline Spelman and her ministerial team.
What the Green Movement Got Wrong
On: Channel 4
Time: 21:00 to 22:20
A group of environmentalists across the world are challenging the movement they helped to create. They believe that in order to save the planet, humanity must embrace the very science and technology they once so stridently opposed. In this 75-minute film, these life-long diehard greens advocate radical solutions to climate change which include GM crops and nuclear energy. They argue that by clinging to an ideology formed more than 40 years ago - the traditional green lobby has failed in its aims and is ultimately harming its own environmental cause. This film is followed by a studio debate chaired by Krishnan Guru-Murthy.
What the Green Movement Got Wrong: The Debate
On: Channel 4
Time: 22:20 to 23:05
A live studio debate, chaired by Channel 4 News presenter Krishnan Guru-Murthy, to discuss the issues raised in the preceding documentary What the Green Movement Got Wrong. The film's leading protagonists, former anti-GM activist and author Mark Lynas and Stewart Brand, a pioneer of the original green lobby, face critics from today's green movement in front of an informed studio audience. Leading policy makers, commentators, scientists, entrepreneurs and economists will debate the impact the green movement has had on global climate change and whether embracing the very science and technology the greens once so stridently opposed, such as GM crops and nuclear energy, would be more successful in reducing the risks to the planet from global warming.
Sunday 7th November
Stephen Fry and the Great American Oil Spill
On: BBC 2
Time: 20:00 to 21:00
Stephen Fry loves Louisiana. Four months after the BP oil spill, dubbed the worst ecological disaster in the history of America, Fry returns to the Deep South together with the zoologist Mark Carwardine, to see what the impact has been on the people, the vast wetlands and the species that live there. What they find both surprises and divides the travelling duo.
Excerpts taken from DigiGuide - the world's best TV guide available from
http://www.getdigiguide.com/?p=1&r=20818
Copyright (c) GipsyMedia Limited.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Saturday, October 30, 2010
The Week In Green Numbers
17%
- the pitiful proportion of the world's land surface that will be protected under a new agreement #
120,000
- bee colonies in Britain #
£2.3 billion
- revenue raised from Air Passenger Duty this year #
50%
- proportion of waste sent to landfill in the UK, down from 78% in 2001 #
20 stories
- height of a building to be made in Austria, using wood instead of steel for the frame #
- the pitiful proportion of the world's land surface that will be protected under a new agreement #
120,000
- bee colonies in Britain #
£2.3 billion
- revenue raised from Air Passenger Duty this year #
50%
- proportion of waste sent to landfill in the UK, down from 78% in 2001 #
20 stories
- height of a building to be made in Austria, using wood instead of steel for the frame #
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Boring Boring Climate
I've been pondering something over the last couple of days, and I'm not quite sure how to put it into coherent words but I'm going to try.
There seems to my mind to be a disconnect between what people currently think on the environment, what the media think that people think, and how they vote.
Let me give you an example - this story in The Independent this week claims that Britons are less environmentally conscious than they were five years ago, that they're "bored" of climate change. They reckon that four out of ten people don't do anything to reduce their carbon footprint.
You could put it another way, of course - six out of ten people now actively try to reduce their carbon footprint. I would imagine that's an astonishing leap over ten and even five years ago.
Could it be that "green" has become commonplace? Could it be that people say they're bored talking about climate change because they get it, they know it, they're willing to do a bit?
Politically, green is on the rise. Caroline Lucas being elected to the UK parliament was no mean feat in a first-past-the-post electoral system. If the polling for Holyrood next year is to be believed then the Scottish Greens are on course to whip some LibDem butt.
Does that mean voters now see Green politicians as the mainstream, rather than some weird hippy types with wild ideas that you should pat on the head every now and then to keep them happy?
I don't like these opinion polls where you're asked to rank issues in order of how worried you are by them, or what motivates you to vote. The environment always does badly out of them, but it's perfectly possible to be concerned about five or six things equally - something that reporters don't like because then there's no focus to the story.
Perhaps this is why the media thinks that there's a "backlash", when in fact the whole issue of climate change has just become mainstream and therefore, well, boring.
There seems to my mind to be a disconnect between what people currently think on the environment, what the media think that people think, and how they vote.
Let me give you an example - this story in The Independent this week claims that Britons are less environmentally conscious than they were five years ago, that they're "bored" of climate change. They reckon that four out of ten people don't do anything to reduce their carbon footprint.
You could put it another way, of course - six out of ten people now actively try to reduce their carbon footprint. I would imagine that's an astonishing leap over ten and even five years ago.
Could it be that "green" has become commonplace? Could it be that people say they're bored talking about climate change because they get it, they know it, they're willing to do a bit?
Politically, green is on the rise. Caroline Lucas being elected to the UK parliament was no mean feat in a first-past-the-post electoral system. If the polling for Holyrood next year is to be believed then the Scottish Greens are on course to whip some LibDem butt.
Does that mean voters now see Green politicians as the mainstream, rather than some weird hippy types with wild ideas that you should pat on the head every now and then to keep them happy?
I don't like these opinion polls where you're asked to rank issues in order of how worried you are by them, or what motivates you to vote. The environment always does badly out of them, but it's perfectly possible to be concerned about five or six things equally - something that reporters don't like because then there's no focus to the story.
Perhaps this is why the media thinks that there's a "backlash", when in fact the whole issue of climate change has just become mainstream and therefore, well, boring.
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Should An Airport Be Allowed To 'Go Green'?
Should an airport be allowed to "go green"?
Should we scream "greenwash!" every time an airport attempts to do something environmental?
"Greenwash!" was the first thing to come to my mind when I read this story in the Guardian, Edinburgh Airport signs up to 'Green Champions' scheme.
You could argue the case that the Airport itself is a completely different entity from the airlines that fly in and out of it. After all, it's the planes which cause the most pollution, not the building.
But it's a spurious argument - the airport touts for business from those airlines and encourages them to fly more often. Well, actually, it encourages them to take off and land more often!
But should that automatically stop them from getting involved with a scheme which would see their staff go on country walks and the airport take responsibility for some local green spaces?
No, it shouldn't.
What it should do is give the charity involved pause for thought. If you don't want your "green" credentials challenged or ridiculed, then don't do business with an airport.
The counter argument, of course, is one that I've used myself in the past - getting them to do one little thing could lead, in time, to them doing a lot.
