Can Cop26 Be a Pearl Harbour Moment?

In an opinion piece, George Monbiot says that it is too easy for people to think that getting a timely and effective response to the climate crisis will be impossible. He suggests, however, that looking at the US response in its preparation to join the Second World War shows that impressive change is possible (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/20/us-war-footing-1941-climate-emergency-earth-pearl-harbor). Many of the changes seen in the US in 1941, were unpresidented and transformational. They completely and rapidly changed industry; brought in rationing as well as transforming taxation. They effectively altered the activities and mindsets of the country's general population. Monbiot thinks that a similar degree of world-wide change is possible in response to climate change. One can only hope that he is right. At the moment, however, there is little sign of a common accord being reached between the two major US parties. Getting agreement across all the major world 'players' at cop26, is a whole different ball game.

The English Way

Climate change makes the probability of extreme weather events much higher. Given the increased likelihood of flooding in England, it's weird that around third of vital flood defences are privately owned (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/31/revealed-a-third-of-england-vital-flood-defences-are-in-private-hands). Around 1000 of these privately-owned English flood defences, are said to be in poor condition. Some, indeed, are on the verge of collapse. Apparently, the Environment Agency (EA) can only 'encourage' owners of flood defences to do maintenance and make repairs. The EA can only move in to make repairs, if loss of life appears imminent. The agency can then only attempt to recoup the costs from the land owners. This is a bonkers system for our present times. Flooding events are not going to disappear, even if there is broad agreement at cop26!

Viking Mice?

Jeremy Searle (Cornell University) has produced strong evidence, adding to a belief that the Vikings occupied the Azores, well before the arrival of the Portughese in 1427 (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/31/did-vikings-and-their-stowaway-mice-beat-portugal-to-the-azores). Searle found that wild House mice on the Azores, had a high incidence of a particular mitochondrial DNA line found in the mouse populations of Orkney, Caithness, the Hebrides (Scotland); the Isle of Man and parts of Ireland. The same line was uncommon in House mice on mainland Portugal. Mitochondrial DNA is passed through the female line, enabling scientists to determine the lineages of animals. There is clear archeological evidence that the Vikings colonised Orkney, Caithness, the Hebrides; the Isle of Man and parts of Ireland. It is highly probable that House mice from Scandinavia stowed away on the Viking longships to reach these locations. The mitochondrial DNA of Azores House mice, suggests they reached these remote islands in the same way.

The Earth and the Roman Empire

I suppose that one might predict that the UK's PM, with his Classics degree, would try to produce a glib analogy between the collapse of the Roman Empire and the potentially devastating effects of climate change (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/29/boris-johnson-cop26-climate-warning-rome-g20-dont-act-now-too-late). The consequences of failure of Cop26 would, however, be on an entirely different scale. Romans were simply replaced by other groups of dominant humans and cultures/civilisations reasserted themselves. Climate change, however, offers no such guarantee of a potential transition. Humans might well find survival difficult enough (if not impossible). The UK PM's claim that Cop26 "must mark the beginning of the end of climate change" is true but overly simplistic. 'Greenhouse gases' remain in the atmosphere for extended periods. Even if their release stopped tomorrow, climate change would carry on. The PM's boosterism and his suggestion, to children, that we should feed humans to plants are distinctly unhelpful. Johan Rockstrom of the Potsdam Institute For Climate Impact Research also states that "The rise of 1.5C is not an arbitrary number. It is not a political number. It is a planetary boundary"(https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/30/climate-experts-warn-world-leaders-15c-is-real-science-not-just-talking-point). Rockstrom then somewhat demolishes his own argument, by saying that "Every fraction of a degree more is dangerous". 1.5C was originally a tacked-on aspiration, over and above a mandate to keep global heating to less than 2C above pre-Industrial levels. It has become increasingly apparent since the Paris Accord, however, that a 2C rise would be catastrophic. So, 1.5C (the new but unlikely target) clearly was a somewhat arbitrary number.

