bemoreeco

A new report has been released which suggests that altering the clocks in the UK by one hour could have a significant impact on carbon emissions.

The research was led by Dr Elizabeth Garnsey at Cambridge University and was based on the concept of putting the clocks forward by one hour, meaning the UK would be on GMT+1 in the winter and GMT+2 in the summer.

Such a move would save half a million tonnes of carbon emissions in the winter alone, the report published in Energy Policy suggested.

The study was carried out on behalf of the 10:10 climate change movement, which is currently running a Lighter Later campaign.

Dr Garnsey said: “The carbon savings associated with this clock change are significant, equivalent to the carbon footprint of the production of 1,800 plastic bags for every home in Britain every year, or taking around 200,000 cars off the road.”

To compile the study, researchers looked at half hourly electricity usage over the winter months and assessed how this was affected by the clocks changing.

The 10:10 campaign aims to current carbon emissions by ten percent this year, with the London Underground recently becoming the latest organisation to sign up.

>>> Please read the full article here

Clean water campaigners Surfers Against Sewage (SAS) and four of the UK’s best Stand Up Paddle-boarders aim to cross the English Channel and set two new Guinness world records in one go, with a relay team and a solo paddler taking on the challenge. The SAS 2010 Challenge will launch on the day with optimum conditions, during the week of the 18th – 25th of June.

Launching from either Shakespeare’s Bay or Sapphire Hoe the champion paddlers will be aiming to raise £10,000 for SAS’s campaigns, celebrate the organisations 20th anniversary and mark International Surfing Day (double check date20thof June). Success is a real possibility and the relay team are the first ever team to attempt the famous crossing. They include 2009 UK stand up paddleboarding champion Jock Patterson, Matt Argyle (Chairman of the British Stand Up Paddle Association (BSUPA) and ranked 2nd in the UK for stand up paddleboarding) and Simon Bassett (BSUPA head coach) will be joined by 2005 European, reigning Welsh longboarding champion and SAS South Wales rep Elliot Dudley, for his solo attempt. All of the paddlers have been training hard, putting in hundreds of lonely hours on the water and are extremely determined to claim these world records and raise as much money for SAS as possible.

Stand-up paddleboarding has become extremely popular amongst recreational water users across the UK and this will be the first official attempt of its kind. The current record was set by a prone paddleboarder, the USA’s Michael O’Shaughnessy in 2006 in 5 hours and 9 minutes. During the week of the 18th – 25th of June, SAS and the paddlers will be poised, waiting for the best tides and conditions in which to complete the grueling, 21 mile crossing in record time.

The event has been put together by SAS with the support of BSUPA, and the paddlers aim to raise £10,000 in sponsorship money to support SAS’s campaigns to protect surfers, waveriders, waves and beaches around the UK. If you would like to sponsor the 2010 Challenge please go to www.justgiving.com/2010challenge and make a donation. You can also check out the paddlers training blog on www.supglobal.com.

Elliot Dudley, solo record paddler, says: “I am really looking forward to taking on this famous challenge and I hope that I will be reaching France as a world record holder. What makes this even more exciting is the opportunity to raise both money and awareness for SAS. As a passionate surfer and SAS Rep, I feel that the work SAS is doing is vital for the UK’s marine environment”

Hugo Tagholm, SAS’s Executive Director, says: “These guys are the best paddlers in the country and we are hoping for a great attempt. It’s fitting that in our 20th year SAS are still pushing the boundaries and supporting the development of recreational watersports. All the money raised will help us to continue developing our campaigns, making recreational waters safe for all. Good luck to the boys!”

The last winter was the coldest the UK has experienced in 30 years and the harsh climate has now proved to have been particularly damaging to honey bees.

According to the British Beekeepers’ Association, around 17 per cent of the country’s population of the insects was lost to the cold.

However, there was some good news for bees, as in the last three years the number of hives has doubled to 80,000.

The association said the figures showed a “small” but “encouraging improvement” as it was revealed that the winter had a less damaging impact on bee populations than in previous years.

President Martin Smith said: “It shows our honeybees are slowly moving out of intensive care, but they are still not healthy enough.”

Many eco products make use of honey in their ingredients, including beauty lotions and potions.

Last year, the Telegraph reported that the Public Accounts Committee had estimated £200 million-worth of crops could be lost if bee numbers continue to decline.