The problem being, "in time" they're still an airport.
Should we scream "greenwash!" every time an airport attempts to do something environmental?
"Greenwash!" was the first thing to come to my mind when I read this story in the Guardian, Edinburgh Airport signs up to 'Green Champions' scheme.
You could argue the case that the Airport itself is a completely different entity from the airlines that fly in and out of it. After all, it's the planes which cause the most pollution, not the building.
But it's a spurious argument - the airport touts for business from those airlines and encourages them to fly more often. Well, actually, it encourages them to take off and land more often!
But should that automatically stop them from getting involved with a scheme which would see their staff go on country walks and the airport take responsibility for some local green spaces?
No, it shouldn't.
What it should do is give the charity involved pause for thought. If you don't want your "green" credentials challenged or ridiculed, then don't do business with an airport.
The counter argument, of course, is one that I've used myself in the past - getting them to do one little thing could lead, in time, to them doing a lot.
The problem being, "in time" they're still an airport.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Government Can't See The Wood For The Trees
Last night BBC Scotland started showing a new series called Making Scotland's Landscape. Beautifully captivating, the first episode was about trees and the loss (and regrowth) of Scotland's natural forests.
I don't know anyone who is a fan of the Sitka Spruce, those fast-growing, straight-line abominations which the Forestry Commission insists on planting in squares on the hillsides. (In fact the programme last night managed to find a former Forestry Commission warden who used to do a bit of "guerilla gardening" and rip up any Sitka which were planted on his patch!)
Having said that, I'd much rather see a square of Sitka Spruce than a new housing estate or an industrial estate. Those are the fears in England & Wales as the government gears up to announce that they'll be selling off 150,000 hectares of forest to the highest bidders.
As Caroline Lucas says:
If you missed Making Scotland's Landscape, or you live in England, Wales or Northern Ireland, then you can see it on the BBC iPlayer here for the next week.
I don't know anyone who is a fan of the Sitka Spruce, those fast-growing, straight-line abominations which the Forestry Commission insists on planting in squares on the hillsides. (In fact the programme last night managed to find a former Forestry Commission warden who used to do a bit of "guerilla gardening" and rip up any Sitka which were planted on his patch!)
Having said that, I'd much rather see a square of Sitka Spruce than a new housing estate or an industrial estate. Those are the fears in England & Wales as the government gears up to announce that they'll be selling off 150,000 hectares of forest to the highest bidders.
As Caroline Lucas says:
"It will be an unforgiveable act of environmental vandalism"The Scottish Government have already rejected privatising the Forestry Commission here, so hopefully they won't now think twice. And if they do, maybe someone could strap Alex Salmond into a chair and make him watch last night's programme?
If you missed Making Scotland's Landscape, or you live in England, Wales or Northern Ireland, then you can see it on the BBC iPlayer here for the next week.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Green In The Media 25th - 31st October
Wednesday 27th October
Costing the Earth
On: BBC Radio Four
Time: 21:00 to 21:30 (Also Thu 1330)
On October 31st we'll all turn our clocks back by one hour. There's mounting evidence that we could save energy by cancelling this annual ritual. Alice Roberts reports.
Thursday 28th October
One Planet
On: BBC World Service Radio
Time: 10:32 to 11:00 (Also 1530, 2030, 0130, Sat 2030, Sun 0630)
One Planet looks at how we use our planet.
Saturday 30th October
Our World
On: BBC News
Time: 05:30 to 06:00 (Also 1430, 0330, Sun 1030, 1430, 2330)
Extreme Schemes.
We are living through one of the biggest extinction eras the planet has ever witnessed. Some scientists are beginning to argue for intervention in the natural order in new ways: Extreme schemes to bring threatened species back from the edge.
Excerpts taken from DigiGuide - the world's best TV guide available from
http://www.getdigiguide.com/?p=1&r=20818
Copyright (c) GipsyMedia Limited.
Costing the Earth
On: BBC Radio Four
Time: 21:00 to 21:30 (Also Thu 1330)
On October 31st we'll all turn our clocks back by one hour. There's mounting evidence that we could save energy by cancelling this annual ritual. Alice Roberts reports.
Thursday 28th October
One Planet
On: BBC World Service Radio
Time: 10:32 to 11:00 (Also 1530, 2030, 0130, Sat 2030, Sun 0630)
One Planet looks at how we use our planet.
Saturday 30th October
Our World
On: BBC News
Time: 05:30 to 06:00 (Also 1430, 0330, Sun 1030, 1430, 2330)
Extreme Schemes.
We are living through one of the biggest extinction eras the planet has ever witnessed. Some scientists are beginning to argue for intervention in the natural order in new ways: Extreme schemes to bring threatened species back from the edge.
Excerpts taken from DigiGuide - the world's best TV guide available from
http://www.getdigiguide.com/?p=1&r=20818
Copyright (c) GipsyMedia Limited.
Saturday, October 23, 2010
The Week In Green Numbers
$2.2 trillion
- yearly environmental cost caused by the world's top 3000 companies #
1.5 billion pounds
- pumpkins grown in the US every year, mostly for Halloween #
1,600 metres
- depth of a proposed deep-sea mineral mine in Papua New Guinea waters #
10 hours
- time a nuclear-powered submarine sat aground on the Isle of Skye waiting for the tide to come back in #
1,500
- buses in Glasgow which may need to be replaced or upgraded in a new initiative to reduce pollution #
- yearly environmental cost caused by the world's top 3000 companies #
1.5 billion pounds
- pumpkins grown in the US every year, mostly for Halloween #
1,600 metres
- depth of a proposed deep-sea mineral mine in Papua New Guinea waters #
10 hours
- time a nuclear-powered submarine sat aground on the Isle of Skye waiting for the tide to come back in #
1,500
- buses in Glasgow which may need to be replaced or upgraded in a new initiative to reduce pollution #
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Coastguard Tugs Scrapped
You're the captain of an oil tanker, carrying 85,000 tons of crude through Scottish waters. It's January, and the weather is quite unpleasant.
Suddenly you lose all engine power. You're drifting, ten miles from land but heading in that direction. Who do you call?
Well, after yesterday's spending review, there's no point in calling the coastguard. The four tugs which they have stationed around the British Isles are to be scrapped in order to save £32 million over four years.
