Petrolhead

This is a difficult confession for someone so invested in environmental issues and who spends his time encouraging others to think about the environment.

I used to be a petrolhead!

I got my first Mini (which was ancient, even then) soon after I turned 17.  I spectated at motor rallies and once drove from Yorkshire to Kent to watch the British Grand Prix at Brands Hatch.  (This probably tells you immediately that I’m no longer as young as I think I am!)  I read books about Timo Makkinen and Paddy Hopkirk and their exploits in the Monte Carlo Rally.  I subscribed to Autosport magazine and watched motor racing on television.

I now drive a sensible family car.  I try to drive economically and only when it’s necessary.

I can’t help but be tempted by some of the car adverts I see on television and daydream about being able to drive the latest shiny new sports car or SUV.

But then, reality sets in and I see that the vision of car ownership portrayed in these adverts is nothing more than an illusion.  When did you last drive along the meandering coastal roads of the south of France, or Italy’s Amalfi coast in glorious sunshine?  And if you have done, when were you able to drive on these roads without encountering another car or, more concerning, a coach full of tourists or a juggernaut hauling 40 tonnes of stuff from the nearest port!

Car ownership and use is still being peddled as a dream of the open road, unlimited time and resources to enjoy the sunshine and scenery.  The reality for most of us is very different.

For me, an almost recovered petrolhead, I’m now considering and, to some extent, looking forward to the time when I no longer need a car.  This expensive, polluting metal box on wheels, which spends most of its time parked up and going nowhere, can become someone else’s problem.

I’m not even excited by the increase in availability of electrically powered cars as we still have to drive them on horribly congested roads.  And in the UK, at least, we haven’t yet developed the infrastructure we need to support a wholesale shift to electric vehicles.

Has your relationship with cars changed?

If you don’t use a car, how do you travel?

Is climate breakdown causing mass migration?

I’ve often told learners that the climate crisis is leading to increasing migration.  In fact, I’ve suggested that the number of migrants reaching more affluent countries today will be dwarfed by the number moving across international borders as the climate deteriorates further.  This seems to be the accepted belief, reinforced by most media outlets.

But I realise I may have been making some inappropriate assumptions and, in turn, passing on these ideas to learners on our courses.

There is no doubt that climate breakdown leads to drought, crop failure and hunger; or floods; or other extreme weather conditions.  These, in turn, force people to leave their homes.  But does this lead to cross-border migration?

Hein de Haas, Sociology Professor at the University of Amsterdam has, in his book, “How migration really works”, encouraged me to examine these assumptions again.

Professor de Haas suggests that the popular idea that illegal migration is out of control is incorrect as there’s evidence that most migrants who move from the global south to the global north continue to do so legally.  What is changing, however, is that the legal channels allowing such migration are being closed.  If this trend continues, we may see an increase in illegal migration as genuine asylum seekers and other migrants try to find ways to reach their desired destination.

Rather than migration increasing due to drought, crop failure and hunger, or extreme weather conditions it increases as countries become richer.  Increasing levels of income and education alongside infrastructure improvements raise people’s capabilities and aspirations to migrate.  Rather than being a desperate flight from misery, migration is generally an investment in the long-term well-being of families and requires significant resources.

If you’re not sure about this, just think about the amounts reported to be paid to people traffickers!  And families appear willing to pay more than once if an initial attempt to reach the desired destination fails.

Poverty, on the other hand, deprives people of the resources to move long distances.  These unfortunate people are barely able to reach the nearest refugee camp or international aid zone and are certainly unable to cross continents.

This is why climate breakdown may not, in fact, trigger mass movements of “climate refugees”.  Research into the effects of droughts and floods shows that most people stay close to home.  The most vulnerable people are the most likely to get trapped, unable to move anywhere.

Professor de Haas indicates that international migrants account for less than 3% of the world’s population.  This figure hasn’t changed much for around 50 years.  About 10% of international migrants are refugees, representing only 0.3% of the world’s population.  80 to 85% of refugees stay in their region of origin, migrating internally.  They will only cross borders if the borders are close.

So: are we wrong to think that climate breakdown will lead to increased international migration?  In common with most aspects of the climate and other, associated crises, we can’t consider migration in isolation.  We need to think about it alongside broader debates around inequality, labour markets, social justice and, more broadly, an understanding of the type of society we want to live in.

Net zero walking?

I was lucky to be invited to spend a day walking in the Lake District recently. This was a day in the Langdales with a scramble up Wetherlam from Fell Foot and Greenburn and then a more leisurely walk and another scramble to the top of Swirl How. From Swirl How, we walked along West Side Edge before dropping down again to Greenburn Beck to complete the circular walk. We were a party of four. The weather was fine but with a bit of low cloud and occasional sunny spells. There had been some rain in the week leading up to the walk.

Why am I giving this background information?

At Foggy Outline we are currently working hard on developing some learning around the topic of net zero. How can we, as a small business, move towards net zero greenhouse gas emissions and what are the impacts of each of the activities we undertake as a business? And, using this information about our own transformation, how can we help others to work towards their own net zero goals? It was from this perspective that I found myself spending some of the day thinking about the environmental impact of hill walking as an activity.

The first issue was the impact of even a small number of walkers on the landscape. As there had been some rain in days before our walk, the soil was damp. Because we began climbing quite steeply, many of our steps dragged at the grass cover and sometimes created divots. Some of the stones we stepped on, we inadvertently dislodged, again revealing bare soil beneath. Soil, without the stabilising effect of grass or the protective cover of stones and scree is potentially prone to erosion.

When you take a broader overview of this type of damage and look at some of the well-used paths in the hills, you realise the impact of multiple walkers. Even in a small group, we each took a slightly different route, despite following the broad direction of the path. When you look back at the paths down some of the slopes, they can be several metres wide and with erosion gullies caused by heavy rainfall.

I realise this is a significant issue for our National Parks and other protected landscapes. The authorities in the Lake District, and closer to home in the Yorkshire Dales, are working hard to balance the need for access with the damage caused by this access.

Repair work

We came across an example of this where about half a dozen people were working on repairing a piece of badly eroded path at Swirl Hawse, between Wetherlam and Swirl How. They were excavating by hand and placing stones to stabilise the path. The stones were being carried up the slope from a large pile that had been deposited for the purpose. This all raises several questions:

• How was this stockpile of stone carried to the location?  Helicopter?

• How did all the personnel travel to the site?  Hopefully they shared their road transport and walked from their parking space but they will have used fossil fuels in travelling from their base to the construction site

• They were using plastic trugs to carry the material around the site

• I am guessing they will have been provided with clothing and equipment by the National Park, all of which has an impact

This relatively simple activity of repairing an eroded path contributes to climate breakdown.

Clothing and equipment

Beyond the impact on the landscape, we were all well equipped for a day in the high hills with base layer, fleece or similar, a weatherproof outer layer, walking shorts or trousers, backpacks, walking socks and boots. Most of my equipment is several years old but most of it is made from “technical fabrics”. That is, they are manufactured fabrics made, for the most part, from fossil-fuel derivatives. My base layer is polyester and was manufactured in Cambodia and my wind stopper jacket was made in China. My boots have leather uppers but synthetic soles, also made from fossil-fuel derivatives.

Similar comments can be made about the other items of clothing, my backpack and water bottle.

Travel

I do not live in the Lake District and had to drive to our meeting point. My journey was the shortest of the four walkers but even I had a 100 mile round trip. My fellow walkers were having a longer stay in the area but their four day break accumulated something in excess of 1,200 miles (2 cars, each with a 600 mile round trip).