>>> Please read the full article here

By Victoria Gill
Science reporter, BBC News

Climate change could wipe out 20% of the world’s lizard species by 2080, according to a global-scale study.

An international team of scientists also found that rising temperatures had already driven 12% of Mexico’s lizard populations to extinction.

Based on this discovery, the team was able to make global predictions using an “extinction model”.

They conclude, in an article in Science journal, that “lizards have already crossed a threshold for extinctions”.

Although the grim prediction for 2080 could change if humans are able to slow global climate warming, the scientists say that a sharp decline in their numbers had already begun and would continue for decades.

The large research team was led by Barry Sinervo from the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of California in Santa Cruz, US.

He said: “We are actually seeing lowland species moving upward in elevation, slowly driving upland species extinct, and if the upland species can’t evolve fast enough then they’re going to continue to go extinct.”

Lizards, the researchers say, are far more susceptible to climate-warming extinction than previously thought. Many species live right at the edge of their “thermal limits”.

Rising temperatures, they explained, leave lizards unable to spend sufficient time foraging for food, as they have to rest and regulate their body temperature.

A group of biologists including Dr Raymond Huey from the University of Washington in Seattle wrote an accompanying article in Science explaining the significance of the research.

Dr Huey and his colleagues said the predictions were “disturbing”.

But they pointed out that follow-up surveys were needed to confirm the results.

“Lizard populations rise and fall over time and failure to detect individuals during short surveys may indicate transient rarity rather than extinction,” they wrote.

But their article went on to say that the research team had shown that “climate-forced extinctions were not only in the future” but were “happening now”.

>>> Please read the full article at the BBC website, here

Air travel is a major contributor to carbon emissions from many developed countries. In 2006, aviation alone accounted for 6.4 per cent of the UK’s CO2 emissions. It is predicted that unless changes take place this figure could rise to ten per cent.

 Friends of the Earth calculate that worldwide more than 600 million tonnes of carbon dioxide are emitted from flights each year, the same amount, it claims, as that released by all human activity in Africa.

What’s more, aviation can also have a significant impact on the quality of the air. Kerosene, the main component of most jet fuels, releases gases like carbon monoxide alongside CO2. 

This has led to companies looking for new ways to mitigate some of the effects of flying and earlier this month United Airlines became the first commercial carrier in the US to operate a flight using synthetic jet fuel, made from natural gas.

Created by the US firm Rentech, the synthetic fuel reduces ground level pollution by emitting 96 per cent less particles from an idle engine. 

The firm claims that the lower density of the fuel allows for a lighter takeoff weight, meaning less fuel is used during the flight. This fuel is also used by the US air force.

United Airlines sent up a team of 19 engineers and observers to assess both the performance and environmental benefits of the fuel. 

However, it could be many years before synthetic jet fuels become the norm within the industry. 

One option which is available now is carbon offsetting. The UK government’s offsetting scheme offers air travellers the opportunity to pay someone to make a reduction equivalent to the emissions from that flight.

Projects which the government says have already benefitted from the scheme include hydroelectric power plants in Fiji and wind energy schemes in Cyprus.

Although with the cost of such schemes being passed directly to the consumer, some may doubt how great the uptake will be.

There is also, of course, the solution of using air travel less. 

The results of the United Airlines test flight are due to be released within the next week, but how long will it be before a definitive answer on how best to make the aviation industry more environmentally friendly is revealed?

>>> Please read the full article here

Virtually all modern businesses rely on a sophisticated system of IT for support. So much so that some organisations spend over 50 per cent of their IT budget on the energy to power it, a new book claims.

Green IT for Sustainable Business Practice calls on those responsible for the company’s IT systems to set carbon reduction targets for themselves and become better acquainted with the regulation surrounding the industry.

However, the issues relating to the carbon emissions of IT systems are extremely complex. While they are huge consumers of energy, they provide thousands of benefits to businesses of all sizes and will have a significant role to play in the transition to a low carbon economy.

Increasingly, businesses are using virtualisation technologies, such as cloud computing, as a way of reducing their outgoings on costly IT equipment. A report by Gartner earlier this year suggested that by the year 2020, 20 per cent of firms will not own any IT assets.

This is perhaps one of the best examples of how energy-efficient technologies can have a positive impact on the bottom line.

