A Happier 2022 From Wales

New Species: A Lockdown Spin-off?

The Covid19 lockdowns ruled out most travel by taxonomists at London's Natural History Museum. This caused these identifiers to concentrate their efforts on existing collections, rather than seeking new material (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/30/natural-history-museum-500-new-species-2021-aoe). The result has been the identification of a total of more than 550 new species in 2021. These include 6 new species of UK dinosaurs, 90 new beetles and 5 snakes. More than half the new species were tiny copepods, from a 60 year old collection assembled by French husband and wife team, Claude and Francoise Monniot. Their copepod collection finally got round to being evaluated by two taxonomists who were nearing retirement. As they say, 'it's an ill wind'!

Climate Perceptions and Actualities

Climate activist, Greta Thunberg, says (not unreasonably), that it is 'strange' that US President, Joe Biden, is regarded, in sections of the media, as a 'climate leader' (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/28/greta-thunberg-joe-biden-climate-crisis-fight-leader). Thunberg notes that the current US administration has actually issued even more licences for extracting and utilising fossil fuels than the previous administration. The US didn't even sign up to stop using coal at Cop26, although this was perceived as an urgent priority. Even American Presidents, however, have nothing like personal control over the country's use of fuels. They can advocate preferred directions of travel but actual decision-making is generally out of their hands. Individual states and large corporations hold the levers of power. Biden's situation is especially limiting, when he doesn't have large majorities in the Senate or the House. Perhaps Biden gets credit simply for not being a climate change denier, like his predecessor? It is clear, however, that the future of the planet's climate is far from certain. Cop26 mainly yielded aspirations and a few undertakings. None of the agreed 'changes' can actually be legally enforced. Administrations will change. Some people can, and will, deviate from doing what is needed. There is nothing like a reliable 'road map' to get to carbon zero.

It's a Question of Timing?

For the start of 2022, the UK's weather, is scheduled to be some of the mildest on record (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/31/warm-winter-fatal-for-uk-endangered-species-bats-butterflies-hedgehogs). A mild winter is not, however, good news for some organisms. Spring flowers may appear in January and then be damaged by later cold snaps. Butterflies, such as the Red admiral and the Small tortoiseshell, may emerge from their pupae too early. If they do so, they will fail to encounter food resources for both the adult and any potential larvae. Hibernating Mammals, like hedgehogs and bats, may awake before conditions are appropriate for feeding. This premature activity wastes limited energy resources. Climate change effectively disrupts the seasonal 'triggers' used by many organisms to enhance their chances of survival and reproducing. This is why I have posted on 'Seeing the Changes' for so many years.

No Respite Post-Christmas From Wild Weather

Two, fast-moving (with winds over 100 mph) wildfires devastated North Colorado, USA (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/30/colorado-wildfires-evacuations-latest). The fires were located near the towns of Superior and Louisville. The blazes destroyed almost 600 homes and forced the evacuation of tens of thousands of people. The wildfires were especially dangerous because the high winds brought down powerlines. This made communication difficult. It now seems that we have wild weather all the year round?

United We Fall?

United Airlines claim they will be '100% green by 2050' (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/29/united-airlines-sustainable-green-flying-experts). United's only tinge of green thus far, is a single passenger flight from Chicago to Washington. This was carried out using so-called 'Sustainable Aviation fuel' (SAF). SAF is made from cooking oil and agricultural waste. United described the flight as 'a significant milestone' in the effort to decarbonise the airline industry. They suggested that it heralded the development of 'guilt-free' flying. Although, SAF may replace traditional fossil fuels, it has considerable problems. Firstly, SAF is unlikely to ever be scaled up sufficiently, to actually replace kerosene. Secondly, burning it, still pumps masses of 'greenhouse gases' high into the atmosphere. Some must also note that United (and some other airlines) are intent on increasing flight numbers and adding destinations. They even intend to develop supersonic air travel, utilising yet more energy and flying even higher. Clearly, air travel can never be 100% green. Reducing air travel emissions, fast enough to deal with global heating, can only be achieved by having fewer flights. Most of the people on this planet are not frequent fliers but will be impacted by climate change.