The Truth, The Whole Truth and Nothing But the Truth

It does look as if the law is becoming ass-like. Three environmental protesters have been found guilty of defacing the Westminster office of the Global Warming Policy Foundation with grafitti (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/30/dont-put-climate-activists-on-trial-cps-urged). The Global Warming Policy Foundation is the most prominent group of climate change sceptics in the UK. The Foundation is well-funded by fossil fuel companies. The fossil fuel companies were only too aware (from the research of their own scientists) that emissions from burning coal, oil and gas had climate damaging effects. They apparently preferred profit over finding solutions to a problem they knew they were creating. The grafitti said "liars, liars, liars". The magistrates, examining the case, commended the protesters for their 'openness and honesty" and gave them the minimum possible sentence. It seems entirely wrong that the Global Warming Policy Foundation can lie and distort whereas their critics are punished for calling a spade a spade (as they say in Yorkshire).

Hardly Fair Dinkum

Question: What's worse than a country not having a strategy for carbon zero? Answer: Producing a plan so risible it makes the country a laughing stock. Australia's 2050 net zero emissions plan relies on 'gross manipulation' of data (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/oct/30/australias-2050-net-zero-emissions-plan-relies-on-gross-manipulation-of-data-experts-say). Details of the 'modelling' are not revealed but the 'plan' uses estimates for carbon dioxide storage in trees and soil, massively above the upper values of what authoritive peer-reviewed science suggests is possible. This is science for the fairies (or coal barons)? They do the planet no favours by indulging in a cosmetic exercise.

Degraded?

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome or Myalgic encephalomyelitis is a long-lasting debilitating condition, sometimes seen after a viral infection. The UK's NICE have just removed using Graded Exercise Therapy as a treatment for this ailment (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/oct/29/health-watchdog-nice-publishes-delayed-me-guidance). In Graded Exercise Therapy patients used to be encouraged to gradually but progressively increase levels of exercise. The approach doesn't seem to work and can actually set some people back, in their attempts to return to a normal life and/or work.

Seeing the Changes 1550

Perfect conditions for fungi in Gorseinon and Loughor.

Firmly in the Slow Lane!

The new Systems Change Lab report looked at 40 different areas, where urgent global change is needed, to avoid the worst consequences of climate change (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/28/world-failing-make-changes-avoid-climate-breakdown-report). The areas analysed importantly included transport; land use and coastal zone management; agriculture; finance; industry; buildings, power and technological carbon removal. The transformational changes needed to avoid climate breakdown, were not evident in any area. Trends limiting climate change, were either too slow or even currently going into reverse. Limiting global heating to 1.5 degrees Centigrade above pre-Industrial levels seems an increasingly big ask. One also has to emphasise there is no guarantee that limiting change to 1.5 degree rise will be 'safe'.

Not Seeing Red?

The UK is removing the final countries from its travel red list (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/28/eu-gives-go-ahead-nhs-covid-pass-proof-full-vaccination). The countries to be removed from the UK's red list include Columbia, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Haiti, Panama, Peru and Venezuela. That means that nobody, arriving from abroad, will have to quarantine (at their own expense) in English airport hotels. The UK are also about to recognise 12 more vaccines (to determine who they will regard as fully vaccinated). The country can now fully relax. Immensa PCR tests will tell us if any new Covid variants are entering these islands?

£37bn Lost Without Trace?

The NHS (this label seems to have been purely a marketing device, devised when the NHS was held in high regard) Test and Trace scheme for Covid19 cost the UK at least £37 bn. The independent Public Accounts Committee have now concluded (they could hardly do otherwise) that Test and Trace completely failed in its main objective (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/27/nhs-test-and-trace-failed-its-main-objective-says-spending-watchdog). That privately-run fiasco was supposed to cut infection levels with Sars-Cov-2 and help return the UK to normal. The scheme proved to be not very good at testing and especially poor at tracing the contacts of people with viral infections. The privately-run Immensa PCR testing company have now had one of their key members seconded to Test and Trace (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/26/firm-that-gave-43000-false-covid-results-still-processing-pcr-tests). Immensa is the company that managed to return more than 43,000 false negative results to people in South-West England. The company also reported suspiciously low incidences of infections with Covid19 for people in parts of Yorkshire. Government refuses to see a connection between falsely informing people they have tested negative for the virus, and growing infection rates. In spite of its abject failures, Immensa still carries out mandatory PCR tests for people involved in foreign travel between the UK and other parts of the world. We Brits have always prided ourselves on our science. This sorry tale suggests, however, our appointed testers don't know their ar** from their elbow. Private trumps effective.

Perhaps the Man at Number 10, Doesn't Speak to the Man at Number 11?