Gartner also claimed that personal computers use ten times their weight in fossil fuels over their lifetime and PC manufacture and transportation accounts for 80 per cent of a computer’s total energy consumption. It predicts this figure will reduce to 60 per cent in 2012, as more customers look for information on carbon dioxide emissions before purchasing a product.

Beyond this IT solutions like video conferencing can allow firms to reduce their reliance on road transport and aviation. As well as reducing carbon emissions, this helps boost efficiency, and again can lead to a positive effect on the bottom line.

Hi-tech IT systems installed in vehicles can also cut carbon emissions by enabling technology to operate more effectively and informing users of their energy usage.

With the book predicting that in the future the IT could fall under the same level of scrutiny as the aviation industry, is it time that companies begin to consider the role of technology in moving towards a low carbon economy? And, exactly how far should that role extend?

>>> Please read the full article here

Earlier this month, the Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC) was introduced in the UK. All larger organisations and companies are required to take part and purchase allowances from the government for each tonne of CO2 they emit.

Australia’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS), which is similar to the CRC, was one of the country’s major initiatives in its fight to cut carbon emissions by 2020. The scheme would have required businesses to purchase permits in order to emit the gas into the atmosphere.

However, it has been announced this week that prime minister Kevin Rudd has taken the decision to shelve the CPRS until 2013 at the earliest.

Initially plans were to put the programme into action by July 2011, with the aim of reducing carbon emissions by 25 per cent by 2020. This would have also provided a serious boost to Australia’s low carbon economy.

The reasons behind the delay were said to be twofold.

According to the government, not enough progress was being made on a new pact on climate change ahead of the expiration of the Kyoto Protocol in 2012.

In Mr Rudd’s own words this, “will provide the Australian government at the time with a better position to assess the level of global action on climate change.”

However, there was also opposition to the carbon trading scheme from the Upper Senate of the Australian government, which is not controlled by Mr Rudd’s ruling Australian Labor Party.

Before Mr Rudd took the decision to delay, the plans for the CPRS in Australia were rejected twice. The second time was just before the Copenhagen Summit in late 2009 after a supporter in an opposition party backtracked on his support.

Under the CPRS a cap would be placed on the emissions released by businesses in Australia which would be lowered over time. Businesses would be able to trade emissions permits between themselves, providing they never exceed the government’s cap, and potentially save vast sums of money on their energy bills.

Questions are now being asked as to whether the move is further confirmation that the lack of agreement which came out of Copenhagen will hinder the efforts of those determined to combat climate change.

And if this is the case, has the country missed out on a golden opportunity to show climate change skeptics and the international community the growing financial benefits of a low carbon economy?

>>> Please read the full article here

Disturbing evidence that honeybees are in terminal decline has emerged from the United States where, for the fourth year in a row, more than a third of colonies have failed to survive the winter.

The decline of the country’s estimated 2.4 million beehives began in 2006, when a phenomenon dubbed colony collapse disorder (CCD) led to the disappearance of hundreds of thousands of colonies. Since then more than three million colonies in the US and billions of honeybees worldwide have died and scientists are no nearer to knowing what is causing the catastrophic fall in numbers.

The number of managed honeybee colonies in the US fell by 33.8% last winter, according to the annual survey by the Apiary Inspectors of America and the US government’s Agricultural Research Service (ARS).

The collapse in the global honeybee population is a major threat to crops. It is estimated that a third of everything we eat depends upon honeybee pollination, which means that bees contribute some £26bn to the global economy.

Potential causes range from parasites, such as the bloodsucking varroa mite, to viral and bacterial infections, pesticides and poor nutrition stemming from intensive farming methods. The disappearance of so many colonies has also been dubbed “Mary Celeste syndrome” due to the absence of dead bees in many of the empty hives.

In the UK it is still too early to judge how Britain’s estimated 250,000 honeybee colonies have fared during the long winter. Tim Lovett, president of the British Beekeepers’ Association, said: “Anecdotally, it is hugely variable. There are reports of some beekeepers losing almost a third of their hives and others losing none.” Results from a survey of the association’s 15,000 members are expected this month.

Flowering plants require insects for pollination. The most effective is the honeybee, which pollinates 90 commercial crops worldwide. As well as most fruits and vegetables – including apples, oranges, strawberries, onions and carrots – they pollinate nuts, sunflowers and oil-seed rape. Coffee, soya beans, clovers – like alfafa, which is used for cattle feed – and even cotton are all dependent on honeybee pollination to increase yields.