Walking in the countryside is an important activity and we should all do more of it and encourage others to do it too! But even this beneficial activity has significant environmental impacts and can lead to significant emissions of greenhouse gases.

What, then, could we do to reduce or, more importantly, eliminate these emissions?

Probably the best thing we could have done was to stay at home and walk from our respective front doors. But had we done that, the Lake District would have foregone the tourist income derived from our visit. My companions spent money at the local pub and in shops and cafes during their longer stay. The Lake District and other destinations rely heavily on tourism to sustain the local economy and without it, we could argue that there would be even less employment and opportunity in these areas. But that’s a discussion for another time.

Had we all stayed at home, we would also have missed out on the benefits of getting together and enjoying the experience collectively. Another significant change we could have made to reduce the impact of our visit to the Lake District would have been to find alternative modes of transport with lower impacts.

But, as anyone who has tried to reach a remote destination using public transport will know, this is not easy. Friends from London who stayed in Grasmere recently did manage to travel by train from Euston to Windermere via Oxenholme and then by bus from Windermere to Grasmere. While the main line is electrified, the branches are not. From last year, the train operator has been trialling hybrid trains with back-up batteries. The buses still run on diesel. So even the most committed users of public transport will still emit greenhouse gases in reaching their destination.

When thinking about replacing our clothing and other equipment, we need to consider its impact and to select items that are manufactured sustainably. Perhaps we should choose manufacturers who will take back our used clothing and equipment for dismantling and remanufacture?

Challenges of achieving net zero

But even when we have done all these things, there will still be emissions of greenhouse gases associated with this simple act of walking in the hills. When this experience is translated to the more complex activities that arise from running a business, you begin to realise how difficult it is going to be to reach zero emissions.

If you are interested in the concept of net zero and the challenges of achieving it as an individual or business, we have just launched a series of short videos on YouTube which will follow the path our micro-business takes as we work towards becoming net zero.

You may also have picked up that we are also working to develop and deliver a net zero course for decision-makers in small businesses. The aim of the course is to provide background on reducing our emissions of greenhouse gases but to go beyond this to provide practical support as more of us make a commitment to net zero. We will provide updates on this here as our ideas develop.

You can also be reassured that, despite this train of thought developing as I walked, we did have a good day! And its clear from the way these ideas developed that, as David Hieatt keeps reminding us, taking time away from the screen and being involved in the natural world is really beneficial. 

Other days out are planned!

Tree planting in the Dales: an opportunity to view

Since 1996, Yorkshire Dales Millennium Trust has been planting trees in the Yorkshire Dales. They have planted more than 1.5 million trees in a diverse range of sites. Of course, all this activity has to be funded and the Trust seems to be adept at finding funding sources from public bodies and businesses. An alternative source of funding comes from members of the public who dedicate a tree (or several) in memory of a loved one or just as an alternative gift for a birthday or Christmas.

I chose to do this a few years ago as a birthday gift for my father. As a result of my financial contribution, the Trust was able to plant two native broadleaf trees in Ormsgill Wood, near Airton and a few days ago, we attended an Open Day to have a look at the series of woodlands that have been developed. Because the woodlands created by the Trust are intended to mimic what happens in nature, the individual trees are not marked and you cannot choose where “your” trees will be planted but the Open Day was a wonderful opportunity to have a look at the area and see what the Trust has achieved.

The site of the Ormsgill woodland has several streams running through it. Because it is quite a damp area of land, the trees planted are appropriate for wetland areas and include Downy Birch, Silver Birch, Rowan, Hazel, Bird Cherry, Sessile Oak, Goat Willow and Hawthorn. More than 20,000 trees have been planted in three distinct areas, all sympathetic to the landscape and intended to complement the existing vegetation and woodland.

The streams at Ormsgill form some of the headwaters of the river Aire that flows from the Dales through Skipton to Leeds and beyond. The site was selected, in part, because of this. In recent years, the Aire has flooded in Leeds and increasing the woodland coverage in the upper reaches of the catchment should slow the flow of water into the river and, over time, reduce the likelihood of flooding further down stream. Leeds City Council is contributing to additional woodland creation in the Aire catchment with this in mind and also to contribute to the alleviation of climate breakdown by planting trees to absorb carbon dioxide.

Carol Douglas, Woodland Officer at the Trust, who was taking the opportunity afforded by the Open Day to do some maintenance on the woodland, advised that the success rate for the planting is approaching 90%, which is higher than is planned for. Plastic tree guards are used to protect the saplings as they become established and the individual areas of woodland are fenced to prevent ingress by the numerous sheep grazing the adjacent pasture. As the woodland areas have not been grazed, at the time of our visit, the grass and other vegetation was waist high and walking through the woodland areas was a challenge. But it was good to get up close and personal to some of the trees on the site.

Although maintenance of the woodland, including removal of the tree guards, is the responsibility of the landowner, this rarely happens. The Trust works with several volunteer groups who spend time removing the tree guards for recycling. The manufacturers are, apparently, able to manufacture new guards from those removed and are working towards a circular process. Yorkshire Dales Millennium Trust is also carrying out research into alternative tree guards and the ultimate aim would be to find material to make a tree guard that is durable enough to protect the trees for up to 10 years but which would, ultimately compost in-situ and provide some nutritional benefit to the tree. Are there any materials scientists out there up for a challenge?

We had an enjoyable and interesting couple of hours at Ormsgill. Although relatively close to Airton and other Dales villages, the woodland is quite remote. The views over Airedale and across to Pendle Hill are spectacular and when there are no visitors to an Open Day, it must be very quiet. I intend to visit again in the near future via the network of footpaths and look forward to experiencing it in those circumstances. In the meantime, thanks to Carol Douglas and her colleagues from Yorkshire Dales Millennium Trust for the opportunity to visit and for their willingness to share their knowledge and experience with us and the other visitors.

Friends of the Dales

Karen and I are based on the edge of the Yorkshire Dales National Park. We use images and ideas of the National Park quite often in our work so I was pleased to be invited to talk to the policy committee of Friends of the Dales about climate breakdown.

Friends of the Dales is a membership charity campaigning for the protection and enjoyment of the Dales. Like many organisations, they are coming to terms with the realities of climate breakdown and developing policies in response. While aware of the issue, the committee felt that an external view of the scale and severity of climate breakdown, its impact on the wider world and some actions we could take would help to focus their thinking.

Three minutes of individual visualisation of what the committee members would like the Dales to be like in 2030 produced some unexpected and thought-provoking ideas. These were beyond the anticipated improvements in landscape and biodiversity, extending to significant social change and building an international reputation for the area’s excellence in regenerative agriculture.

Unlike many organisations that have recently declared a climate emergency but failed to follow it up with meaningful action, I am confident Friends of the Dales will develop an effective policy response. Beyond this, I think this will have a more profound impact because of the relationship Friends of the Dales has with the National Park Authority here in the Dales.

One outcome from the talk is that I am putting together an article for the group’s newsletter to seek the input of the wider membership and to find out what they want the Dales to be like in 2030.

Build, build, build!

In his attempt to kickstart the economy in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic, the UK Prime Minister urged us to “Build, Build, Build!”. If this is going to happen, how can we make sure the new houses we need also coincide with our goals for a zero-carbon Britain?

In 2019, 178,800 new houses were completed, an increase of 9% on the previous year. In 2014, Dr Alan Holmans, a housing expert at the University of Cambridge, produced estimates of the housing gap based on 2011 data but taking housing conversions, second homes and vacancies into account. His analysis suggested we need to build about 170,000 additional private sector houses and 75,000 social sector houses each year. This is a total of an extra 240,000 to 250,000 new houses each year, excluding any reductions in existing housing stock.