The scenario above is actually the one which faced the captain of the MV Braer in 1993, as his ship slammed into the Shetland mainland. There weren't any tugs to pull the oil tanker to safety in those days, in fact they were provided after the inquiry into the Braer disaster recommended that the option was available.
The cost of Braer was estimated to be £100 million. The cost of the tugs is around £7 million a year, extrapolating from the "savings" which the government has announced.
That £7 million looks like a bargain, when you consider the damage that 85,000 tons of crude oil could do to a coastline. Surely there's scope for the Scottish Government to take over funding for a couple of these vessels to keep them close to the oil tanker shipping lanes?
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
The Military Equivalent Of A Willy-Waving Contest
Just what is the point of Trident?
Britain's independent (ha!) nuclear deterrent replacement has been put on hold by the Prime Minister.
But who does our deterrent actually deter?
Does the Al-Qaeda operative about to detonate his backpack on the Tube think "No, hang on a minute, I'd better not do this because Britain has a couple of missiles in a submarine somewhere in the North Atlantic"?
Of course not - in this case, the deterrence is an irrelevance.
So what about those other "threats", North Korea and Iran.
Our current missile stock hasn't given them any pause for thought. They're determined to get their own nuclear missiles whether we've got them or not.
And I don't exactly see Spain or Greece screaming out "Jings, North Korea's got the bomb, we'd better get one too!"
No, the only reason for Trident is as a status symbol. It's to make us look like big boys, like taking puffs on a cigarette behind the bike sheds while trying not to throw up.
Unfortunately, everyone else can see that we're no longer part of the big boys' gang, no matter how much we try to bluster.
And £70 billion is an awful lot to throw away on a penis extension.
Britain's independent (ha!) nuclear deterrent replacement has been put on hold by the Prime Minister.
But who does our deterrent actually deter?
Does the Al-Qaeda operative about to detonate his backpack on the Tube think "No, hang on a minute, I'd better not do this because Britain has a couple of missiles in a submarine somewhere in the North Atlantic"?
Of course not - in this case, the deterrence is an irrelevance.
So what about those other "threats", North Korea and Iran.
Our current missile stock hasn't given them any pause for thought. They're determined to get their own nuclear missiles whether we've got them or not.
And I don't exactly see Spain or Greece screaming out "Jings, North Korea's got the bomb, we'd better get one too!"
No, the only reason for Trident is as a status symbol. It's to make us look like big boys, like taking puffs on a cigarette behind the bike sheds while trying not to throw up.
Unfortunately, everyone else can see that we're no longer part of the big boys' gang, no matter how much we try to bluster.
And £70 billion is an awful lot to throw away on a penis extension.
Monday, October 18, 2010
Are Rail Fares About To Rise 30%?
Channel 4 News reported at the weekend that rail fares could rise 30 to 40% in the government's spending review this week. Here's their report:
If true, this will have a devastating effect on passenger numbers, and a consequent effect on the railway. (Of course it could be a "scare" story, with them set to announce a rise of "just" 20% and then we all breathe easy!)
There seems to be a mindset in government (and not just this one, previous governments too) that railway passengers are a special case and outwith normal economic boundaries. You can charge them whatever you want, and they'll still pay and use the service.
Trying to price people off the railway so that you don't need to invest in new carriages and services hasn't worked in the past and won't work in the future, but that doesn't mean you can put up the prices without consequence.
So what will happen? Well, here's the great wheeze: less full-fare paying passengers means that there are more empty seats on the train. More empty seats means that the train companies can sell more discounted tickets, for which all the money goes into the TOC's pocket instead of being distributed around the various railway companies. This means that each privatised company will actually make more money, pleasing their shareholders.
And that's no way to run public transport.
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Green In The Media 18th - 24th October
Wednesday 20th October
Costing the Earth
On: BBC Radio Four
Time: 21:00 to 21:30 (Also Thu 1330)
Wine drinkers have enjoyed a decade of great taste and great prices. A host of environmental problems including climate change and road construction could be about to bring the golden age to an end. Tom Heap investigates.
Thursday 21st October
One Planet
On: BBC World Service Radio
Time: 10:32 to 11:00 (Also 1530, 2030, 0130, Sun 0630)
One Planet looks at how we use our planet.
Sunday 24th October
Countryfile
On: BBC 1
Time: 18:30 to 19:30
Adam Henson visits a farm in the United States with a dairy herd of thirty-two thousand cows to ask whether the UK should adopt the same intensive methods. Meanwhile, Tom Heap investigates alternatives to the plastic packaging which surrounds our food.
Excerpts taken from DigiGuide - the world's best TV guide available from
http://www.getdigiguide.com/?p=1&r=20818
Copyright (c) GipsyMedia Limited.
Costing the Earth
On: BBC Radio Four
Time: 21:00 to 21:30 (Also Thu 1330)
Wine drinkers have enjoyed a decade of great taste and great prices. A host of environmental problems including climate change and road construction could be about to bring the golden age to an end. Tom Heap investigates.
Thursday 21st October
One Planet
On: BBC World Service Radio
Time: 10:32 to 11:00 (Also 1530, 2030, 0130, Sun 0630)
One Planet looks at how we use our planet.
Sunday 24th October
Countryfile
On: BBC 1
Time: 18:30 to 19:30
Adam Henson visits a farm in the United States with a dairy herd of thirty-two thousand cows to ask whether the UK should adopt the same intensive methods. Meanwhile, Tom Heap investigates alternatives to the plastic packaging which surrounds our food.
Excerpts taken from DigiGuide - the world's best TV guide available from
http://www.getdigiguide.com/?p=1&r=20818
Copyright (c) GipsyMedia Limited.
Saturday, October 16, 2010
The Week In Green Numbers
7,000 metres
- depth at which a new fish species was discovered #
57 kilometres
- length of the world's longest railway tunnel, being built in Switzerland #
95%
- proportion of Venezuela's economy that relies on oil #
6,200 miles
- trip that a humpback whale took between two breeding grounds #
90% - 115%
- estimated increase in rail passenger numbers in the Edinburgh area in the next 15 years #
Thursday, October 14, 2010
The Psychology Of Denial
It fascinates me that some people can deny what is going on around them in the face of overwhelming evidence. A few years ago I attended a Crewe Alexandra football match, as you do, and as the ball went whizzing past their goalkeeper and into the back of the net for the third time, the guy beside me said "Right, we're going to have to start playing now and teach this lot a lesson". I giggled and looked at him, only to realise that he was deadly serious and wondering why a strange Scotsman was laughing at his team.