The official residence of the UK's PM is 10, Downing Street. The Chancellor of the Exchequer lives next door at Number 11. The PM has notional responsibilities for the Cop26 meeting in Glasgow on climate change. The Chancellor, in his budget speech, has lowered the rate of air passenger duty for short haul domestic flights and continued the freeze on fuel duty for cars (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2021/oct/27/autumn-budget-2021-rishi-sunak-spending-review-borrowing-live-updates?page=with:block-617943248f08ea671ec0b18d). The last things we need to do, if the UK is to reduce its 'greenhouse gas' emissions, is to encourage both short haul air flights and fossil fuel-powered car use. Domestic flights generate more emissions per passenger per mile than longer trips. Emissions are highest at take off and landing. There are also easy alternatives to short haul flights such as travelling by train. The failure to raise more duty on petrol and diesel also reduces the incentive to go electric. Perhaps the Chancellor is trying to drive us to drink? He has also reduced the tax on beer and cider.

Science Museum in a Shade of Greenwash?

For decades, UK Institutions such as Art Galleries, Theatre Companies, Football Clubs and Museums have been encouraged by government to seek Corporate Sponsorship to help run their activities. This can be very lucrative but sponsors only 'give' money, when they judge it will be in their interest to do so. Sponsorship can quickly turn into a laundry exercise for rich, but somewhat dubious companies/countries. This is especially well illustrated by a vigil of London's Science Museum by climate activists (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/oct/27/climate-activists-occupy-science-museum-over-fossil-fuel-sponsors). Kensington's Science Museum is expected to showcase all aspects of Science and is much frequented by children. The museum was occupied by members of the London Branch of the UK Student Climate Network (UKSCN). The UKSCN demonstrators were armed with sleeping bags and candles for an overnight occupation. The activists objected to the Museum's sponsorship by fossil fuel companies, including Adani, BP, Equinor and Shell. The products of the fossil fuel companies have a major role in climate-changing 'greenhouse gas' emissions. Petrol and diesel emissions also make air quality so poor, it has been linked to respiratory disease and thousands of early deaths. One need hardly, of course, mention the environmental impacts of many substantial pollution events (e.g. oil leaks) linked to these companies. The UKSCN activists were particularly incensed By news that fossil fuel sponsorship had been used to create a new gallery in the Science Museum. This development is branded as the 'Energy Revolution: The Adani Green Energy Gallery'. It must strike some people as being a shameless example of 'greenwashing'. The companies that generated your problems will (slowly?) produce the solutions. Perhaps Museums etc shouldn't have to be so dependent on sponsorship?

Achievable and Affordable?

The independent Climate Change Committee (CCC) have judged the finally-published UK strategy for reaching net zero by 2050 as being 'achievable and affordable' (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/26/uk-net-zero-plan-achievable-and-affordable-say-climate-advisers). The CCC, although noting that the plan is the most comprehensive proposed by a G20 country, did suggest it was very 'market-led'. The strategy is very focused on technology, such as heat pumps and electric cars. In relation to the former replacing gas boilers in UK homes, the plan involves offering £5000 grants to help 90,000 households install heat pumps. This sounds generous but actually 600,000 heat pumps a year will have to be installed by 2030 to make the required reductions in 'greenhouse gas' emissions (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/19/what-are-heat-pumps-and-why-is-the-uk-government-pushing-them). The CCC also note that the UK strategy hardly mentions farming. The strategy also has nothing to say on meat consumption or on limiting growth in flying. The CCC thinks these omissions makes hitting net zero by 2050, 'more difficult and riskier'. They also feel that more action is clearly needed to protect low income families from the costs of going 'green'. Many households are already struggling.

Rationing Our Way Out of the Climate Crisis?

Actor Joanna Lumley is probably right when she says that 'wartime style rationing could help solve the climate crisis' (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/26/joanna-lumley-wartime-rationing-solve-climate-crisis). Why should a relatively small proportion of the UK population, utilise most of the country's air flights? Why should some people restrict their meat consumption, whilst others wolf down animal protein every night? Why should some people replace their emissions-heavy domestic gas boilers, whilst other use patio heaters in their gardens? It all sounds very straight foreward. Rationing was, however, easier to set up on an island like the UK in the Second World War. Everyone carried identification. All were citizens or people whose presence in the country was known and approved. In spite of a general acceptance of rationing into the 1950's in the UK, there was trading of allowances, a thriving black market and even counterfeiting of coupons. Money could, even then, get around any restrictions. Rations also resulted in some people, because of their position, receiving more than others. This caused resentments. There would certainly be powerful arguments for entertainers, politicians and captains of industry etc to get bigger allowances for travel. One might also predict that getting a country to ration, could be difficult if conspicuous consumption is seen in other nations (it will be). It is hard to see rationing working unless it is adopted on a global basis e.g. for air flights. There is no sign of general support for such moves.