There is debate about whether we need this number of new houses or whether a smaller number is more appropriate. Writing in The Guardian in January 2018, Ann Pettifor, director of Policy Research in Macroeconomics and a fellow of the New Economics Foundation argued that there were enough houses in the UK for the number of households but that the price of houses keeps rising due to speculation in the property market. She suggests that this speculation is fuelling house price rises rather than shortage of supply.

Whatever the cause, the increasing price of houses, which means that the people in most need of housing cannot afford to step onto the property ladder, is exacerbated by some house builders constructing the wrong houses in the wrong places. If you consider that many of the houses we now occupy are more than 100 years old, the housing stock currently being constructed should still be serviceable well into the 2100s. But the design of the houses and the quality of the construction means that these houses are likely to become uneconomic to live in and to maintain significantly earlier than that. Nor do many of these new houses use the most up to date technologies to make sure they are energy efficient, pleasant places to live in.

The Passivhaus idea began in Sweden and Germany in the 1980s but with the exception of a small number of specialist builders, the full range of techniques and ideas used in Passivhaus construction have not been adopted in the UK. We know how to build thermally efficient homes that are cheap to run and which make the most of passive solar gain for heating and lighting yet we continually fail to do so. We know how to capture rainwater and use it to supplement tap water for flushing lavatories and watering gardens but we fail to install it in new houses. Many existing homeowners are installing solar panels to heat water and generate electricity but at present, few new homes are equipped with this technology when they are built.

With the knowledge we have about how to build thermally efficient houses which result in few emissions of greenhouse gases and which can contribute to our energy requirements, it seems to be verging on the criminal that few builders think about the full life-cycle of the houses they build.

All new houses should be built using the latest technology to minimise emissions at all stages of their life-cycle, from the production of the bricks, blocks, timber and other components, to the way they are constructed and, importantly, how they function through their life as homes for families. Well-built houses can, and do, last many decades and over this period, the environmental impact can be significantly greater than that from the initial construction.  Builders must take some responsibility for the use phase of the life-cycle of our houses when constructing them rather than abdicating all responsibility the minute they hand over the keys – relying on the NHBC to pick up the pieces when houses do not perform as promised.

Housebuilders tell us they’re building the houses their customers want but it is difficult to see how they are providing any sort of service to their customers. Many of the houses being built today are unaffordable and many are not fit for purpose. There have been several recent reports about the use of sub-standard materials in new build houses and significant problems with the construction and finish of the buildings. It could be argued that this is a failing of government policy but an ethical house building company should be identifying how they can provide affordable housing that meets the highest standards for as many people as possible and this may necessitate a fundamental rethink of the housebuilding model.

In this context, is the idea of “Build, Build, Build!” as championed by the Prime Minister really valid? Should we aim for a smaller number of houses to be built each year but make sure that each one is high quality and that a bigger proportion of those built are affordable? “Affordable” in this context should mean more than just the price to buy the house. It should also take into account the cost of running and maintaining the building for the next 100 years or more, no matter how many families get to call it “home” in that time.

Edge lands

Edge lands, “the urban fringe, the no man’s land between town and country”.

During a series of daily rail journeys from my local town, I identified a group of linear edge lands. At first I could not get beyond the abandoned tyres, plastic buckets and other assorted detritus that humans seem so keen to dump along our railway lines. But as the journeys progressed my eye developed to see the other aspects – the newly forming catkins on the willows, the gently unfurling buds of new leaves in the blackthorn & the flitting sparrows and other hedgerow birds.

Common ground

I first came across the concept of edge lands when reading an extraordinary book, Common Ground, by Rob Cowen. In the book, the author describes and explains his developing relationship with an unloved patch of land on the outskirts of Harrogate. In its own way, this small patch of ground was as wild as some of the areas we more commonly associate with wilderness. He describes the edge lands as “the urban fringe, the no man’s land between town and country.” While I could recognise the sort of area described, I had not explored this idea until my series of journeys gave me an opportunity to think about it in more depth.

Although the incidence of litter along these edge lands increases as the train approaches the towns and cities, the more rural areas are not immune. Why is it that these areas attract rubbish? It cannot be a function of the railway lines and the passengers as modern trains do not allow litter to be thrown from windows. Perhaps it is the nature of the edge lands themselves? Just by virtue of their position, they are not cared for. So, accumulating debris is no person’s responsibility and it is not cleared. The railway embankment is off limits to the farmers and home owners whose land adjoins it and provided the rubbish does not affect the running of the trains, it is probably not cost-effective to clean it up – the employees and contractors for Network Rail are tasked with a specific role and rubbish clearance would not appear to be part of it.

Resilient nature

But it is a testament to the resilience and strength of nature that new growth and new life can, not only survive, but thrive here. I have long been fascinated and intrigued by this ability for plants to find a niche whenever we turn our backs. A tiny build up of stone debris and dust in the corner of a step becomes a home for a germinating seed which develops into a small weed and then after a couple of seasons, there is an established colony of plants and associated insects and other invertebrates. Leave this untouched for much longer and there’s a wild patch of land we had not intended.

The “experiment” that is the exclusion zone around the Chernobyl nuclear plant in Ukraine demonstrates this on a much larger scale. It serves to demonstrate what can happen when we either knowingly or unintentionally abandon an area. Nature soon takes over to the extent that most of us are excluded from it because we are reluctant to encounter nature in this wild and unmanaged form.

This was also observed by many users of social media during the Covid-19 lockdown when pictures were shared of urban foxes, deer and wild boar roaming the streets that were, only a few days before, full of cars and people.

Whose litter?

It is obvious that some of the debris seen by the side of railway tracks is left by contractors working on the lines. Empty and part empty plastic dumpy bags, old rails, sleepers and insulators together with other discarded materials can be seen. Perhaps the contractors need to be incentivised to remove these materials for use elsewhere rather than just abandon it?

Some of the house holders whose properties abut the lines also seem to consider the land over their back wall or fence to be a legitimate repository for their unwanted garden and household waste. This is not just a function of the lines locally either. I have seen the same in the wealthy commuter belt to the south west of London. I suspect there is an element of “out of sight, out of mind” as with much of our waste. We have become used to other people taking responsibility for it and for managing it on our behalf. Once we cannot see it, it is no longer our responsibility. We see this with waste thrown from car windows that litters the sides of roads.  But do the people who discard this debris over their fence onto the railway embankment not realise that their story, told in their discarded waste, is on view to all the rail passengers who pass by their back gardens every day?

I am quite happy to accept that what makes this part of the urban fringe, this edge land fascinating is that it is not cared for or managed or tidied but it would certainly be improved if there was less evidence of how wasteful we can be.

Climate lockdown?

What we can learn from the Covid-19 lockdown for the longer-term restrictions in our normal way of life that are likely to arise from climate breakdown? Are we heading for a climate lockdown?

Background

Although now being eased, the restrictions imposed in most countries in response to the Coronavirus outbreak have been significant. It will be interesting to see if the restrictions were in place for long enough to have led to permanent changes in our lifestyles or if we will just go back to normal. There is no doubt the UK government would like us to get back to business as usual as soon as possible to avoid or limit the worst impacts on the economy and already we are being urged to consume our way out of recession. But many of us recognise that business as usual is not an option for the longer term.