When it comes to climate change, denial in the face of the evidence takes two forms. There are those who deny because it suits them, mostly because they will gain from that denial in one way or another.
Then there are those who fascinate me the most, the ones who would rather believe the first group of deniers. They don't gain out of it, and in fact it can make that person look mischievous or just plain stupid. What motivates them? What drives their psyche to declare everything is wonderful and should remain the way it is in perpetuity?
The Green Living Blog has a guest post by psychologist Adam Corner, in which he discusses a couple of experiments about "the threat of climate change to our identity and self esteem".
I urge you to go read.
When it comes to climate change, denial in the face of the evidence takes two forms. There are those who deny because it suits them, mostly because they will gain from that denial in one way or another.
Then there are those who fascinate me the most, the ones who would rather believe the first group of deniers. They don't gain out of it, and in fact it can make that person look mischievous or just plain stupid. What motivates them? What drives their psyche to declare everything is wonderful and should remain the way it is in perpetuity?
The Green Living Blog has a guest post by psychologist Adam Corner, in which he discusses a couple of experiments about "the threat of climate change to our identity and self esteem".
I urge you to go read.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
2010 Arctic Sea Ice Third Lowest On Record
America's National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) have updated their Arctic findings for 2010, and it's not pretty reading.
Usually, September is the time of the year which shows the smallest amount of sea ice in the Arctic, and so it proved again this year.
Unfortunately, it was also the third lowest in the satellite era. The ice extended 4.9 million kilometres, which was 2.14 million kilometres below the 1979-2000 average.
If that's hard to picture, the video below shows the ice extent since 1979 overlaid on Google Earth, or if you have Google Earth installed on your computer then you can download the file here.
Usually, September is the time of the year which shows the smallest amount of sea ice in the Arctic, and so it proved again this year.
Unfortunately, it was also the third lowest in the satellite era. The ice extended 4.9 million kilometres, which was 2.14 million kilometres below the 1979-2000 average.
If that's hard to picture, the video below shows the ice extent since 1979 overlaid on Google Earth, or if you have Google Earth installed on your computer then you can download the file here.
Monday, October 11, 2010
Scrapping My Car
Okay, I'll back up here. What the hell was someone who claims to be "green" doing with a car?
I'm realistic enough to know that sometimes a car is the only option. My girlfriend lives 60 miles away, out in the wilds of Perthshire. By public transport, the journey from Edinburgh takes an eye-watering 3 hours. By car, it takes 80 minutes.
I wish it weren't so, but sometimes in Scotland the public transport options are complete pants. So, I own a car for my once a week jaunt to Perthshire and the rest of the time it sits gathering dust and rust.
Or rather, sat. This morning I scrapped it, as the costs of repairs started to become more than the car was worth. Quite honestly I'm glad to get rid of it, as I didn't much like it. But then, I'm not sure you're supposed to "like" functional cars that get you from A to B, not in the same way you're supposed to "like" a Ferrari or a Bugatti.
And yes, I can appreciate how beautiful a Ferrari looks. It's not something that endears me to some of my fellow environmentalists, but I've said this before: it's not the car I don't like, it's the internal combustion engine.
This is actually the second car I've scrapped. The first one, I had a hell of a time trying to find someone to take it off my hands, working my way through the Yellow Pages. Some wouldn't touch it, some said it wasn't worth their while picking it up, some wanted me to pay them to collect it.
This time, I decided to cut out the hassle. I used this website, and two hours later I had a scrap dealer from Fife calling me and arranging a time to collect the car. No fuss, no stress, and one less polluting car on the road...
...at least for a few weeks, until I buy a replacement.
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Green In The Media 11th - 17th October
Monday 11th October
The Essay
On: BBC Radio Three
Time: 23:00 to 23:15
Before 'Silent Spring'
Series in which writers, scientists and environmental campaigners reflect on the figures whose ideas preceded the influential 1962 book Silent Spring and laid the foundations of the contemporary green movement. 1. Indian eco-activist Vandana Shiva considers the Chipko protest of 1730, when 363 Bishnoi people in Rajasthan were massacred for protecting a forest of sacred Khejri trees.
Tuesday 12th October
The Essay
On: BBC Radio Three
Time: 23:00 to 23:15
Before 'Silent Spring': 2. John Muir.
Environmental historian Donald Worster explores the life of John Muir, a Scot who emigrated in the 19th century to the United States to become an adventurous and outspoken advocate for the American wilderness.
Wednesday 13th October
Costing the Earth
On: BBC Radio Four
Time: 21:00 to 21:30 (Also Thu 1330)
Climate change litigation is already big news in the US and the number of environmental cases in our own courts could be about to increase. Tom Heap asks what the law can do.
Grand Designs
On: Channel 4
Time: 21:00 to 22:00
When Jonathan Belsey's marriage ended, he left the family home and bought a plot of land just down the road on a mission to build a house that would be exciting to look at, cheap to run, and ecologically sound. He's a scientist after all, and this will be the great experiment he's dreamt of. By the time building begins he has met his new partner Lindsay, who he manages to convince to buy into his dream. The house will now be their first home together, with room for their combined family of four daughters. The design and building is high risk. The mix of untested technology and uncompromising use of materials means a constant battle between comfort and ideology. The house will be carbon neutral, heated only by the sun, with power supplied by a massive wind turbine. Jonathan and Lindsay's build is a battle, with technologies that don't work, a design that's uncompromising, and a budget that runs out far too quickly. But with every penny sunk into it, this house has to work.
The Essay
On: BBC Radio Three
Time: 23:00 to 23:15
Before 'Silent Spring': 3. Alfred Russel Wallace.
Botanist Sandy Knapp reflects on 19th-century naturalist Alfred Russel Wallace's surprisingly radical views about our relationship with nature. Wallace is best known for co-proposing the theory of natural selection with Charles Darwin. But his extensive travels in South America and South East Asia taught him to appreciate the beauty of the natural environment and to understand the impact of human beings on wild places.
Thursday 14th October
One Planet
On: BBC World Service Radio
Time: 10:32 to 11:00 (Also 1530, 2030, 0130, Sun 0630)
One Planet looks at how we use our planet.