London Air Pollution

Air pollution causes serious disease and early deaths. All Londoners currently live with air quality below WHO standards. Most of London's air quality problems are linked to vehicular transport. Poor people living, studying and working by major roads, are particularly at risk. Sadiq Khan and Maria Neira (Mayor of London and WHO Director, Public Health, Environment and Social Determinants of Health) opine that the greatly expanded ultra low emissions zone (ulez) will greatly improve air quality in the capital (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/24/death-and-illness-from-toxic-emissions-are-avoidable-cop26-must-deliver-bold-action). Khan and Neira hope that the new ulez will get more people cycling, walking, using public transport and/or investing in electric vehicles. It is to be hoped, of course, that people with physical challenges (who cannot cycle, walk, use public transport or drive) will also be catered for. One must, however, note that not every city/town in the UK, has London's scope for change. I also seem to remember a previous mayor of London who sat on air pollution figures in the capital. Pollution was especially bad around schools. I wonder what happened to him?

Following (a Long Way Behind) the Science!

Weirdly, a Number 10 spokesman has dismissed the strong likelihood that the 43,000 false negative Covid tests by Immensa, can be blamed for any of the sharp rise in infections in the SW of England ( https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/25/false-covid-test-results-not-cause-of-surge-south-west-england-says-no-10). The SW of England is currently showing the greatest UK surge in Covid19 infections. Most of the false negatives reported by Immensa were on samples from this region. Virologists maintain that telling people they are negative (when they are not), changes their behaviour and makes transmission much more likely. In contrast, Number 10 claims that the high rate of infection in the English SW is because the region "may be catching up with the rest of the country." The UK government apparently have no plans to punish the privately-owned company that messed up the tests. White is black and black is white. And this is a government that claims to 'follow the science'. God help us!

Singing From the Same Hymn Sheet?

UK Water Companies are allowed to discharge untreated sewage into rivers (and, from there, to the sea), when it rains heavily. An amendment was proposed to the current Environmental Bill. This would have stopped Water Companies pumping waste into the already heavily polluted rivers. The government voted the amendment down. A number of Members of Parliament (MPs) who voted for the amendment's removal, have been heavily critisized by their constituents. Several, subsequently posted almost identical defences on social media (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/25/sewage-vote-outcry-prompts-tory-mps-to-defend-decision-on-social-media). The wording for the MP's postings came from the top. It basically claimed that the amendment lacked an impact assessment and that the costs of immediately banning sewage 'spills' would be too great. Figures on the costs of entirely replacing the Victorian sewage system were cited in support. Just a few points. It has been known for decades that sewage is destroying the biodiversity in UK rivers. The Water Companies could have done something about this. It must be possible, in many locations, for Water Companies to increase their capacity for temporarily holding rainwater/sewage for longer periods. Contrary to one MP's claim, constituents are not accusing them of voting to discharge sewage into rivers. The people who live in the constituencies are complaining that the MPs appear to be doing nothing to reduce this activity by the privately-owned Water Companies. Some Water Companies appear to be fixated on profits for their shareholders.

Seeing the Changes 1549

It must be wet in Loughor, as what appears to be Bog beacon (Mitrula paludosa) is peeping through my lawn.

Let the Electric Train Take the Strain?

Aneurin Redman-White paints a very convincing picture of the successive failures to upgrade the UK rail system (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/24/clean-rail-travel-uk-government-electrification-low-carbon). Redman-White points out that, periodically, massive developments are announced (such as electrification of a major route). Teams of specialist workers are assembled and trained to carry out the changes. The development then overruns and is abandoned or drastically cut. The trained team is dispersed. A new development is announced and a new team is assembled to carry it out. The whole cycle is then repeated ad nauseum. This has essentially limited the efficiency of what should have been recognised as a major tool in the UK's drive to become carbon neutral. The country needs better, faster, cleaner and cheaper rail links.

Have the Birds Flown?