Many commentators are suggesting that more workers and their employers will have identified the benefits of working from home. This could have a long-term impact on commuter travel and on the commercial office sector. These changes may be beneficial when we look at climate breakdown as the emissions from travel and offices may be reduced. But the converse is that the emissions from our houses, which may be less thermally efficient than our offices, will increase so the overall benefit may be limited. It is also clear that the worldwide lockdown has only slowed our emissions. We have not reduced the quantity of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Beyond these changes, what can we learn from the restrictions that were imposed to avoid the worst effects of Covid-19 and the effects that will arise as a result of climate breakdown?

Same, but different?

We are being urged to see the links between a global pandemic and climate breakdown. One can make us much more susceptible to the other and both are symptoms of serious disruption to the natural systems that underpin everything we do. But I am more concerned with how much of a blueprint the lockdown provides for when the effects of climate change begin to take effect. During a recent webinar, Chris Stark, Chief Executive of the Committee on Climate Change, suggested that some of the effects of climate change are now inevitable – we have not taken enough action to avoid them and we will have to find ways to adapt. Adaptation will involve changes in our way of life.

A key difference between climate breakdown and Covid-19 is the notice of the changes. Statistically, we are told, a pandemic was overdue but we had no idea what it would be, how severely it would affect us and when it would take hold. So we had the opportunity to prepare but only in a general sense. However, we have known about climate breakdown and its potential consequences for many years. It is 26 years since the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change was ratified and we are currently preparing for the 26th Conference of the Parties to that Convention. We could have been much more prepared for climate breakdown and may have been able to avoid some of the changes that are likely to affect us.

What can we expect of climate breakdown? If we manage the transition to a low-carbon world effectively, the changes ought to be gradual and controllable. We can change the way we heat our homes and the way we travel for work and leisure. We can travel less and as flying becomes less acceptable, holidaying closer to home may become the norm, although the long-term outlook for tourism as an industry is less certain both at home as well as abroad. The types of food we are able to buy from the supermarkets may change and we may have to get used to fewer commodities being imported. The range and quantity of consumer goods may be reduced. We will probably have to get used to appliances lasting longer and being repaired rather than replaced.

So we can already begin to see the correlation between the enforced lockdown resulting from trying to manage a pandemic and what may happen in the near future. We have become used to travelling less and to a significant reduction in the number of flights available. For those living near airports and under aircraft flight paths, this has improved the quality of life considerably with fewer emissions and reduced exposure to noise. The roads were, for a period of time, quiet, which reduced emissions of carbon dioxide and other harmful pollutants. Many more people have come to recognise the benefits of slower travel on foot or by bike and there has been some reconnection with the natural world.

Covid-19 exposed some of the frailties of extended supply chains and just-in-time working and as a result, some organisations may rethink the way they work. They may need to retain a larger inventory of parts than they have been used to and, perhaps, seek manufacturers and suppliers closer to home. Making this change now will prepare them for further disruption due to climate breakdown. Some businesses will, inevitably, not survive but many people are beginning to realise that the transition to a low-carbon economy can create a different set of jobs that may be more rewarding than those that currently exist.

Work patterns will change with more people working from home, provided there is adequate investment in the infrastructure needed to support this. Working hours may change with us moving towards a shorter or more flexible working week.

Shops, restaurants and entertainment venues closed as a result of Covid-19 are now opening up and are having to operate very differently to keep their customers safe while the virus is still circulating in the population. In the longer term, these businesses will have to find significantly different ways of working and many of them may not survive. We may find that it is the smaller, more agile and less heavily indebted businesses that will thrive in an age of Covid-19 and climate breakdown whilst the bigger businesses may succumb to competition from new innovators and disruptors.

In a managed transition to a post-carbon world, there will be more leisure time and the opportunity to reconnect with the natural world and with our surroundings. Many people have commented on the benefits to health and wellbeing that have come about as a result of the Covid-19 lockdown and these benefits can be multiplied as many of us get used to a different pace of life.

Unmanaged transition

However, if we do not strive now to decarbonise our economies and to complete that process within the next few years, we will face an unmanaged and unmanageable transition to a post-carbon world.

There is little evidence from across the world that the transition is being managed effectively. There still seems to be a lack of awareness of the changes that will happen and the speed at which they will hit us. Scientists are warning that the target of the Paris Agreement, to maintain the global temperature at 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, is now unlikely to be met and some governments seem to accept much greater levels of heating. If this is the case, the transition will be rapid, unplanned and we will enter the post-carbon world unprepared for its effects.

A major difference between the Covid-19 lockdown and the changes that will arise from climate breakdown is that the current restrictions are likely to end. We may have to operate under some restrictions for several more months and possibly stretching into a couple of years but, eventually, our scientists and medical specialists will, if they do not find a vaccine, be able to work out the best way to treat the virus, to manage its worst effects and to help most people to recover.

Unlike a virus, there is no vaccine for climate breakdown! There will, almost certainly, be things we can do to alleviate some of the effects in a similar way to the treatments that are and will be found for treating Covid-19. These may lead to changes and adjustments to the restrictions that we face. Many of the mitigation measures we are currently adopting – but at too slow a pace – will remain important. Examples include the electrification of our vehicle fleet and the growth of car clubs and other vehicle sharing; the move to renewable energy generation and smart grids; upgrading the capacity of our homes and buildings to retain heat; and the continued growth of walking and cycling for shorter journeys. But we will also have to find ways to adapt to a significant rise in sea levels, different weather patterns, increased heat and new food growing conditions coupled with a possible increase in pests and diseases.

With an outbreak of disease, we know what we are facing. There is a single issue to address and to devise a solution to. With climate breakdown, the issues will come at us from many different directions. We cannot predict where or when severe weather events will occur. We can assume that the south eastern US, for example, will continue to be affected by hurricanes but will the hurricane season extend? Will the range and severity of the hurricanes change? Will new areas of the world be affected by hurricanes or severe storms? In the UK, global heating is welcomed by some who envisage mediterranean conditions in the Lake District but the amount of cold water entering the oceans from the melting Greenland ice cap may lead to much colder conditions.

An added complication is that, the longer we take to find a vaccine for Covid-19 and administer that vaccine to nearly 8 billion people, the more likely it is that we may still be trying to manage the effects of a pandemic as climate breakdown begins to take effect. We may have to find ways to manage these global shocks concurrently.

Related issues

In an increasingly unequal society, the effects will be greater for those less able to manage them. This is true globally but also within the UK and other countries where the impact of climate breakdown will be felt most by the poor and the disadvantaged. To avoid this, we must continue to find ways of overcoming inequality and speed up our response. If we continue to do the bare minimum in terms of mitigating the emissions of greenhouse gases, levels of other air pollutants will also continue to rise and the effects will be felt disproportionately by the less well off.

It is unlikely that restrictions on our way of life as a result of climate breakdown will be government-led. In response to Covid-19, restrictions were imposed and can be eased or tightened by government to manage the challenge. This is unlikely to be the scenario with climate breakdown – the restrictions are likely to be driven by the conditions and be more and more onerous. Our ability to operate in the ways that we have become used to will disappear and we may not have time to adapt to one challenge before another comes along.

We will also, concurrently, have to deal with the related issue of biodiversity loss.

Adapting to change

But we will adapt. We have shown our ability to live under changing conditions and to evolve many times since modern humans first appeared about 300,000 years ago. It will take time and as more and different shocks occur, the changes may become more difficult to adapt to. And there is a real danger that if the changes are not managed correctly, if societies are not informed about what is going on and involved in the decision-making, people will object, perhaps violently. This is probably not imminent but it is certainly possible in the next 20 to 50 years. The UK government was late to impose a Covid-19 lockdown for fear of the public reaction to draconian restrictions on our freedom. They are risking much more serious civil unrest by not recognising the dangers posed by climate change and managing the transition effectively.