The Essay
On: BBC Radio Three
Time: 23:00 to 23:15
Before 'Silent Spring': 4. Aldo Leopold.
Curt Meine considers the ideas of outdoorsman, forester and philosopher Aldo Lepold, whose book A Sand County Almanac, published posthumously in 1949, became both a classic in American nature writing and a cornerstone of environmental ethics. Curt explores how a shack and an abandoned farm in Wisconsin became the inspiration for Leopold's environmental manifesto.
Friday 15th October
The Essay
On: BBC Radio Three
Time: 23:00 to 23:15
Before 'Silent Spring': 5. John Clare
Richard Mabey explores the role of 19th-century poet John Clare in bringing the beauty and fragility of the natural environment to wider public attention.
Sunday 17th October
Countryfile
On: BBC 1
Time: 18:30 to 19:30
Tom Heap asks whether it is really possible, or affordable, to capture and store carbon emissions from our dirtiest power stations.
Excerpts taken from DigiGuide - the world's best TV guide available from
http://www.getdigiguide.com/?p=1&r=20818
Copyright (c) GipsyMedia Limited.
The Essay
On: BBC Radio Three
Time: 23:00 to 23:15
Before 'Silent Spring'
Series in which writers, scientists and environmental campaigners reflect on the figures whose ideas preceded the influential 1962 book Silent Spring and laid the foundations of the contemporary green movement. 1. Indian eco-activist Vandana Shiva considers the Chipko protest of 1730, when 363 Bishnoi people in Rajasthan were massacred for protecting a forest of sacred Khejri trees.
Tuesday 12th October
The Essay
On: BBC Radio Three
Time: 23:00 to 23:15
Before 'Silent Spring': 2. John Muir.
Environmental historian Donald Worster explores the life of John Muir, a Scot who emigrated in the 19th century to the United States to become an adventurous and outspoken advocate for the American wilderness.
Wednesday 13th October
Costing the Earth
On: BBC Radio Four
Time: 21:00 to 21:30 (Also Thu 1330)
Climate change litigation is already big news in the US and the number of environmental cases in our own courts could be about to increase. Tom Heap asks what the law can do.
Grand Designs
On: Channel 4
Time: 21:00 to 22:00
When Jonathan Belsey's marriage ended, he left the family home and bought a plot of land just down the road on a mission to build a house that would be exciting to look at, cheap to run, and ecologically sound. He's a scientist after all, and this will be the great experiment he's dreamt of. By the time building begins he has met his new partner Lindsay, who he manages to convince to buy into his dream. The house will now be their first home together, with room for their combined family of four daughters. The design and building is high risk. The mix of untested technology and uncompromising use of materials means a constant battle between comfort and ideology. The house will be carbon neutral, heated only by the sun, with power supplied by a massive wind turbine. Jonathan and Lindsay's build is a battle, with technologies that don't work, a design that's uncompromising, and a budget that runs out far too quickly. But with every penny sunk into it, this house has to work.
The Essay
On: BBC Radio Three
Time: 23:00 to 23:15
Before 'Silent Spring': 3. Alfred Russel Wallace.
Botanist Sandy Knapp reflects on 19th-century naturalist Alfred Russel Wallace's surprisingly radical views about our relationship with nature. Wallace is best known for co-proposing the theory of natural selection with Charles Darwin. But his extensive travels in South America and South East Asia taught him to appreciate the beauty of the natural environment and to understand the impact of human beings on wild places.
Thursday 14th October
One Planet
On: BBC World Service Radio
Time: 10:32 to 11:00 (Also 1530, 2030, 0130, Sun 0630)
One Planet looks at how we use our planet.
The Essay
On: BBC Radio Three
Time: 23:00 to 23:15
Before 'Silent Spring': 4. Aldo Leopold.
Curt Meine considers the ideas of outdoorsman, forester and philosopher Aldo Lepold, whose book A Sand County Almanac, published posthumously in 1949, became both a classic in American nature writing and a cornerstone of environmental ethics. Curt explores how a shack and an abandoned farm in Wisconsin became the inspiration for Leopold's environmental manifesto.
Friday 15th October
The Essay
On: BBC Radio Three
Time: 23:00 to 23:15
Before 'Silent Spring': 5. John Clare
Richard Mabey explores the role of 19th-century poet John Clare in bringing the beauty and fragility of the natural environment to wider public attention.
Sunday 17th October
Countryfile
On: BBC 1
Time: 18:30 to 19:30
Tom Heap asks whether it is really possible, or affordable, to capture and store carbon emissions from our dirtiest power stations.
Excerpts taken from DigiGuide - the world's best TV guide available from
http://www.getdigiguide.com/?p=1&r=20818
Copyright (c) GipsyMedia Limited.
Saturday, October 09, 2010
The Week In Green Numbers
81%
- decrease in some frog species in the UK over the last 12 years #
35 million cubic feet
- deluge of "toxic sludge" which engulfed villages in Hungary #
40%
- how much of the Department for Energy and Climate Change budget goes to the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority #
11.14%
- US energy that came from renewables in the first six months of 2010 #
27%
- food bought that is subsequently wasted in the US #
- decrease in some frog species in the UK over the last 12 years #
35 million cubic feet
- deluge of "toxic sludge" which engulfed villages in Hungary #
40%
- how much of the Department for Energy and Climate Change budget goes to the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority #
11.14%
- US energy that came from renewables in the first six months of 2010 #
27%
- food bought that is subsequently wasted in the US #
Friday, October 08, 2010
Feeling Drained
The things we'll do to get our hands on some fossil fuel...
Scottish Coal have applied for permission to drain a loch and turn it into an opencast coal mine.
Let me run that by you again. They want to drain a loch.
Specifically, Loch Fitty in Fife.
They've already closed down the fishery on the Loch, but say that after they've raped the landscape they'll restore it.
Or, in other words, they'll leave their big hole out in the rain for a few years to fill up again.
Scottish Coal have applied for permission to drain a loch and turn it into an opencast coal mine.
Let me run that by you again. They want to drain a loch.
Specifically, Loch Fitty in Fife.
They've already closed down the fishery on the Loch, but say that after they've raped the landscape they'll restore it.
Or, in other words, they'll leave their big hole out in the rain for a few years to fill up again.
The Caveman Coalition
I've been banging on about how unambitious the Scottish Government is when it comes to anything environmental these days, so it would be remiss of me not to comment on yesterday's rather obscene vote in the parliament.