Migration is very energetically demanding, especially for small birds. Such species only do this when the costs versus benefits analysis results in gains (in terms of avoiding fatal cold snaps and/or being able to forage for longer). It had been assumed that birds undertaking migrations timed their movements purely in relation to changing daylength. A recent analysis by workers at Durham University of 50 years of migration/climate/vegetation data suggests, however, that this is not the whole story (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/25/britains-migratory-birds-may-stop-flying-south-for-winter). Some small birds that breed in the UK (notably the Willow warbler; the Garden warbler and the Nightingale) seem to be spending less time in overwintering sites such as Africa and Southern Europe (in some cases over 50 days less). Recently, birds have been leaving later to travel South and earlier to migrate back to the UK. If the trends continue, some species might even dispense with the annual migration altogether. These small birds appear to be able to adjust their migrations in response to other factors such as prevailing temperatures and food availability. Yet another clear illustration of the impact of global heating?

Ivory Poaching and Natural Selection

Ivory poachers kill African elelphants for their tusks. A tuskless elephant would be of no interest to them. Mass poaching consequently appears to be driving the current evolution of the elephant (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/21/ivory-poaching-evolution-tuskless-elephants-study). A previously rare genetic mutation in female elephant in Garangosa Park in Mozambique, is spreading. The mutation results in the elephants being born without tusks. Not being targeted by poachers, seems to override any potential benefit derived from having tusks (in sexual selection, defence against predators and/or foraging). No tusks: no poachers!

Paying For Agreement?

Developed and developing countries naturally assume different starting positions in their likely responses to Cop26. In general, the developed nations have been/are the biggest polluters. They also have the finance/technology to make their transition to a low carbon economy. Poorer nations a) put much of the blame for the climate crisis on the developed nations and b) are more likely to suffer extreme hardship/eradication as a result of climate change. Saving the planet, however, needs action from every country, irrespective of its current state of development. In an effort to break the impasse between developed and developing countries, poorer nations are to be offered billions of dollars more funding to help them reduce their 'greenhouse gas' emissions (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/24/poor-countries-to-be-offered-extra-funding-to-break-cop26-impasse). This approach is necessary but it has some potential flaws. Firstly, the UK (along with Germany and Canada) are charged with setting up the financial deal. Concomitantly, the UK's Chancellor of the Exchequer is planning further cuts to the UK's aid Budget. That will not reassure the poorer nations. Secondly, poorer countries were promised aid from 2009. They have only received 80% of the money pledged. Why would they be more trusting this time round? Thirdly, developed nations have seemed to have generally regarded offering 'aid' to poorer countries, as technique for generating sales opportunities. The Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change is predicting that, if Cop26 is not a success, conflict and chaos will follow (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/24/world-conflict-and-chaos-could-be-the-result-of-a-summit-failure). She suggests that migration crises and food shortages could well result in the breakdown of global security and stability. Is everyone confident?

RSV(P)?

Welcome to the party! In the UK this winter, the 'Viruses Unchained' extravaganza, not only includes appearances by Covid19 and Seasonal influenza, we also have support from Respiratory Syncytial virus (RSV)! There are vaccines for the first two but not for RSV. RSV causes mild, cold-like symptoms in a majority of people. It can, however, produce potentially fatal bronchitis in the very young and the aged. One of the side-effects of the Covid pandemic lockdowns, was a very low incidence of RSV infections last winter. Transmission of this virus was greatly reduced by limiting social contact. Immunity to RSV declines very rapidly (it's about 2 years max). Medics are, consequently, expecting a very high incidence of infections by RSV this winter. The plethora of potential respiratory viral infections, together with what looks like a slow uptake of booster shots for Covid19, seems to be pushing the UK government towards a 'Plan B' for England. Some people are suggesting the country will actually need a 'Plan B+'.

Would You Buy Access to a Plot of Seabed From These Folk?

The Crown Estate makes millions of pounds every year by leasing areas of the seabed around England and Wales. 'Greed' appears to have caused them to lease the same area to two incompatible schemes ((https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/oct/23/crown-gives-go-ahead-to-rival-net-zero-carbon-north-sea-schemes). An area, off the Yorkshire coast, has been leased to part of the giant Hornsea offshore windfarm and the East Coast Cluster Project. The cluster project, aims to capture carbon emissions from Teeside and Humber Industrial clusters. This carbon dioxide would then be stored under the North Sea in this precise location. The schemes are incompatible, because the foundations of the offshore wind turbines, would obstruct crucial seismic monitoring stations. The monitoring stations are needed to detect and prevent any leakage from the underwater carbon dioxide stores. Someone should get their money back (probably with compensation?).