Alternatives

Is this inevitable? If we do not take action quickly and match the commitments made by government with effective policies to take us in the right direction, almost certainly. But as we learn to live with Covid-19 there is a real opportunity to build back better, to tread much more lightly on the planet than we have hitherto and to continue to reap the benefits so many people have identified as a result of the enforced lockdown. Less traffic on the roads means less noise pollution and less air pollution and wildlife can continue to recover from the way we have ravaged it over the past hundred years. We can take advantage of the green spaces and the woodlands that so many of us have come to value once more.

Less air travel means we have to become more grounded in our own space and it also means less air pollution and noise – particularly in the vicinity of airports. Less shipping means we may again have to get used to seasonal produce grown locally but which will be fresher and much less likely to be affected by chemicals as we will be unable to produce the quantity of herbicides and pesticides. There are so many more advantages of managing a reduction in our carbon dioxide emissions.

The potential for a climate lockdown is very real and the consequences may be very serious but there is also potential for much improved lifestyles if we take more action now and opt for a green recovery from the massive shock our systems have suffered as a result of Covid-19.

Sustainable purpose

A meeting was recently convened by Ben Kellard, Director of Business Strategy at Cambridge University’s Institute for Sustainability Leadership (CISL). The meeting drew together a number of eminent thinkers from the field of business sustainability to discuss what they considered to be represented by the term “sustainable purpose”.

If you have read anything else I’ve written, you will know that I am not a business leader. I work in environmental education but I have worked with employees from a diverse range of businesses. I have also worked in businesses both large and small and for a number of years, I ran my own small company. Although sometimes ambivalent about the role of business in society, I recognise that some form of trade between individuals is necessary, particularly in our complex and interrelated society.

I read the report of the meeting.

My underlying emotion on reaching the end of the video and the explanation behind it was one of disappointment. I was disappointed that a meeting of such eminent people could not put forward a more radical set of goals. In the introductory video Jonathon Porritt questions the viability of the underlying capitalist economic system on which the whole idea of a “sustainable business” is founded. Like him, I find the idea of business purpose quite confusing when many, perhaps most, businesses that currently exist will be unable to continue in the world where we face rapid climate and ecological breakdown.

I am also confused as to why civil society would or should look to existing businesses for solutions when they have manifestly failed to deliver them up to now. Are there any businesses that currently exist that are “part of the solution” as envisaged in the discussions? Are there any companies who are looking at their business model with the honesty and integrity needed to meet the challenges we currently face? Where is the business equivalent of the School Strike for Climate or Extinction Rebellion?

Greta Thunberg is currently being vilified by some elements of the media because she is asking some uncomfortable questions of government, business and society. But any person who is or aspires to be the leader of a major company must, surely, be asking these same questions. We need people with real vision and true leadership ability to head our businesses. They need to talk with the honesty advocated by Greta Thunberg, by Extinction Rebellion and by Jonathan Porritt. They need to tell the truth about what is happening and the contribution of their business to the problem. Now is the time for these highly paid executives to earn their money and to lead their businesses into this uncertain future.

Tim Balcon, CEO of IEMA said in his editorial in the June edition of Transform that, “…business leadership is required – corporations must not just recognise that they have a role to play, but should look at what that role is and how it should play out.”

An issue for business leaders, though, is the number of existing business models that are obsolete in the context of climate and ecological breakdown. Fossil fuel companies are the obvious example, but we could also look at chemical companies, mining organisations and, perhaps, some of our road transport businesses. Civil engineers will have to move away from road building to other, more resilient forms of infrastructure.

The CISL discussion concluded, correctly, that incremental change and the goal of doing no harm is no longer enough. Why do more business leaders not recognise this? Why do they not see that climate and ecological breakdown will profoundly reshape the economy and society and take action? Can business really take the proactive role in delivering the transformational change required? Disruption to business models generally comes from outside rather than being generated by existing businesses. How many chief executives will be brave enough to close down their business? How many have the vision to reinvent their business to address these challenges?

The very definition of sustainability and whether this is achievable has been called into question, but even if we accept this as our objective, it has to permeate through all aspects of business decision making. If a business decision has to be made, the impact of the decision on the climate, the environment and society must be the main priority and come ahead of making profit. If a decision will lead to harm to the climate, environment or society, the new leaders have to be strong enough to decide against that course of action. But do we have leaders of this calibre in business today? In reality, how many businesses have a truly sustainable purpose as defined by the CISL? Even the companies that perform the best are not truly sustainable and retain their focus on the profit motive even as they pursue peripheral sustainability goals.

I do not have the answers to these questions but I came across the report of Mr Kellard’s meeting at a time when similar questions had begun to settle in my mind and to lead me to question the role of business in our (arguably) broken society. Perhaps by asking some of these questions, we may find some more acceptable and viable answers!

The future of the UK motor industry

The future of the UK Motor Industry raises some interesting issues but before we can consider this, we first need to look at the current situation.

The SMMT, the trade body for the UK motor industry suggests that the industry contributes £202 billion directly and indirectly to the economy. Whether or not you accept this exact figure, it is beyond dispute that the industry contributes significantly to the economy when you consider research and development, logistics, retail and distribution, finance, insurance, fuel and maintenance. The SMMT website suggests that 200,000 people in the UK are employed in new car retail, the vehicle fuel industry supports 40,000 jobs and more than 340,000 work in vehicle servicing and repair.

But the UK motor industry is currently in difficulty. In 2021, Honda will close its only UK factory in Swindon. There are concerns over the Nissan plant in Sunderland and a collaboration with Suzuki will see a larger number of vehicles being produced at the currently under-used Toyota plant in Burnaston, Derbyshire. Concern over the fate of the motor industry in the UK is nothing new. I remember the almost constant stream of bad news from British Leyland over the 30 years from its initial collapse and nationalisation in 1975 until its administration in 2005. This brought to an end to mass production of cars by British-owned manufacturers.

In the UK today, the foreign companies producing cars at a large scale are predominantly Japanese. The Japanese manufacturers took advantage of government incentives to invest in the UK because it offered a relatively benign financial environment from which to produce cars for the European market. The European Union meant that parts and finished vehicles could cross internal borders quickly and tariff-free, facilitating just-in-time assembly. The departure of the UK from the European Union will, inevitably, increase the challenges faced by the UK manufacturing plants at a time when vehicle manufacturing is experiencing significant difficulties across the world due to over-production and failure to anticipate some significant shifts in customer demand.

The complete demise of the motor industry in the UK is unlikely to be imminent but are the difficulties experienced as much of a problem as the government and the media imply?

Clearly, if we look at the use of cars, vans and trucks in the context of the climate emergency, the end of the motor industry as it currently appears cannot come too soon. The 40 million cars, vans and trucks on our roads are major users of fossil fuels and contribute around one third of our greenhouse gas emissions. As we already know, we cannot continue to extract, refine and use fossil fuels if we are to avoid climate breakdown. But they also consume large amounts of energy: in the extraction and refinement of the raw materials needed to build the vehicles; in the transport of parts across vast distances to meet the demands of just-in-time manufacturing; and in vehicle building itself.