The SNP promised in their 2007 election manifesto that if they formed the government, then they would reduce emissions by 3% every year.
Yesterday, they put an entirely underwhelming plan in front of parliament for approval - a reduction of 0% this year, followed by 0.5% next year and then 0.3% in 2012.
The Tories were always going to vote for this. The LibDems, on the other hand, were decrying the plan earlier this year. Having got into bed with the Conservatives on a UK level, they have now followed their new Overlord's lead and voted for the SNP plan.
(Incidentally, this shows a worrying lack of autonomy from the Scottish LibDems which doesn't bode well for Labour if they want to form a coalition with them next May)
As for Labour, they couldn't bring themselves to support anything the SNP touches, so they abstained, although I've no doubt they would like to see the politically-difficult targets reduced.
The fact that all four "big" parties in the parliament were willing to see these laughable emissions targets go through doesn't bode well for the future. There's a distinct lack of balls when it comes to making the big decisions needed to cut our carbon output this close to an election.
The problem, of course, is that the climate doesn't recognise an election cycle.
The SNP promised in their 2007 election manifesto that if they formed the government, then they would reduce emissions by 3% every year.
Yesterday, they put an entirely underwhelming plan in front of parliament for approval - a reduction of 0% this year, followed by 0.5% next year and then 0.3% in 2012.
The Tories were always going to vote for this. The LibDems, on the other hand, were decrying the plan earlier this year. Having got into bed with the Conservatives on a UK level, they have now followed their new Overlord's lead and voted for the SNP plan.
(Incidentally, this shows a worrying lack of autonomy from the Scottish LibDems which doesn't bode well for Labour if they want to form a coalition with them next May)
As for Labour, they couldn't bring themselves to support anything the SNP touches, so they abstained, although I've no doubt they would like to see the politically-difficult targets reduced.
The fact that all four "big" parties in the parliament were willing to see these laughable emissions targets go through doesn't bode well for the future. There's a distinct lack of balls when it comes to making the big decisions needed to cut our carbon output this close to an election.
The problem, of course, is that the climate doesn't recognise an election cycle.
Thursday, October 07, 2010
Tackling The Unsexy
Energy efficiency is the low-hanging fruit in a low carbon future. Which makes it surprising that it has taken the Scottish Government so bloody long to do anything about it.
They've finally got around to announcing their plan to tackle energy waste, with an "ambition" to cut it by 12% over the next ten years.
Actually, their ambition should be to cut it by 100%. I'm fed up with the government aiming for the extremely low and achievable in their targets.
The problem the SNP have with it is that it's not sexy. No big positive headlines, no one to shake hands with for the photocall, no ribbons to cut.
Nothing, in fact, except lower power bills and less carbon.
So that's five million happy Scots, and one unhappy First Minister!
They've finally got around to announcing their plan to tackle energy waste, with an "ambition" to cut it by 12% over the next ten years.
Actually, their ambition should be to cut it by 100%. I'm fed up with the government aiming for the extremely low and achievable in their targets.
The problem the SNP have with it is that it's not sexy. No big positive headlines, no one to shake hands with for the photocall, no ribbons to cut.
Nothing, in fact, except lower power bills and less carbon.
So that's five million happy Scots, and one unhappy First Minister!
Tuesday, October 05, 2010
I Am Become Death, Destroyer Of...Trees
I didn't take much notice of the noise at first. I'm used to birds darting into and out of the tree outside my living room window.
In fact, I've mentioned the tree before here. It's an absolute delight in the summer to see so many species of birds resting in the branches.
But the fuss wasn't for dying down this morning, so I took a glance out the window...to see a man had climbed the tree with a saw.
My first thought was that it was the council, doing a bit of pruning work. Then I took note of the cardigan he was wearing (discarded later), the lack of safety equipment as he perched on the trunk, and the fact that he was quite clearly of (or close to) retirement age.
I still at this point thought that he was trimming a few branches, so to be honest I didn't take much notice. About ten minutes later I realised that it wasn't just any old branches that he was going for, but one of the main branches.
I wasn't happy about this - the tree provides me some degree of privacy from my neighbours in the opposite tenement, particularly in the summer when the leaves are full.
Having brought that branch down, he then proceeded onto the one next to it. It was about this time that he clocked me sitting at my computer by the window watching him.
As he was tackling the third big branch, I decided to ask him what the hell he was doing.
He complained that the tree prevented light reaching the lower flats, that it was a stupid place to put a tree, that the back green was covered in weeds because of the lack of sunlight, that people couldn't hang their washing out because it would be in the shade.
Have a look at the photos here, taken mid-morning. The back green he refers to is in the shade anyway!
I complained about my growing lack of privacy as he hacked away. "No one can see you from the other flats anyway", he replied.
"Besides, won't you be glad to get a bit more light?"
"Well, no," I said, "we don't get the light on this side anyway, and besides I used to enjoy watching the birds in the tree."
"Well, I don't like doing this, but it has to be done!"
He was at pains to point out that the tree had been trimmed before, about eight years ago, and he was only cutting it back to that previous level.
I left our interaction at that, unsure of the ownership of the tree and realising that there was nothing I could do. Even if I chained myself to the tree, he'd just wait till I wasn't there to complete the job. A wee sneaky part of me did contemplate stealing his ladders and leaving him stuck up there!
So the sawing continued, until all that was left of the gorgeous tree that has given me joy over the last two years was this stump:
To say I'm devastated is an understatement.
In fact, I've mentioned the tree before here. It's an absolute delight in the summer to see so many species of birds resting in the branches.
But the fuss wasn't for dying down this morning, so I took a glance out the window...to see a man had climbed the tree with a saw.
My first thought was that it was the council, doing a bit of pruning work. Then I took note of the cardigan he was wearing (discarded later), the lack of safety equipment as he perched on the trunk, and the fact that he was quite clearly of (or close to) retirement age.
I still at this point thought that he was trimming a few branches, so to be honest I didn't take much notice. About ten minutes later I realised that it wasn't just any old branches that he was going for, but one of the main branches.
I wasn't happy about this - the tree provides me some degree of privacy from my neighbours in the opposite tenement, particularly in the summer when the leaves are full.
Having brought that branch down, he then proceeded onto the one next to it. It was about this time that he clocked me sitting at my computer by the window watching him.