Tequila Sunrise Surprise

The Tequila fish (Zoogoneticus tequila) had been declared extinct in the wild. This fish had only been found in the Teuchitlan river in S-W Mexico. Tequila fish appeared to have been driven to extinction by a combination of water pollution and introduced predators. This fish is now, however, cited as a conservation success story (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/29/uk-zoo-helps-lost-mexican-fish-live-to-see-another-tequila-sunrise). Captive Tequila fish were sent from Chester zoo, in the UK, to Michoacana University in Mexico. The fish were bred in impressive numbers and some were habituated to wild conditions in a Mexican lake. More than 1,500 Tequila fish have now been returned to the Teuchitlan river. This is presumably after sorting out the pollution problem and, at least, drastically reducing predator numbers. The collaboration seems to be a good model for reintroduction programmes. It was, of course, only possible, as the Tequila fish had survived in a zoo.

Swan Lake

Viv Groskop describes how she developed a deep fear of swans in her childhood, actually believing that these birds could kill (https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/dec/26/escape-your-comfort-zone-i-love-swimming-outdoors-so-i-decided-to-confront-my-deep-fear-of-swans). Groskop's swan phobia became a problem for her in the Covid19 lockdowns, when she took up swimming outdoors (pools were closed). She sometimes had to share the lake or river with swans. Sensibly, Groskop got help from a 'swan whisperer' to deal with her phobia (standard exposure therapy?). People have been frequently warned that swans can break an arm or a leg with their powerful wings. Swans only 'attack' humans, however, if their chicks or eggs appear threatened. A swan is only likely to bite a human by accident, when being fed bread (they naturally eat grass). Swans have much more to fear from humans than vice versa!

Nits Knitting Human History?

It sounds a bit like the fictional starting premise of Jurassic Park. In that book/film, dinosaur DNA was extracted from the blood meal of mosquitos preserved in amber for millenia. A study in the Journal of Molecular Biology and Evolution appears to have done something comparable with nit glue (https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/dec/28/how-nit-glue-could-help-answer-head-scratchers-about-our-ancestors). Nits are the eggs of human head lice. The eggs are fixed to the hairs of their hosts, using a powerful cement. The joint British, Danish and Argentinian study, successfully extracted human DNA from nit glue on the hairs of 8 South American mummies. The mummies were between 1,500 and 2,000 years old. Nit glue generated the same proportion of DNA that could be extracted from a tooth sample. That DNA was also, better preserved. Taking hair samples from mummies, also proved more acceptable to ethnic groups, than removing bone. The DNA broadly confirmed suspicions about human migration in the area. Mummification is, of course, comparatively rare but the technique may have a useful role in Archaelogy.

Lack of Social Mobility in the Air?

Concern has been expressed about social mobility stagnation in the UK (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/sep/28/lack-of-social-mobility-in-uk-risks-fuelling-populism-says-fiona-hill). The children of rich people generally thrive, whereas those of poor parents often fail to achieve. Initiatives have been set up to try to give children from poorer backgrounds more opportunities. There is a need, however, to recognise that such children often carry subtle, lasting handicaps. Studies have demonstrated that, in the UK, there is a strong correlation between poor air quality and child poverty (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/28/labour-highlights-link-between-child-poverty-and-air-pollution). Poor people tend to live in cheap accomodation in areas with busy roads. Their children will consequently live and attend schools in areas with high air pollution. Most of the 50 UK locations with the worst air quality (often related to vehicle emissions), also have the highest rates of child poverty. Vehicle emissions include nitrogen dioxide; carbon monoxide; ozone and sulfur dioxide, as well as particulate matter. Poor air quality reduces life expectancy and damages both physical and intellectual health. It's consequently not just the fact that the parents of poor children can't afford private tuition, they are damaged by the air they breathe. Hardly remarkable then, that many don't go on to attend prestidigious universities and/or move up the social strata into professions. Banging on about encouraging aspiration, without also cleaning up the air that poor children breathe, seems a bit futile.