We also need to factor in the raw materials. Most of the materials used in vehicle manufacture are finite and until relatively recently, few were or could be recycled. The situation improved with the Directive on End-of Life Vehicles which, in the year 2000, introduced the concept of Extended Producer Responsibility. This puts some of the responsibility for the product at the end of its life on the manufacturer. The Directive aims to reduce the waste arising from end-of-life vehicles but it is limited to passenger cars and light commercial vehicles, so resource intensive heavy goods vehicles do not have to comply. From 1 January 2007 the Directive covered all vehicles a given producer has ever introduced in the market-place.

Motor vehicles are also implicated in causing pollution other than carbon dioxide emissions. The air quality in our towns and cities ranges from poor to toxic. Although London is often singled out for criticism, all major cities across the UK suffer from poor air quality, particularly, it seems, in the vicinity of our schools. Our veneration of the car together with our fear of harm to our children paradoxically leads to us poisoning our children and ourselves with the noxious gases that arise from burning fossil fuels in our car engines as we drive them to school. And the pollution effects are much worse when we and our children are inside our cars and in a queue of stationary traffic! We could be in a position where the life-expectancy of our children is less than we enjoy.

Electric vehicles are the favoured solution of both government and the motor industry. While a move to electric vehicles is to be welcomed if it removes some of the pollution from our streets, it only addresses one aspect of the problem with our car use. The emission of carbon dioxide and other gases from vehicle tail-pipes will be eliminated but if a high proportion of these new cars are powered with electricity generated using fossil fuels, we are just shifting this part of the problem from the streets to the power stations. Only if the vehicles are powered using electricity from renewable sources do we remove much of the carbon dioxide and the particulates. But some of the particulate pollution arising from cars and other vehicles comes from the brakes, the tyres and the road surface, an issue that moving to electric vehicles will not overcome.

Neither does a move to an electric vehicle fleet address the impact of resource use in the manufacture and disposal of the vehicles. In fact, electric vehicles add another layer of complexity with the need for batteries that require large quantities of scarce minerals. And appropriate large-scale facilities for recycling these batteries do not yet exist.

We have a highly developed infrastructure for refuelling our existing vehicle fleet and although some progress has been made in installing charging points on the motorway network and in some towns and cities, there is still more to do. Disruption from installing the cabling necessary to meet the need for additional charging points does not appear to have been factored into the move to an electric vehicle fleet.

In addition, if we simply substitute vehicles driven by internal combustion engines for similar vehicles with electric motors, we will do nothing to address the problem of congestion in our towns and cities and on our motorway and trunk road network. As the number of cars and other vehicles on our roads increases year on year, journey times increase and frustration builds as people sit in traffic queues. Even if the climate emergency allowed for it, building more roads is not the answer due to “induced demand” where the increasing supply of a commodity (in this case roads) makes people want even more of it.

With this catalogue of challenges caused by the demand for personal transport in the form of the car, is the contraction of car manufacturing in the UK such a problem? Or should we be looking at this as an opportunity to disrupt the UK motor industry? I do not know what the next generation of personal transport is going to look like. I certainly do not think it will just be a question of substituting the existing car fleet for a similar one powered by electric motors as neither situation is sustainable. This is a time that calls for re-imagining our need for our chosen modes of transport and the infrastructure associated with them.

Individuals can take action to avoid some of the problems associated with climate breakdown. One of the most effective is to avoid owning or using a car. The average car in the UK travels 7,900 miles a year and for much of its life, it is parked. The annual carbon dioxide emissions associated with owning the car and running it is 2.4 tonnes. If you consider that the average individual carbon footprint in the UK is about 14 tonnes and the government target is 10.5 tonnes, going car-free could make a considerable impact.

But, in common with many of the problems associated with climate breakdown, the solutions are not all down to individuals.

The closure of the Honda’s Swindon plant is a massive blow to the people who work there. But the nature of car manufacturing has changed over recent years so that many of these people are now highly skilled engineers who have much to offer other industries. This is surely an opportunity for the government to invest in the area, promoting, for example, the manufacture of solar panels or wind turbines; green refrigerators or the next generation of transport system designed to overcome the issues with our current generation of cars, vans and trucks.

It is up to government to set the policy framework and to provide the right economic environment for the necessary changes to take place. We need a government that is not fixated on a single issue but which grasps the magnitude of the climate emergency we face and is willing to make the major policy changes that will allow us to avoid climate breakdown.

Swallows: an update

I know. I promised to write again about the swallows and provide some photographs of them if my photography skills were up to it.

Unfortunately, since I wrote about the arrival of the swallows on 15 May, I have hardly seen a swallow here. There are some in the village although my feeling is that the numbers are significantly lower than usual. I have seen them at a distance but the family group that makes its summer home around our house and the neighbouring terrace has been strangely absent.

We spent a week in early July in a village on the northern tip of the Yorkshire Dales National Park but which is actually in Cumbria. Each evening we were treated to the spectacle of 8 to 10 swallows diving and swooping around the house and farm buildings as they sought out flying insects. It was quite a spectacle and reminded me of what had been missing from the summer at home.

I did try to take some photographs. The ones on the wing were very poor but I did get a few shots of them at rest on the cables connecting the buildings. The quality is not high but at least I managed to get a few images.

I have checked with both the RSPB and the BTO websites and there is nothing to suggest that 2019 has been a particularly bad year for swallows. A couple of other forums report mixed fortunes. Some areas enjoyed early arrivals and significant numbers while others suggest that numbers are reduced and in a few cases a complete absence. So, perhaps the lack of swallows around our house and outbuildings is not something to worry about for one year. But I am already concerned about what will happen next spring.

The RSPB website suggests that as with other once common species, swallows in the UK are in long-term decline. In the case of swallows, numbers have been decreasing since the 1970s. Changes in farming practices may be to blame for fewer nesting sites and fewer flying insects here in the UK but changing climatic conditions over their whole geographic range may be more important. At their over-wintering sites, conditions are becoming hotter and drier and there is less food. This means that they begin their migration to Europe in poor condition and changing conditions over North Africa and the European continent also affect the success of the migration.

I certainly hope the lack of swallows around our house this summer is an anomaly. I’ll let you know what happens in 2020!

Sustainable and resilient business models

The United Kingdom (UK) has, over recent years developed a favourable regime for starting new business. But a business is not just created in a vacuum. As well as government policy, environmental, societal and scientific factors govern all aspects of our daily lives and forming a new business is no different. If you are considering establishing a new business, these factors will inevitably influence the direction you take both in terms of the product or service you will seek to offer and the form your business will take. Your goal for your new business may only be small and local or you may intend for your new sustainable and resilient business to be a major international force. Whatever the scope of your ambition, you can make a difference to your own life and those of other people. If this motivates you, developing your new business to design and create a new product or service that can have a positive environmental impact could be one of the best things you do.

The current political and economic world view suggests that the economies of the world can continue to grow without limits and that the environmental system is a function of the economic system. Economic growth is seen as the primary goal of government policy throughout most of the world and success is measured by gross domestic product (GDP). Conventional economic thinking suggests that as a resource runs out, we will find an alternative and substitute that resource for the depleted one. But this is clearly not the case for all resources. For example, phosphorous is an important plant nutrient, essential to food production. Current estimates suggest we have only between 60 and 130 years of phosphorous reserves in the world. Increasing price and scarcity could force changes to global agriculture and there are already shifts in the global trade in phosphorous-based fertilisers. How will we cope when the supply has run out?