Greenwashing the UK's Chancellor With Air-Travel?

It's reported that the UK's Chancellor of the Exchequer (its top Finance man) is keen 'to burnish his green credentials' (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/oct/22/cost-of-flights-to-rise-as-rishi-sunak-prepares-to-raise-air-passenger-duty). One of the ways the Chancellor hopes to do this, is by tinkering with Air Passenger Duty (APD). Air travel is a major generator of 'greenhouse gases'. Currently, APD is charged at two levels, namely up to and more than 2000 miles. Passengers on the longer flights are charged more. The Chancellor proposes to introduce a third level, of more than 6000 miles. This would involve an even higher rate of APD being charged to people e.g. travelling to Australia, South Africa or Japan. The obvious flaw in his logic is that emissions associated with air-travel are maximal at take-off and landing. Consequently, short haul flights are very substantial generators of pollution per mile travelled. There are also often reasonable (albeit sometimes expensive) alternative modes of transport (e.g. by train) for the shorter distances. The Chancellor claims that keeping short haul cheap, is essential for maintaining the integrity of the UK. Many Environmentalists have been pushing for a 'frequent flyer levy'. In this, passengers would have an extra APD charge for 2nd and subsequent flights in a year. Fifteen percentage of the UK population actually take 70% of all the country's flights. In spite of its greater fairness, the Chancellor does not support a frequent flyer levy. One might guess that he and most of his colleagues are frequent flyers. Even worse, most of them, have their flights paid for by the tax payer. The Chancellor seems to need to put a lot more effort into his thinking to appear remotely 'green'?

Immensa: A Big, Big Problem

Yet another world-beating UK fiasco! Immensa is a private Covid testing laboratory, based in Wolverhampton, England. It erroneously informed circa 43,000 people, mainly in S-W England, that they did not have an infection with Sars-cov-2 (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/23/covid-testing-failures-at-uk-lab-should-have-been-flagged-within-days). The error should have 'been picked up within days' by Immensa's quality control processes and/or the UK Health Security Agency. There was neery a peep out of either. It was actually left to 'customers' complaining about their tests, before the alarm was raised. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of contacts could have been infected by the virus. This would especially be the case, as people in England, have been encouraged to operate without any of the former Covid19 restrictions (wearing face-masks, social distancing and working from home). I wonder if anyone will eventually be found to be liable for deaths as a result of this abject failure?

Seeing the Changes 1548

Evidence of how conducive current conditions are for fungi on the Bynea-Penclacwydd border. Numbers of small, yellowish fungi by the cycle track. More impressive still, were the baker's dozen of large fungi there in varied stages of development.

Driving Away From Diesel

Air pollution generates disease and early death. The Mayor of London's long-announced expansion of the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ulez), coming into operation on the 25th October, has apparently resulted in there being 128,000 fewer diesel cars on that city's roads than in 2017 (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/oct/22/london-drivers-ditching-diesel-cars-six-times-faster-rest-uk-ulez). This means that Londoners are ditching diesels six times faster than in the rest of the UK. Most of this will be a consequence of the charges associated with the ulez but there are other factors particular to London. London is financially supported to provide a much better (in terms of cheapness, diversity and reliability) public transport system, than is found in other parts of the UK. Many areas of London also have wide-spread provisions for cycles. Although London has pockets of deprivation, a high proportion of its population probably has the means to invest in an electric vehicle. The provision of recharging points is also fairly well-established in the capital. Other parts of the UK will need financial help, to replicate London's abandoning of diesel.

Out Of This Earth?

I suppose we must make exceptions for the fact that William Shatner is a 90 year old Canadian actor. Logic, however, doesn't seem to be his thing. When Shatner returned from his trip on the Blue Horizon rocket, he gushed that 'Everybody in the world needs to do this'. Providing trips for a tiny proportion of people on the planet, would ensure the extinction of all complex life on the planet (https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/oct/22/fool-fellow-actors-criticise-william-shatner-space-flight-joan-collins-brian-cox). When critised about the carbon emissions generated by his jolly, Shatner grandly announced that it was a 'baby step of getting industry, all those polluting industries off Earth'. Just how, does firing a 90-year old briefly into space, do any such thing? Running Amazon from the moon? Some of Shatner's actor colleagues have described his actions as being those of a fool. I suspect, however, that other VIPs will be tempted by the publicity generated by Shatner's trip.