Baked Alaska

A record daytime temperature of 19.4 degrees Centigrade was recorded in Kodiak, Alaska this December. This is yet another reminder (if we needed one) that runaway climate change is underway on our heating planet (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/29/alaska-sets-record-high-december-temperature-of-194c). These atypical temperatures cause serious problems for humans, with the sinking of villages and interference with local lifestyles. The consequences for the wildlife (seals, polar bears etc) are, however, even more detrimental. Organisms, adapted over millenia to ice and snow, simply can't cope with fast changes on this scale.

Squirrel 'Terrorising' Welsh Town Bites the Dust!

A Grey squirrel, being routinely fed by a woman in her garden in Buckley, Flintshire, ended up biting her and several neighbours. The beast was christened 'Stripe', after the chomper in the film, Gremlins (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/dec/28/stripe-the-bitey-squirrel-meets-a-sad-end-after-terrorising-welsh-town). Eventually, the woman decided she had no choice and invested in a humane trap. The Royal Society for the Protection of Animals (RSPCA) were called in and transferred the beast to one of their cages. The RSPCA then had to kill the animal as, since 2019, it has been illegal to release a Grey squirrel back into the wild in the UK. The Prince of Wales only approves of Red squirrels.

British Opinion or a Tiny (Somewhat Biased) Snapshot?

An article has been published, trumpeting that Britons are concerned that government hypocrisy will affect the public's willingness to change their own behaviour, in order to tackle the climate crisis. The article also points out there is doubt that the Cop26 commitments can be met, unless they are legally binding (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/28/britons-think-politicians-hypocrisy-will-hamper-tackling-climate-crisis). This all sounds very definitive. The 'views' are, however, actually based on a first collation of views from the Net Zero Diaries, organized by the consultancy 'Britain Thinks'. The Net Zero Diaries is a focus group of 40 individuals who, prior to Cop26, kept accounts of news events they had learned about and their everyday 'climate encounters'. The diarists also heard from a range of experts on environmental topics. The 40 individuals were reportedly selected to include participants with a strong interest in the environment and others who were just general consumers. The 'analysis' frequently contrasted these 'two groups'. One has to have reservations about whether such a tiny sample is, in any sense, representative of wider public opinion. One thing seemed, however, to be clear. None of the Net Zero Diarists were exactly certain what had happened, in Glasgow, at Cop26. I suspect that this, at least, is likely to be the case for the vast majority of the general public.

Science Versus 'Goodies and Baddies'?