Even if we can find alternatives to scarce resources, this does nothing to affect the way we dispose of the waste created by our resource use. We cannot, for example, expect our oceans to continue to absorb carbon dioxide without limits because as they do, they become more acidic and this affects the plant and animal life they can support. Similarly, we cannot continue to push pollutants into our atmosphere because we cannot control where they go and there is a limit to the level of pollution humans, animals and plants can cope with before we begin to suffer the effects. This is seen by the increased rate of illness and death resulting from air pollution in our cities.

This view, that economic performance is all that matters, also holds true for business, where profit and return on shareholder value are the key metrics used when comparing business performance and deciding where to invest. Providing your business is making a profit and returning dividends to its investors, it does not seem to matter that it is spewing pollution into the atmosphere and the water courses or that it is exploiting vulnerable people, either here or in other parts of the world.

What is a sustainable business?

This current worldview sees the environment as part of the global economy. The reality is that without a healthy and functioning environment, there is a limit to our economic development. We have to recognise the environmental limits that govern our lives and we have to find different models for our businesses that are healthy and regenerative rather than exploiting both human and physical resources. In this context, a sustainable and resilient business is one that has a minimal impact on the earth, safeguards and husbands our resources and looks after the people with whom it comes into contact.

The UK and the rest of the world has a long way to go before we can consider our businesses to be truly sustainable and resilient in the long-term. To reach this stage will require a complete change of mindset as far as most policy makers and most business-people are concerned. Changing this mindset will take time or, perhaps some cataclysmic event. But while this change is taking place, there is a desperate and urgent need for new innovations in products and services to help us reduce the carbon intensity and resource inefficiency of our current business models. This change offers two different opportunities for creating sustainable and resilient businesses:

• reducing the impact of existing businesses by eliminating or minimising their impact by for example, decreasing the use of scarce resources and on-site generation of renewable energy

• the design and creation of completely new products and services that meet the current and future needs of businesses and people

The first opportunity is about transforming existing businesses which is happening but not nearly fast enough or on a sufficiently large scale. The second of these opportunities is the more exciting and the one which provides the greatest opportunity for fundamental change. While it may be good to think about a world where everyone helps each other rather than competing, we need to recognise that people trade with each other. With the right business model and the right set of values, there is no reason why new and adapted businesses cannot make money while also changing the world for the better.

There may be opportunities in helping individuals and other businesses to recognise their own impact and to reduce it. A massive reduction in consumption, as people become more aware of the impact of ‘disposable’ clothing and other consumer goods may reduce some business opportunities but others open up. For example, rather than selling new washing machines, could you design a rental model that would work more effectively? You could supply the machine to a household and charge a fee per wash cycle. A periodic payment by the user would include a full maintenance package to keep the machine running as long as possible. At the end of the rental period, you would then take back the machine, refurbish it and replace worn out parts before leasing it to another household who cannot, perhaps, afford the charges for a brand new machine.

This business model would reduce the amount of waste generated but it would also extend the life of the machine and serve customers much more effectively. It might feed into the design and manufacture of the washing machine in that it would be in your interest and that of your customer for the machine to run as long as possible with minimal intervention. This is the opposite of the current model where the manufacturer wants the machine to wear out and be replaced quickly. It also changes the financial and social relationship between business and customer in that you are being paid a regular, small amount for the service provided by the washing machine instead of a larger amount periodically for the customer to “own” the machine. It is also in your interests to maintain a longer-term relationship with the customer to make sure you secure the repeat business when a replacement machine is required.

The way forward

The environmental goods and services sector contributed an estimated £30.5 billion to the UK economy in terms of value added in 2015. This is 1.6% of GDP. Although GDP is not an effective measure of a country’s health or wellbeing, it is the default measure of performance we currently use. If we are to become a sustainable and resilient country with sustainable and resilient businesses with a low impact on the earth that safeguards our resources and avoids energy insecurity, we have to shift the balance so that only 1.6% of our GDP (or better still, even less) is generated by our current model of resource inefficient and polluting businesses.

A sense of place

Naomi Klein’s book, “This Changes Everything” was published in 2014 and I read it shortly afterwards. It is quite a dense book, with 466 pages excluding the notes and references but it provides a very good analysis of climate change. The book develops a theme from the author’s previous book, “The Shock Doctrine” hypothesising that the solution to the issue of climate change lies in politics and economics and not in science. This is a conclusion I share and which I try to explain to the environmental policy students with whom I work. I also agree with the author that the necessary changes will be extremely difficult to achieve, given the entrenched values that drive our current neoliberal economic and political system.

I found reading the book quite a frustrating experience. I realise I was probably waiting for the flash of inspiration or the call to action that would provide the clear solution to the problem. I was waiting for the answers to the intractable problems that Naomi Klein describes so eloquently but was disappointed when they were not forthcoming. Of course, I realise from my work on climate change and other environmental issues that there is no silver bullet, no single solution to the mess we have caused for ourselves but despite this, I still found myself asking her for the answer! Instead, she describes a series of relatively small, apparently unconnected events that have built to become a movement; a slow groundswell that is building to challenge the conventional worldview. Whilst changing values and behaviours is a long-term process, my concern (and the author’s) is that the changes will not happen quickly enough to avoid the catastrophic environmental changes associated with climate change.

Given her origins, it is perhaps inevitable that Naomi Klein’s case studies focus on North America. She mentions the Occupy Wall Street movement that had its parallels in the UK and elsewhere. These movements failed to change the banking and finance systems in the wake of the 2007/8 crash but have helped to begin a much more interesting debate about the nature of our financial and political systems. The protests against the Keystone XL pipeline are also highlighted and the importance of Native Americans or First Nation groups in mounting legal challenges to fossil fuel developments and the infrastructure changes needed to support new sources of energy are explored in depth. In the UK, the anti-fracking protests are highlighted and linked to action both in North America and around the world.

This is where the whole thing begins to get interesting. The author makes the case that in an effort to demonstrate to their shareholders that they continue to be a good investment, the fossil fuel companies must continually identify new sources of oil and gas as existing fields mature and decay. Without this continuous pipeline of new discoveries, the companies become worthless. This is prompting the search for unconventional sources of oil and gas because the easy to win, relatively shallow, land-based sources have all been found and are in use.

These unconventional sources include the tar sands in Canada and Venezuela and shale gas in the United States and elsewhere. The same pressures are encouraging Shell and others to explore the potential for tapping into resources within the Arctic circle and the inhospitable reaches of the Southern Ocean. In addition to being more carbon intensive than conventional reserves, these sources of oil and gas are also found in places that are unused to industrial development and the infrastructure necessary to support an oil and gas industry.

While oil and gas exploration was taking place in Saudi Arabia or Iraq, or even in the North Sea, we in the UK, individually, had little connection to it. But the idea of an intensive industrial process such as fracking taking place in some of our most precious landscapes and adjacent to our front and back gardens prompted a new wave of activism by a new group of people. Although initiated by the major environmental NGOs, many of the protests are led by people unused to direct action and the increasingly draconian response of the government suggests that the protests are having an effect. The release of additional tracts of land for shale gas exploration and the government’s attempts to circumvent the planning process means that few of us will be unaffected by this development in the next few years. If this happens, many more people will be prompted to take direct action.

This is where Naomi Klein’s book and another favourite of mine tend to collide. “The Shepherd’s Life – a tale of the Lake District”, by James Rebanks has, on the face of it, little to do with climate change, geopolitics and neoliberalism. But what these two books share is an attempt to help us find our sense of place – geographically, socially and politically. As sheep farmers, looking after a flock of local Herdwick sheep, James Rebanks and his family are deeply rooted in the fells of the Lake District. By continuing a way of life and a family connection they can trace back over 600 years, they work to protect the landscape and the way of life they love (and sometime loathe) and which forms such an important part of what and who they are.