In the UK alone, honeybee pollination is valued at £200m. Mankind has been managing and transporting bees for centuries to pollinate food and produce honey, nature’s natural sweetener and antiseptic. Their extinction would mean not only a colourless, meatless diet of cereals and rice, and cottonless clothes, but a landscape without orchards, allotments and meadows of wildflowers – and the collapse of the food chain that sustains wild birds and animals.

>>> Please read the full article here

For many countries around the world the task they face in the coming years is how to create a more sustainable environment while still competing in the global economy.

This represents a significant challenge, as businesses have often been reluctant to change their practices for fear of them impacting on their bottom line.

However, the annual Climate Competitiveness Index, compiled by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and non-profit organisation AccountAbility, suggests that many nations are already making strides in this area.

Simply put, a country’s climate competitiveness is measured by its accountability, defined as the clarity and support for its policies, and its performance – whether its track record suggests it is able to implement the changes.

The report analysed the activities of 95 major countries across the world. Together, these nations account for 97 per cent of the world’s economic activity and 96 per cent of its carbon emissions.

Germany, Europe’s largest economy, was shown to be performing well in many areas. It was named as an “outstanding example” of a country which is making significant strides towards a low carbon economy.

The country was also said to have achieved “consistent progress” in combining climate accountability with performance, which UNEP said is the key to increasing Climate Competitiveness.

Sweden, Denmark, Japan and France were all shown to be performing well in this area. North Africa and the Middle East region were of the worst performers in both areas.

In terms of the performance index, the UK was shown to be the strongest nation in the world. However, it lagged behind a number of other European countries when it came to accountability.

The Low Carbon Economy Limited partnership with UNEP can be found by clicking here. It includes data and policy, country by country, which can be viewed and analysed.

UNEP suggested that the countries which performed well in the index had a strong record in reporting and managing carbon emissions, as well as developing their range of low carbon products and services.

It said that a network of organisations dedicated to the support of low carbon growth was present in those which performed best.

But in Bolivia, Ghana, Vietnam and Bangladesh, concern among members of the population was a key driver and in Scandinavia and Singapore businesses were playing a major role.

All signs point to the routes leading to a low carbon economy being varied, which begs the question, is the UK currently travelling down the right one?

>>> Please read the full article here

As one of the largest consumers of oil in the world, there is a terrible irony in the events which are currently taking place off the coast of the US.

Up to 5,000 barrels of oil a day are currently flowing into the Gulf of Mexico, according to estimates from the US coastguard. And as of this morning Louisiana has been placed under a state of emergency as this oil started washing up on shore.

The leak is coming from BP’s Deepwater Horizon rig in the Gulf, which was damaged in an explosion last week that killed 11 people and critically injured two more.

Efforts which are being made to control the spill include undertaking a controlled burn of some of the oil on the surface, the deployment of booms to stop the pollution spreading and the use of chemicals to disperse the oil.

To stop the leak all together BP may have to place a cap on the well, which could take weeks to complete. If this does not succeed they may be forced to drill a relief well, which will take three months.

And while the immediate concern has been to try and contain the spill, attentions are now turning towards the long-term impact that the situation could have on the US – and not just in terms of the huge level of environmental damage.

Since coming into office, President Obama has been working on his energy and climate change bill, which has received much opposition.

Most recently, a joint effort between the Democrats and Republicans to pass the bill in the Senate failed after a key figure removed his support.

The bill pledges to cut the US’s emissions by 17 per cent on 2005 levels by the year 2020. To do this it proposes a series of changes to both levels of consumption and the US’s energy mix, including less of a reliance on foreign oil.

However, as a huge consumer of power, the US must find a major source of domestic energy production. Prior to this week’s events, it was thought that this plan could include drilling for oil within US waters.

Reuters reports that the country has not ruled out the possibility of suspending any further deep water drilling until companies prove they are able to handle spills.

But in the long term, will the oil spill prompt the US to rethink its plans for its energy policy? Or once the clean-up is complete will the country simply continue to consume fossil fuels and ignoring the costs, which as this most recent incident has proven, are human, environmental and economical.

>>> Please read the full article here