Amy Westervelt (Climate journalist and Founder/Executive Producer of the Critical Frequency podcast network) has an opinion piece on how to 'sell' action on climate change to the general public (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/dec/28/follow-the-science-public-climate-crisis). Westerberg argues that telling people 'to follow the science' (a la Greta Thunberg?) won't save the planet. She points out that, in the US, currently the second largest polluter, 'only' 40% of the population are college graduates. This implies that society is too uneducated to understand the science. Westerberg opines, however, that people can be activated to fight for 'justice'. This requires, in her view, the clear labelling of 'villains'. In the case of climate change, these would be the major petrochemical and mining companies, along with their facilitators (some politicians and banks). 'Heroes', in this scenario, would be the climate activists. Westerberg provides a graphic example of a member of a Californian crab-fishing family, whose catches were progressively reduced by warming waters. That woman had assumed that climate change was something that just happened. She was, however, infuriated when shown evidence that, in the 1970s and 1980s, the major oil companies had all taken out patents for oil drilling platforms, designed to exploit fields in a melting Arctic. This was at a time when the same companies were using their wealth to distort science and tell people there was nothing to worry about. Westerberg may have a point about the relative effectiveness of whipping up the resentment of the exploited against their exploiters. I have, however, some reservations (I would do wouldn't I, as an ancient scientist?). My first reservation is that 'to follow the science' one doesn't have to be a climate science specialist. Science becomes more 'believable' when a) there is a clear consensus among the specialists; b) the key data is generated by individuals operating in 'respectable' institutions; c) the papers have been subject to peer review by reputable journals and d) the generators of the data are not financially beholden to commercial interests who would benefit. Science is never exact, which is one of the things that creates problems for 'followers'. It is also appreciated that none of the above four criteria gives an absolute guarantee of verity. My second reservation is that, in our social media-dominated world, the labelling of 'goodies' versus 'baddies' has been used with malign intent. For example, part of the Covid 'antivaxx' mantra is that 'Big Pharma' are the 'baddies'. Antivaxxers argue that they are making untold millions with their vaccines (true). Antivaxxers are self-appointed 'heroes', with their suggestions that Covid19 is a feeble disease that should be treated with cheap alternatives (like bleach and ivermectin). They are also protecting our 'freedoms' (untrue). I would prefer not to give up on science just yet. I still hope that the general public can and will increase their scientific understanding!

Drivers of Biodiversity Decline

On a world-wide basis, the five biggest (in order of importance) threats to biodiversity are:- 1. human changes in land and sea use; 2. human water consumption; 3. degradation of peatlands and bogs; 4. plastic pollution and 5. invasive species (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/26/bogs-banks-and-bubble-barriers-five-great-projects-to-protect-nature-aoe). All 5 threats are well-recognised and conservationists are developing some interesting techniques, when attempting to deal with them. It is now recognised that the North American grassland plants are under considerale threat due to land use changes. The Southeastern Grasslands Initiative, recognising that financial support is very limited, has helped to set up conservation seed banks. The possibility consequently exists that plants could be reintroduced. Each year since the 1980s, 1% more water has been needed. Similar annual increases seem to be likely into the forseeable future. It has, however, been recognised that 80% of untreated waste water is currently allowed to simply flow back into ecosystems. Conservationists are looking at developments in Israel that clean and reutilise waste water. This might cut down the need for desalination plants. Peatlands and bogs only cover around 3% of the Earth's land surface. They store, however, almost 550bn tonnes of carbon, which is more than all the planet's forests. There are, consequently, initiatives (such as in Northern England) to restore degraded peatlands. Its impact on atmospheric carbon dioxide might well be greater than that acheived by planting trees. Plastic pollution in the oceans is scheduled (without intervention) to triple over the next 20 years. There are, consequently, many initiatives to remove plastics from the seas, including removing it from the rivers that feed them. Most of the focus, however, appears to be on large items like bottles and stirrers. Less attention has been paid to microplastics from the tyres and braking systems of motor vehicles. These will still be produced, even if everyone switches to using electric cars. Invasive species (e.g. rats, pigs etc) are often accidentally or deliberately introduced by humans. It has now been demonstrated that more than 100 threatened island bird, mammal and reptile species have benefited from programmes that eradicated invasive mammals. Conservation often requires operatives to become rat-catchers. Recent developments in this area include the development of the New Zealand Predator-Free zone. There is obviously lots of work that has to be done in these 5 areas, if serious loss of biodiversity is to be avoided.

'Weathering' Climate Change?