Recent surveys suggest that a significant majority of the population of the UK is against fracking but our democratically elected government thinks it knows better. It has put its weight behind fossil fuels and fracking, while failing to support the renewables industry that is critical to avoiding catastrophic climate change. If the places where we have our roots are threatened, indirectly by climate change but more directly by fracking or other technologies, will we do what is necessary to protect them? This link to a sense of place could be one of the important factors that will help us to stop the oil and gas industry and its political puppets in its tracks.

House on fire!

I know that the notion of Nero fiddling while Rome burned is wrong on many levels, not least because the violin had not been invented at the time he ruled the Roman Empire. However, this was the overwhelming image that came to mind as I read a back copy of Transform, the official magazine of IEMA. I was struck by a couple of articles that appeared quite close together in the April edition. One was reporting on Michael Gove’s address to the recent Broadway Initiative conference in London and the other was about revision of the Annex SL requirements of various management system standards, including ISO 14001. These are both important developments but seemed trivial in relation to the scale of the issues we face.

Greta Thunberg has urged us all to react to climate breakdown as though our house is on fire – because it is! The people of all ages who joined the Extinction Rebellion protests in London and other cities across the world over the Easter weekend were giving us a similar message, urging radical and rapid action to avoid the environmental catastrophes that are unfolding.

I am a member of IEMA and I have a great deal of respect for the organisation and the work they do. They have raised awareness of environmental issues with business and provided a forum for environmental professionals to meet and exchange ideas. More recently, they have begun to lobby government on environmental impacts and their management.

But should IEMA, and other organisations for environmental professionals such as CIWEM, CIEEM and CIWM, not be taking up the challenge posed by Greta Thunberg and Extinction Rebellion and taking more radical action? Instead, we continue to act as though business as usual is an option. We listen to government ministers offering platitudes, and we participate in international committees that may deliver an outcome in two years time.

We don’t have another two years to talk about this! We need to be taking action now. As environmental professionals, we should know, better than anyone, that business as usual is not an option. Media reports and television programmes tend to focus on what individuals must do, such as buying fewer products with less packaging; eating less meat; taking fewer holidays; avoiding flying; and insulating our homes. These are all vitally important but we have to look to business to take action too. The environmental impact of a business far outweighs that of an individual or a group of individuals.

The companies we work for must change their business models, change them fundamentally and change them quickly. Government is currently in a state of paralysis but as a nation, we pride ourselves on the role of business in our society and economy and champion business as providing leadership. Now is surely the time for the highly paid Chief Executives and Boards of Directors to show their worth and to lead their businesses into a carbon-free future. These newly invigorated businesses could demonstrate how we can care for and nurture the fragile environment on which we all, individuals and businesses, depend.

Having an effective environmental management system in place within our businesses is important and in “normal” times would be something we should strive for all businesses to embrace. But these are not normal times. Every business decision has to take into account its environmental impact and this should become a more important decision-making criterion than either the social or financial impact because without a functioning environment, the social and financial issues will become irrelevant as our business sector ceases to exist.

We need to consider the basics of the business and its products or services. Does the product or service your business provides enhance or harm the environment? What are the raw materials that are used in the production; how much energy does it take to produce; how is it packaged and what are the life-cycle impacts of that packaging; how is it delivered to the customers; what real benefit does it provide to customers and their lives? Does your business embrace the circular economy or is it still locked into outmoded linear models? If the environmental costs outweigh the benefits provided to customers, should we be producing that item or should we focus our resources on something different?

This can begin with us, the people who have been working in the environmental sector for so long. Our time has come but we have to lead – both in our words and in our actions. This is no longer about tinkering at the edges of existing businesses but changing them fundamentally. Our role, as environmental professionals is to highlight how precarious our position has become, to make sure it is at the top of the agenda for every board meeting and to challenge the directors of our businesses and other organisations to justify their decisions on the basis of environmental impact. We need to be able to look Greta Thunberg and the members of Extinction Rebellion in the eye and assure them we are doing everything we can to avoid climate breakdown. Otherwise, we are just like Nero, fiddling while our world burns!

Swallows

The swallow has always been an important species for me. I grew up in an old farmhouse on the edge of the Yorkshire Dales. Outside my bedroom window were a pair of telephone wires and, at some time in mid April, one or two swallows would land on the wires and begin their distinctive, quiet twittering song. I was always pleased to see these summer visitors with their blue-black feathers, chestnut forehead and throat and their distinctive tail streamers. The arrival of the swallows generally meant the weather was changing for the better and we could look forward to the lambs growing and the cows being turned out to grass.

Over the next few weeks, the number of swallows would grow and some would begin nesting under the lintel of the barn door which adjoined the house. There were usually two or three or sometimes more nests and, after a few weeks, the parents would be busy with their aerial acrobatics, picking insects off the wing to feed to their growing brood. A few weeks more and the young birds would be ready to fledge.

If we were lucky and the weather was kind, there would be a second brood and then, during August, the  swallows would mass again on the wires outside my bedroom window ready for the long migration to Africa. There could be dozens of these tiny, iridescent birds, twittering away to each other. Many would be making the return journey but for others, it would be their first time travelling away from Yorkshire and the north of England. I found it difficult to comprehend how they could all navigate those thousands of miles to their winter homes. And then, suddenly, they were gone!

A few years ago, after an absence of more than 30 years, I moved back to the southern edge of the Yorkshire Dales. Since my return, I have watched intently for the swallows and invariably, in mid April, they arrive. Unfortunately, the numbers are significantly lower than I remember from my childhood with, perhaps, two or three pairs nesting around the cluster of houses. In the past couple of years, it has been around the 24th or 25th of April when I have first noticed them but this year, it was on the 19th of April that I saw my first one. I suspect this early arrival is not, in itself significant as we experienced some unseasonably warm weather in February and I read reports of the swallows arriving on the south coast at that point.

So far, I have only seen a solitary swallow on two or three occasions. I hope this was a scout and that others will follow soon. However, it is now almost the end of April, there have been no other arrivals and the solitary bird must have just been passing through as I have not seen a swallow for more than a week! I keep scanning the skies for them but have, so far, been disappointed.

Why am I telling you all this?

This year, I hope to use the presence of the swallows to mark the passing of the seasons. Over the coming weeks, I’ll report periodically on the swallows, telling you what they are doing. I am not intending to use them as any sort of scientific indicator but just to try and make a reconnection with a small part of the natural world that many of us have lost. The presence of the swallows, their ability of these tiny birds to make the long journey from Africa, the instinct that drives them to find the place they last nested or, for subsequent generations, the place where they hatched, should provide a sense of awe and inspiration. Instead, these wonders of nature, which we find difficult to explain, often pass by without remark.

I hope you’ll come back over the next few weeks for an update on the swallows and I’ll try to provide some of my own photographs to illustrate the posts – although they are probably too quick for my amateur photography skills!

Update 15 May

Thank goodness, the swallows are back. I was beginning to get anxious as I kept looking skyward and not seeing them for days on end. There was an occasional glimpse of a solitary bird darting over the rooftops but then nothing. Finally, as the weather again began to warm at the start of this week there was a couple of swallows flying around, then three and finally, yesterday evening as we enjoyed the last of the day’s warmth, sitting in the garden, there were six or seven flying around.

I was also advised the other day that the swifts that call the village home for a few brief weeks in the summer had also arrived and in the small town just up the valley I saw a few yesterday afternoon.

Perhaps this means summer’s here?