What's In It For the 'Leaders'?

Activist Greta Thunberg complains that 'there are no real climate leaders yet' and asks 'who will step up at Cop26?' (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/21/climate-leaders-cop26-uk-climate-crisis-glasgow). Thunberg is certainly correct when she says:- a) the science is clear and b) most world leaders are in denial. I suspect, however, that she hasn't yet developed my degree of cynicism (I have had much longer to hone this awful attribute). It seems to me, that the main aim of all 'world leaders' is to achieve power (by inheritance, success in elections or by force). Once power is grasped, all 'leaders' want to hang on to it (only, of course, for the 'good' of their country). A 'leader' 'stepping up' in Thunberg's sense at Cop26, would be showing extreme altruism (not something in the 'skill-set' of the vast majority of politicians). Greta seems to believe/hope that, the arrival of a real climate leader, would embarass his/her counterparts from other countries to fall into line. I am not so sure. The 'world leaders' gathering in Glasgow (and those simply sending delegations), appear happiest when they are making optimistic 'pledges' and trying to convince their people that they have won something in talks. Some, even invent cost-free scenarios for the future, based on little or no evidence.

COP Out?

A leak of more than 32,000 'comments', reveals that governments have been vigorously lobbying for changes to drafts of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report prepared for Cop26 in Glasgow (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/21/oil-and-coal-rich-countries-lobbying-to-weaken-un-climate-report-leak-shows). Predictably, fossil fuel producers (such as Australia, Russia and Saudi Arabia) have been pushing for a weakening of sections dealing with the crucial role of hydrocarbons in global heating. Countries dependent on coal-fired electricity generation (e.g. China and India), are resisting calls to phase out coal. Major producers of meat (e.g. Argentina and Brazil) object to any mentions of a need for humans to alter their diets. Some rich polluters don't see why they should financially help poorer nations to 'go green'. We have been assured that the scientists won't change their report in response to such pressures. It's not, however, the scientists who will be doing the 'horse-trading' in Glasgow. The 'world leaders' who happen to be there or their delegations, will call the shots. They are not exactly the most trustworthy collective! Cop26 will also have to deal with the 'boosterism' of the UK's PM. Most experts think there will have to be considerable changes in public behaviour, if we are to substantially cut carbon dioxide emissions. Experts advocate, for example, levies on high carbon foods and a reduction in frequent flying. In contrast, the PM (who appears to like people to join him in his imaginary 'happy place'), says that net zero can happen without sacrificing the things we love (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/20/meat-tax-and-frequent-flyer-levy-advice-dropped-from-uk-net-zero-strategy). Mr Johnson claims that the UK strategy 'shows how we can build back greener, without so much as a hair shirt in sight'. He reckons, by 2050, we will all be driving non-polluting cars; flitting around in silent, energy efficient aircraft and heating our homes with 'free' energy from the seas. The current PM is hardly likely to be held to account, if none of this technology materialises on the appropriate scale.

'Geography On Our Side'

With one or two notable historic exceptions, the Crown Estate controls access to and development of the seabed around England and Wales. The Scots had the rights to 'their' seabed devolved to them in a settlement. The Welsh First Minister is now suggesting that, devolving the Crown Estate to Wales, could 'boost the country's aspiration to become a world leader in renewable technology' (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/oct/21/mark-drakeford-says-devolving-crown-estate-would-help-wales-with-net-zero-aim). The First Minister claims that the country has 'geography on its side'. Wales is West-facing making it exposed to the prevailing winds coming across the Atlantic. The country is also surrounded by sea on three sides. There appears to be much scope for using the energy in wind, waves and water to produce and distribute 'clean energy'. The Westminster government (in England) appears to be against losing its control of the Welsh seabed.

Seeing the Changes 1547

I know it can be warmer down South. In Hastings Ivy-leaved toadflax (Cymbalaria muralis) was in flower. Dragonflies and butterflies, like this Red admiral (Vanessa atalanta) were still flitting about.

All Down to the Pensions?