Climate change results in more extreme weather events. These include droughts, wild fires, storms and floods. The UK is, to some extent, currently insulated by geography from the worst of such changes. 2021 has, however, seen the country exposed to upland wild fires, major collapses of cliffs and several violent, damaging storms. These have impact on humans but they also create winners and losers amongst the animals, fungi and plants of our natural world. The National Trust have produced a useful annual audit of the impact of weather on nature in the UK (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/27/how-new-normal-of-wild-weather-put-strain-on-uk-nature-in-2021). Obvious winners in the UK include Grey seals (breeding colonies have done well) and fungi (the warm, wet conditions produced impressive displays). Obvious UK losers include rare upland birds and mammals (killed or forced to move by wild-fires); butterflies (most species substantially declined in 2021) and trees (up-rooted by storms and/or killed by fungal disease, such as Ash dieback). Clearly, climate change is exerting real pressures on nature. These pressures are orders of magnitude worse in many other parts of the globe. We are currently, however, not near the 'safe' global heating figure of 2 degrees above pre-industrial levels.

Climate Changes Versus Costs?

Switching to electric cars is one way of countering the release of climate-changing (and health-damaging) emissions (carbon dioxide and nitrous oxides). The UK's Department for Transport had announced (pre Cop26) it was going to require every new and existing non-residential building (offices, stores, schools etc) with car parking for 20 or more vehicles, to install at least one charger for electric vehicles. Predictably, there was fury at the proposed 'cost'. The scheme has been quietly abandoned (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/27/plans-in-england-for-car-chargers-in-all-commercial-car-parks-quietly-rolled-back). The requirement will now only apply to new build and modified non-residential buildings. Commercial costs appear more important than planetary costs?

Got a Problem? Export It!

The US is the world's largest exporter of plastic waste. Up to 2015, the US used to send most of its plastic waste to China. Then China decided it didn't want to be the 'world's plastic rubbish dump'. It now seems that much of the US's plastic waste is being diverted to Latin America (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/24/latin-america-urges-us-to-reduce-plastic-waste-exports-to-region). Latin American Environmental Organisations are calling on the US to reduce the export of plastic waste to their regions. Plastic waste exports to Latin America doubled in the first 7 months of 2020. Mexico, being close and having cheap labour, gets most. The waste creates serious environmental problems and tends not to be disposed of/recycled in Latin America. The US should create its own specialist plants for dealing with the plastic waste that they generate locally.

'Carbon Friendly' Rockets?

There is a plethora of plans for 'spaceports' in the more remote parts of the UK (https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/dec/26/the-great-british-race-to-space). The first UK-launched satellite is likely to be fired into space from Cornwall. There are also firm plans for creating rival spaceports in Sutherland and Shetland (Scotland). More tentatively, spaceports may also be established in Campbeltown, Prestwich and North Uist (also Scotland), as well as Snowdonia in Wales. All the proposals have been busy stressing their 'green credentials'. They have claimed (to get local support) to be 'carbon friendly' and principled re-users of rocket stages. Some of this is, however, simple 'greenwash'. Putting satellites into space will inevitably generate carbon dioxide. It is to be hoped that the companies involved will be compelled to undertake remediation. The odd tree planting won't be sufficient. The UK's pledges to become carbon neutral (by 2030 or 2050?) will also have to take its spaceport emissions into account.

A Whale of a Time?

Elon Musk is offering a $100m Climate prize. The Whalex team of Australian scientists hope to collect some of this money. That team have been pumping simulated whale faeces into the ocean, off Sydney (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/24/can-fake-whale-poo-experiment-net-australian-scientists-a-share-of-elon-musks-us100m-climate-prize). The thinking is that the nutients in the fake whale poo will massively increase the growth of tiny phytoplankton in those waters. These unicellular plants photosynthesize, absorbing, as they do so, carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Removal of the 'greenhouse gas' might help to limit climate change. Having said that, Mr Musk appears more than willing to augment atmospheric carbon dioxide levels with his SpaceX initiatives.

Old King Coal

Experts at the Cop26 meeting, agreed there was an urgent imperative to stop burning coal. The Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air has found, however, that the pledges and targets extracted in Glasgow, are wholly inadequate to prevent a climate crisis (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2021/dec/23/why-cop26-coal-power-pledges-dont-go-far-enough-visualised). The Cop26 pledges and targets, as they stand, are insufficient to ensure that coal power in phased out quickly enough. Unless countries move faster to abandon coal as an energy source, the worst ravages of global heating cannot be avoided. Added to the problem is the backsliding on pledges evident in countries like the UK and US. Coal was supposed to be the easiest hydrocarbon to deal with.