As he was tackling the third big branch, I decided to ask him what the hell he was doing.
He complained that the tree prevented light reaching the lower flats, that it was a stupid place to put a tree, that the back green was covered in weeds because of the lack of sunlight, that people couldn't hang their washing out because it would be in the shade.
Have a look at the photos here, taken mid-morning. The back green he refers to is in the shade anyway!
"Besides, won't you be glad to get a bit more light?"
"Well, no," I said, "we don't get the light on this side anyway, and besides I used to enjoy watching the birds in the tree."
"Well, I don't like doing this, but it has to be done!"
He was at pains to point out that the tree had been trimmed before, about eight years ago, and he was only cutting it back to that previous level.
I left our interaction at that, unsure of the ownership of the tree and realising that there was nothing I could do. Even if I chained myself to the tree, he'd just wait till I wasn't there to complete the job. A wee sneaky part of me did contemplate stealing his ladders and leaving him stuck up there!
So the sawing continued, until all that was left of the gorgeous tree that has given me joy over the last two years was this stump:
To say I'm devastated is an understatement.
Monday, October 04, 2010
Now Approaching Birmingham, Where This Line Terminates
I have deep misgivings about Philip Hammond, the UK's new Transport Secretary.
He set his stall out early and has continued in the vein: that he's going to "end the war on the motorist".
It doesn't seem to matter that a war on cars is a figment of the imagination of the motoring lobby and the tabloids. It's populist, so it's going to be done.
The first shot was fired last week when he announced that the M4 bus lane was being scrapped, and that the lane would be open again to all vehicles. No thought seems to have been given to re-purposing what has actually been a successful scheme - independent research has shown that it reduced traffic jams, improved rush hour journey times for buses AND cars, and reduced accidents.
They could have re-purposed the lane for high-occupancy vehicles, to allow buses to use it along with cars with more than one occupant. But this seems to have been dismissed as not populist enough.
Today, Hammond is addressing the Tory conference and the Guardian says he will announce £800 million for the High Speed 2 rail line, from London to Birmingham.
On the one hand, I'm glad that they're finally committing to this much-needed project that quite frankly should have been built ten years ago.
On the other hand, Birmingham seems to be the end of the line. The HS2 will split there, with one branch joining the West Coast Main Line to Manchester and Glasgow, and the other branch joining the East Coast Main Line to Newcastle and Edinburgh.
This means the chances of a dedicated high-speed line to Scotland and the north of England will be extremely slim.
The government should commit now to building the line all the way to Glasgow and Edinburgh, and then start building it from the north southwards to ensure that it happens.
But then, there's no votes for the Tories in Scotland or the north of England, is there?
He set his stall out early and has continued in the vein: that he's going to "end the war on the motorist".
It doesn't seem to matter that a war on cars is a figment of the imagination of the motoring lobby and the tabloids. It's populist, so it's going to be done.
The first shot was fired last week when he announced that the M4 bus lane was being scrapped, and that the lane would be open again to all vehicles. No thought seems to have been given to re-purposing what has actually been a successful scheme - independent research has shown that it reduced traffic jams, improved rush hour journey times for buses AND cars, and reduced accidents.
They could have re-purposed the lane for high-occupancy vehicles, to allow buses to use it along with cars with more than one occupant. But this seems to have been dismissed as not populist enough.
Today, Hammond is addressing the Tory conference and the Guardian says he will announce £800 million for the High Speed 2 rail line, from London to Birmingham.
On the one hand, I'm glad that they're finally committing to this much-needed project that quite frankly should have been built ten years ago.
On the other hand, Birmingham seems to be the end of the line. The HS2 will split there, with one branch joining the West Coast Main Line to Manchester and Glasgow, and the other branch joining the East Coast Main Line to Newcastle and Edinburgh.
This means the chances of a dedicated high-speed line to Scotland and the north of England will be extremely slim.
The government should commit now to building the line all the way to Glasgow and Edinburgh, and then start building it from the north southwards to ensure that it happens.
But then, there's no votes for the Tories in Scotland or the north of England, is there?
Sunday, October 03, 2010
Green In The Media 4th - 10th October
There's a new series of Autumnwatch starting on Thursday, so BBC Four takes the opportunity to look at how our attitudes to wildlife have changed over the years, and what role television has played in that.
Monday 4th October
Horizon
On: BBC 2
Time: 21:00 to 22:00
The Death of the Oceans?.
Sir David Attenborough reveals the findings of one of the most ambitious scientific studies of our time - an investigation into what is happening to our oceans. He looks at whether it is too late to save their remarkable biodiversity. Horizon travels from the cold waters of the North Atlantic to the tropical waters of the Great Barrier Reef to meet the scientists who are transforming our understanding of this unique habitat. Attenborough explores some of the ways in which we are affecting marine life - from over-fishing to the acidification of sea water. The film also uncovers the disturbing story of how shipping noise is deafening whales and dolphins, affecting their survival in the future.
Tuesday 5th October
When Britain Went Wild
On: BBC 4
Time: 21:00 to 22:30 (Also 0100, 0330, Wed 2250, 0150, Sat 2350)
Documentary which explores the untold story of how Britain 'went wild' in the 1960s. It shows how the British people fell in love with animals and how, by the end of the decade, wildlife protection had become an intrinsic part of our culture - before then people knew very little about endangered species or the natural world. The film discovers how early television wildlife programmes with David Attenborough, writers such as Gerald Durrell and Gavin Maxwell and pioneers of conservation such as Peter Scott contributed to that transformation.
100 Years of Wildlife Films
On: BBC 4
Time: 22:30 to 00:30 (Also Sat 0120)
Bill Oddie highlights the passionate, eccentric and pioneering individuals who have often risked life and limb to break new boundaries in wildlife films. He charts the changes in technology that have driven the industry forward and reveals how the last hundred years of wildlife films has as much to do with our social attitudes as it has to do with the animals themselves. Bill explores the changing trends throughout the last century, from shooting animals for fun in the 1930s to campaigning to save them from extinction today.
Wednesday 6th October
Costing the Earth
On: BBC Radio Four
Time: 21:00 to 21:30 (Also Thu 1330)
The great Pacific Garbage Patch is now twice the size of France but we still use plastic for disposable items. Dr Alice Roberts finds out if anything can stop the fake plastic sea.