Some UK MPs are warning that pension schemes need to 'cushion' the economic effects of the country's net zero carbon plan (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/20/mps-urge-pension-schemes-cushion-economic-effects-uk-net-zero-plan). The administrators of pension funds have a mandate to maximise returns for their scheme's members. The MPs are worried that some substantial funds may quickly divest from share-holdings in industries (like steel production) characterised by high fossil fuel use. They maintain that investment is needed to update equipment and develop new technologies to deal with the 'green' transition. Without the financial support, such industries may be 'wiped out', leaving sections of the UK as economic wasteland. This is essentially what happened in the Thatcher years, when regions dependent on coal mining were abandoned to their fate. It is argued that, the UK will not get to carbon zero by 2050, without public support in all regions. The administrators of the pension funds could, however, be placed in a really difficult bind. There are already pressures from the membership of some schemes, to sell their pension's shares in petrochemical companies etc.

An Eco Friendly Caffeine Drink?

I appreciate that people selling beverages have to make their product sound as tasty as possible. Now, they also seem to have to cite environmental issues. Tenzing is marketed as 'Natural Energy: Purely From Plants'. It makes a virtue of being made using 'natural caffeine' from 'nature's most powerful plants'. Caffeine is a legal stimulant. Artificial caffeine can be made in the laboratory, using urea and chloroacetic acid as ingredients. Having said that, cocoa, coffee and tea are all potent and relatively cheap sources of 'natural caffeine'. It would actually be unusual for a manufacturer to opt to use the synthetic version. It seems a fairly innocuous drink but describing it, as the result of a 'botanical quest', is perhaps, pushing its 'green' credentials too far. Describing the can's contents as 'Energy good for mind, body and planet' also appears to be a bit over the top. It's basically a mix of carbonated water, green tea and lemon juice, with a pinch of Himalayan rock salt (hence the name?) and some beet sugar. It is certainly likely to be better for the drinker than many of the current 'energy drinks'.

Seeing the Changes 1546

Warm and wet. So lots of Honey fungus (Armillaria mellea) in my Loughor garden. Not, however, as impressive as the Parasols (Macrolepiota procera) in Hastings (unfurled and emerging).

Will the Galaxy Miss Us?

Brian Cox warns the delegates of Cop26 that humans might be the only intelligent beings in our galaxy. He suggests that 'destroying our civilisation (with rampant climate change) could be a galactic disaster' (https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/oct/19/earths-demise-could-rid-galaxy-of-meaning-warns-brian-cox-ahead-of-cop26). Cox is an excellent science communicator, whose new series Universe airs shortly on BBC2. One episode discusses the 'Goldilocks theory'. This is the idea (it's not actually much of a theory) that the Earth is in just the right position in relation to its sun for life. It's neither too hot nor too cold. Cox notes that there may be circa 20bn Earth-like planets in the galaxy. On the basis of what he feels he has learned about Biology, however, he suggests that any life evolving on other planets might well be only simple and slime-like. I wholly approve of Cox attempting get the Cop26 delegates to think seriously. I feel, however, that his view of the relative uniqueness (if there is such a thing) of humans, is overstated. Humans have always had a tendency to claim to be unique. Some have/still do maintain they are 'in God's image'. Scientifically, humans even arrogantly classify themselves as Homo sapiens ('wise man'). For many years, it was claimed that humans were the only organisms on the Earth to have a) self-awareness; b) language; c) an ability to fashion and use tools; d) any numeracy etc, etc. In more recent years, scientists have found beasts, also having these skills, actually living on our own planet. It's by no means certain that the galaxy would be a less 'meaningful' and brillient place without humans. I hope Cop26 goes well.

Traditions and Emissions

Just returned from Hastings (the site of the 1066 invasion of Britain by the Normans). I happened to be there on the 16th of October when, this year, the Hastings Bonfire Society (founded 1995) had its torch-lit procession through the old town. People dressed up as soldiers, zombies, pirates etc and played drums and other instruments. Torches were waved and flares lit. The procession terminated on the beach-front of Hastings, where an enormous bonfire of wooden pallets was lit. There was subsequently a spectacular firework display with cannon blasts. Apparently, many of the towns on England's South Coast (e.g. Lewes and Battle) have similar events on different days in October/November. This is separately from the much more widespread 5th November Guy Fawkes (the man who failed to blow up the Houses of Parliament in London) celebration. I must admit that I found the whole Hastings event entertaining and exciting but I do worry about the amount of carbon dioxide emissions pumped into the atmosphere by such displays. I suppose how much 'greenhouse gas' depends how frequent and intensive these events are? How do these emissions equate to a space tourism trip or even a short-haul flight on an airline? I expect the emissions per participant in these traditions are relatively modest.