An Andean Addition?

Global heating results in the climate becoming less dependable. Being unable to rely on the weather, is consequently a challenge for food security. This issue was faced by Peruvian farmers operating in the past (https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/dec/25/a-seed-for-all-seasons-can-ancient-methods-future-proof-food-security-in-the-andes). The Peruvian farmers operated on numerous small plots on the Andean mountainsides. The plots were at different levels on the mountains. The farmer's traditional techniques, encouraged the conservation of numerous varieties of maize (corn) and other biodiverse crops. This approach might well be applied by farmers in other locations, in attempts to counter the effects of climate change. Monocultures are unlikely to be resilient.

Season's Greetings and a Better 2022?

Those Microplastics Get Everywhere!

'Clean' air samples were filtered, between June and October 2017, at the Pic du Midi Observatory. The observatory is almost 3000m above sea-level in the French Pyrenees. Every single sample in this CNRS study contained microplastics (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/21/no-mountain-high-enough-study-finds-plastic-in-clean-air). Microplastics are even found high in the troposphere, where winds can carry them rapidly around the planet. Is it any wonder that these tiny pollutants are found from the top of Everest to the depths of the Mariana trench? Microplastics endanger the health of humans and other animals. Self-abuse?

Waste Not?

You might expect the Environmental Agency (EA) to have a powerful controlling role in pollution and waste disposal in England. George Monbiot points out that the EA has admitted that reports of pollution; illegal dumping of waste and other environmental damage are all increasing. It maintains, however, that grants for incident management have been reduced by 90% in the last 10 years (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/dec/24/dead-goldfish-licensed-waste-disposer-system-falling-apart). The EA have consequently instructed all its staff to only 'routinely spend time' on things that happen in areas, where they have defined legal responsibilities. The EA currently limits its work to incidents at regulated sites. Such incidents would involve radioactive waste, illegal waste (e.g. asbestos) and flood control. The EA also have responsibility for the release of raw sewage into rivers and seas by the privatised Water Companies. Recent reports suggest they are unlikely to get a 'gold star' for their efforts in this respect. For anything else, the complainant is to be urged to try to solve the problem by contacting the polluter. The EA admit that the UK has circa 250,000 unlicenced (i.e. illegal) disposers of waste. Just to demonstrate how pathetic the system has become, Monbiot registered his long-dead pet goldfish as an upper-tier, carrier, broker and dealer in waste. He did this is less than 4 minutes on the EA's website. 'Mr Goldfish' is still listed, a month later.

Whose Emissions Are They?

During Glasgow's Cop26, the UK government repeatedly pressured other countries to urgently abandon coal. This was on the logical basis that coal is the most polluting of hydrocarbon fuels and the biggest emitter of 'greenhouse gases'. Only a few weeks later, plans for an expansion of an underground coalmine in Wales, appear likely to be approved with the support of the UK government (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/dec/24/new-wales-coalmine-may-soon-be-approved-despite-cop26-pledges). Aberpergwm anthrocite mine is in the Neath Valley (South Wales). Over its life, the mine could generate 100m tonnes of carbon dioxide, as well as liberating methane (an even more potent 'greenhouse gas'). The mine was given an operational licence by the London-based Coal Authority in 2016. The devolved Welsh administration, were only given powers over their country's mining developments in 2018. They have used this power to ban open-cast mining of coal. The Welsh administration would also like to ban Aberpengwm's expansion. Whitehall, apparently doesn't take climate pledges too seriously. UK government is claiming it has jurisdiction over the expansion, which should go ahead. Money talks louder than pledges!

Some of My Favourite Pictures From the National Wetlands Centre Wales