Thursday 7th October
One Planet
On: BBC World Service Radio
Time: 10:32 to 11:00 (Also 1530, 2030, 0130, Sun 0630)
One Planet looks at how we use our planet.
Excerpt taken from DigiGuide - the world's best TV guide available from
http://www.getdigiguide.com/?p=1&r=20818
Copyright (c) GipsyMedia Limited.
Monday 4th October
Horizon
On: BBC 2
Time: 21:00 to 22:00
The Death of the Oceans?.
Sir David Attenborough reveals the findings of one of the most ambitious scientific studies of our time - an investigation into what is happening to our oceans. He looks at whether it is too late to save their remarkable biodiversity. Horizon travels from the cold waters of the North Atlantic to the tropical waters of the Great Barrier Reef to meet the scientists who are transforming our understanding of this unique habitat. Attenborough explores some of the ways in which we are affecting marine life - from over-fishing to the acidification of sea water. The film also uncovers the disturbing story of how shipping noise is deafening whales and dolphins, affecting their survival in the future.
Tuesday 5th October
When Britain Went Wild
On: BBC 4
Time: 21:00 to 22:30 (Also 0100, 0330, Wed 2250, 0150, Sat 2350)
Documentary which explores the untold story of how Britain 'went wild' in the 1960s. It shows how the British people fell in love with animals and how, by the end of the decade, wildlife protection had become an intrinsic part of our culture - before then people knew very little about endangered species or the natural world. The film discovers how early television wildlife programmes with David Attenborough, writers such as Gerald Durrell and Gavin Maxwell and pioneers of conservation such as Peter Scott contributed to that transformation.
100 Years of Wildlife Films
On: BBC 4
Time: 22:30 to 00:30 (Also Sat 0120)
Bill Oddie highlights the passionate, eccentric and pioneering individuals who have often risked life and limb to break new boundaries in wildlife films. He charts the changes in technology that have driven the industry forward and reveals how the last hundred years of wildlife films has as much to do with our social attitudes as it has to do with the animals themselves. Bill explores the changing trends throughout the last century, from shooting animals for fun in the 1930s to campaigning to save them from extinction today.
Wednesday 6th October
Costing the Earth
On: BBC Radio Four
Time: 21:00 to 21:30 (Also Thu 1330)
The great Pacific Garbage Patch is now twice the size of France but we still use plastic for disposable items. Dr Alice Roberts finds out if anything can stop the fake plastic sea.
Thursday 7th October
One Planet
On: BBC World Service Radio
Time: 10:32 to 11:00 (Also 1530, 2030, 0130, Sun 0630)
One Planet looks at how we use our planet.
Excerpt taken from DigiGuide - the world's best TV guide available from
http://www.getdigiguide.com/?p=1&r=20818
Copyright (c) GipsyMedia Limited.
Saturday, October 02, 2010
The Week In Green Numbers
2,000%
- increase in Rhino poaching in last 3 years #
2,000
- estimated number of seals shot by Scottish fish farmers every year #
250
- radioactive particles found on the seabed around Dounreay in 2 months #
60 tonnes
- woolly mammoth tusks exported from Russia every year #
$72 billion
- investment by China in clean technology since 2000, $5 billion more than the US #
- increase in Rhino poaching in last 3 years #
2,000
- estimated number of seals shot by Scottish fish farmers every year #
250
- radioactive particles found on the seabed around Dounreay in 2 months #
60 tonnes
- woolly mammoth tusks exported from Russia every year #
$72 billion
- investment by China in clean technology since 2000, $5 billion more than the US #
Friday, October 01, 2010
Tory Caveman Misses Point
Way back in March I had cause to praise a Tory.
I wrote an email to all of Scotland's MEPs, and sat back and waited for the replies. And waited. And waited.
Eventually, a LibDem told me that there was no point in cutting Europe's carbon emissions, and a Labour MEP told me she was out of the office.
The only person who bothered to reply was one of Struan Stevenson's researchers, who took the time to read the report I linked to before sending a detailed email.
I've thought favourably of Stevenson since then...until today.
He has a letter published in The Herald (third one down on this page) in which he hits all the misleading anti-windfarm talking points and misses the point about where our future energy supply will come from, calling the "race" to renewable energy "madcap".
Oh yeah, and he dusts off the phrase "the lights will go out".
The Tories have had much fun in the last year of accusing Labour of not "fixing the roof while the sun is shining". So let me spell it out in much the same way:
When the wind is blowing, we will send our excess energy to Norway through the North Sea Supergrid where they will use it to fill reservoirs. When the wind is not blowing, Norway will send our energy back to us by emptying those reservoirs.
It'll be a lot less expensive to lay a subsea power line between Scotland and Norway than it will be to build a couple of huge concrete boxes to hold the caveman technology that is a coal-fired power station.
And that's before we ever take into account the advances in battery storage technology and smart energy grids at home.
Mr Stevenson needs to stop thinking like a caveman.
I wrote an email to all of Scotland's MEPs, and sat back and waited for the replies. And waited. And waited.
Eventually, a LibDem told me that there was no point in cutting Europe's carbon emissions, and a Labour MEP told me she was out of the office.
The only person who bothered to reply was one of Struan Stevenson's researchers, who took the time to read the report I linked to before sending a detailed email.
I've thought favourably of Stevenson since then...until today.
He has a letter published in The Herald (third one down on this page) in which he hits all the misleading anti-windfarm talking points and misses the point about where our future energy supply will come from, calling the "race" to renewable energy "madcap".
Oh yeah, and he dusts off the phrase "the lights will go out".
The Tories have had much fun in the last year of accusing Labour of not "fixing the roof while the sun is shining". So let me spell it out in much the same way:
When the wind is blowing, we will send our excess energy to Norway through the North Sea Supergrid where they will use it to fill reservoirs. When the wind is not blowing, Norway will send our energy back to us by emptying those reservoirs.
It'll be a lot less expensive to lay a subsea power line between Scotland and Norway than it will be to build a couple of huge concrete boxes to hold the caveman technology that is a coal-fired power station.
And that's before we ever take into account the advances in battery storage technology and smart energy grids at home.
Mr Stevenson needs to stop thinking like a caveman.
It's Salmond's Oil, Addendum
As a quick follow-up to yesterday's post, here's Patrick Harvie talking about oil after a clip of his question to Alex Salmond in the parliament yesterday:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)