Challenges for Climate Change

One matter will be discussed frequently in both Washington and Westminster over the next few weeks - how to tackle climate change.

Gary Robertshaw wrote the following - your comments would be appreciated both here and by Gary directly. His website is
http://www.search-for-me.co.uk/index.html

Population growth - the other side of the coin

Reading through the various reports on climate change and environmental damage it can sometimes seem as though the problems we face are insurmountable. That, despite the hard work of environmental campaigners and those concerned with fair trade and green issues, we are merely forestalling inevitable environmental collapse.

As the overdue realisation dawns on governments around the world, particularly those with most to lose because of dense populations perilously exposed to sea level rises, there is a clamour for ‘quick fix’ solutions. Everything from geo-engineering to devices in space designed to block out sunlight.

Whilst well-intentioned, these efforts overlook a far more fundamental problem. This problem can be expressed in a simple, single statement: There are too many people on the Earth, consuming too many resources.

In other words, our impact on the environment can be broadly expressed as follows:

Number of people x Per capita resource consumption

Stabilisation of the global population and a reduction in per capita resource consumption will, in combination, do more to mitigate environmental damage than anything else. The Pareto principle of directing most effort into that which produces the greatest result has never been more important, whilst political prevaricating and drawn-out discussions on relatively minor issues serve only as a distraction.

An effective solution must address both population growth and resource consumption together. There is little point in trying to reduce per capita resource consumption with a surging population as the total impact on the environment will continue to rise.

Politically, however, that is what is happening. Governments regard the subject of population stabilisation as almost taboo. A no-go area not up for debate. Almost immediately, there are accusations of totalitarianism and coercion in reducing family sizes.

Yet, it doesn’t have to be like that. Empowerment and better education of women in developing countries is known to have a downward impact on birth rates. The Obama administration’s progress in encouraging family planning in the US and more broadly within the UN will have a positive longer-term impact. There is so much that can be done and without recourse to totalitarian policies.

However, the size of the problem should not be underestimated. For example, China’s population is still growing now despite the policy of one child per couple having been in place for many years. There is an inherent time lag involved. On top of that there are likely to be greater food shortages and displacement of large populations as climate change impacts upon agriculture in low lying areas, coupled with desertification of areas where deforestation has taken place. This will inevitably compound the problems of migration.

Environmental organisations need to avoid focusing almost explicitly on reducing per capita resource consumption whilst neglecting the other side of the equation; population growth. Global environmental strategies can only be truly effective when addressing both sides of the coin.

Guest Column

Today the entry on this blog has been contributed by Dr Gary Robertshaw. Gary runs The Green Providers Directory (http://www.search-for-me.co.uk/), commenting and writing on a range of environmental and political issues.

Your thoughts in response to this article would be appreciated.

Time for optimism?

The prospects for the emergence of a genuinely sustainable global economy have been given fresh impetus with the election of Barack Obama, extending beyond the well intentioned rhetoric characteristic of new administrations. I think we can be optimistic for several reasons.

Firstly, it signals a radical departure from the previous administration’s policy of denial, apathy and denigration of science. Gone too is the unthinkable prospect of Sarah Palin presiding over US energy policy, whose ignorance on scientific and environmental matters are truly breathtaking.

Secondly, the Obama administration does not regard sustainable energy investment as ‘nice to have but not during a recession’. In particular, there is a stark recognition that a reversion to old coal mining technology and a reliance on foreign oil are not in the US’s long-term economic or international interests. Investment in sustainable projects is seen as a growth opportunity that will contribute to (i.e. not dilute) the US economy, creating new jobs and new technologies. For example, the Obama administration aims to create five million new jobs by strategically investing $150 billion over the next ten years to catalyse private efforts to build a clean energy future. It has also set a target of 10% of US electricity from renewable sources by 2012, and 25% by 2025.

Thirdly, US environmental and energy policies have ramifications far beyond its borders. The old adage that when the US sneezes the rest of the world catches a cold applies not just to financial markets, but also to the global environment. As the largest contributor to global emissions, its commitment to developing renewable energy sources, cutting back on fossil fuels (which should concurrently reduce its involvement in foreign conflicts) and investment in sustainable living will naturally have the largest impact whilst encouraging other nations to follow suit. More specifically, the new administration seeks eliminate its current imports from the Middle East and Venezuela within 10 years.

Of course the Obama administration will be criticised by both sides. The oil industry, loggers, car manufacturers, arms industry, et al will claim that his ambitions are unrealistic, and that they will cost jobs – they will use lobbying, corporate influence and every tactic available to undermine him (expect to see Bush’s involvement here too). On the other side, he will be condemned by the doom mongers as doing too little too late.

The transition from the world’s worst polluter to a leading, sustainable economy will not happen overnight. Old infrastructure, corporate inertia and scepticism, vested interests and general apathy will slow down progress. However, green campaigners, long frustrated by the Bush years, now have cause to be imbued with real optimism.


Dr Gary Robertshaw
The Green Providers Directory
http://www.search-for-me.co.uk/

DECC

One of the most important changes made to the structure of Government in Gordon Brown's recent reshuffle was the establishment of the Department of Energy and Climate Change. It was created out of BERR (Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform) - which had its Energy Group and DEFRA (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) - where the Climate Change Group was established.

The new Secretary of State is Ed Miliband (brother of the Foreign Secretary) - http://www.decc.gov.uk/about-decc/who-are-we/ministers/miliband/biography.htm. He is supported by two Ministers of State - Mike O'Brien MP http://www.decc.gov.uk/about-decc/who-are-we/ministers/obrien/biography.htm and Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (who also has responsibilities within the remaining parts of DEFRA) http://www.decc.gov.uk/about-decc/who-are-we/ministers/hunt/biography.htm. Joan Ruddock is the fourth Minister in the new department, being the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State. http://www.decc.gov.uk/about-decc/who-are-we/ministers/ruddock/biography.htm

The Department's new website is still in the early stages of development, but can be accessed at

http://www.decc.gov.uk/

The Week Ahead

Only a few more days until the US Elections. I'll be flying over to Northern Virginia on Tuesday to watch the last week of the campaigns - and my observations will be recorded in this blog and on some BBC local radio stations. I will also be updating twitter on my activities. (see column to the right or http://twitter.com/jdavidmorgan)

In the UK eyes will be focused on the US Elections. I've never known such a high level of interest in the American elections in the UK. There is strong support for Obama - even the Tory mayor for London, Boris Johnson, is hoping he will win.

At Westminster the Climate Change Bill will see its final stages taken in the House of Commons on Tuesday. Press reports yesterday suggest that the government is preparing to make concessions to avoid a Labour rebellion. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/oct/24/climate-change-carbon-emissions-miliband). The Local Transport Bill is expected to pass its final Commons stages on Monday. In the House of Lords there are some interesting questions due to be asked. Some will be profiled during the coming week on this blog. I would also draw your attention to Lord Astor of Hevers question to Her Majesty’s Government on Monday "what steps they are taking to promote synergy and reduce possible friction between NATO and the European Union on defence matters."

The Parliamentary calendar can be viewed at http://services.parliament.uk/calendar/futurebusiness.html {which will be transferred to http://services.parliament.uk/calendar/thisweek.html at some point]