The Vestas occupation

July 30, 2009 08:28 by Carbonica

The debacle over the sit-in at the Vestas wind turbine factory in Newport highglights the tug of war that renewables companies are facing with local communities in the UK and Europe.  

The "not in my backyard" mentality is pricing these companies out of the market.

Vestas decided to shut the plant earlier this month and issued a statement saying "The local planning process for the construction of new onshore wind power plants in the United Kingdom remains an obstacle to the development of a more favourable market for onshore wind power". "Since offshore wind power is still on a project basis, a large and stable market for onshore wind power is vital to secure a stable production flow."

I think that says it all.

Whilst obviously we all sympathise with those who lose their jobs, we have to accept that renewable companies need incentives to grow from a market at its infancy and they need all forms of help not hindrance. Vestas's workers would have a better chance of securing their jobs if instead of occupying the factory in question they demonstrated against the local authority and did a sit in at the Council's offices, demanding that dimwits in charge of planning applications up and down the country stop holding the renewables industry to ransom.

In order to move forward the commitment to renewables, the UK government needs to find a formula to override local authorities and allow wind power companies like Vestas to expand their operation without any hurdles.

Carbon capture experiments are meeting the same type of opposition in Europe. In an excellent article that we've cited today ("Public wary of carbon capture"), Joshua Chaffin in the FT describes how people in the  Netherlands are opposing a Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) experiment with the fear that the CO2 stored underground could be a serious health hazard (if not fatal) if it's suddenly released into the air. Oil companies have been injecting CO2 in the seabed for decades and no one has paid any attention but now it becomes an issue when people feel CCS coal stations may be too close for comfort.

As it is, CSS experiments are running late and over budget, and no one seriously expects that they can deliver emission cuts for less than £20 per tonne. This is a crazy figure. One can plant so many trees for that amount and effectively capture via Nature's way many more tonnes of CO2 for the same amount of money, at the same time restoring forests and lifting communities out of poverty. With the opposition of local communities, unless governments take a tougher stance, there will be no chance to deliver any commercially realistic form of CSS on time.

 

Brunella

 

 

All comments are welcome, will be immediately displayed and this forum is not moderated. Your feedback is appreciated.

 

 


Be the first to rate this post

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Carbonica supports new UN carbon offsets

July 27, 2009 12:17 by Carbonica

The UN has given green light to two new generations of carbon offsets that will bring carbon reductions to a mass market in developing nations.

farm

The panel that oversees the running of the UN's Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) approved in principle last week a substantial project that will deploy over 30 million compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) in Mexico.

Details of the project can be found in www.unfccc.int.

The project is designed by energy efficiency project developer Cool nrg International and the CFLs will be distributed in phases over the next 2-3 years with the purpose of generating up to 7.5m offsets under the Kyoto's CDM scheme called Certified Emission Reductions (CER).

Each offset will account for the equivalent of one tonne of CO2 equivalent of greenhouse gas emissions.

CDM has been criticized for the high administration costs of rubberstamping the UN's approval. Trying to put together smaller projects that bring emissions reductions to significant numbers of people, such as energy efficient lighting schemes, is very expensive.

Under what is known as a programmatic CDM, developers deploy projects in unlimited numbers (in theory) providing each uses the same approved standards or methodologies from the outset. Therefore fees and redtape are kept to a minimum.

On the other hand, the UN also recently approved the the first agricultural methodology, or biological approach, for CDM projects. The UN’s announcement coincides with the USDA’s analysis report that shows the economic benefits to agriculture from the US cap-and-trade legislation.

The agricultural methodology, which will be used to design projects that eliminate the use of synthetic nitrogen on legumes like soybeans and cowpeas, was developed by Amson Technology LC, a greenhouse-gas-reduction and sustainability consulting firm, Becker Underwood Inc., a leading developer of bio-agronomic and specialty products and Perspectives GmbH, a Point Carbon company, a high-quality greenhouse gas reduction market solutions provider.

Carbonica very much supports these initiatives. We believe that they are very beneficial to developing nations, and they are pivotal in our global strategy to cut GHG emissions.

Brunella  

 

brunella@carbonica.org

 

 

All comments are welcome, will be immediately displayed and this forum is not moderated. Your feedback is appreciated.


Be the first to rate this post

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Carbonica featured on unmatchedstyle

July 24, 2009 03:00 by Carbonica

Many thanks to reader Julia Anderson for blogging about Carbonica and featuring it on unmatchedstyle.

She writes: "I’m loving the earthy textures, fun colors, illustrations and hand-drawn looking font."

Thank you Julia -- your comments are appreciated!

Some people have noticed that the layered textures in the background can be slow to load on older computers. I guess our designers counted on everyone having super-fast computers. Sorry about that. We will develop in less graphically-charged version keeping the good CSS techniquest that we have developed.

Many thanks

Brunella


Be the first to rate this post

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Tags:
Categories: green websites
Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (1) | Comment RSS

Carbonica featured on GottAQuirk

July 22, 2009 03:43 by Carbonica

 

Thank you to Zubeir Soeker for his mention of Carbonica on gottAquirk, a blog where readers discuss sites of note -- his comments and praise are noted and appreciated. He does mention the issues of navigation that we were already looking into redesigning, especially the vast swathes of terra morta on the left margin that we can populate with useful things. All wonderful projects will come in due course!

We have been cited a lot but sorry to all those we've failed to thank. I must get into the habit of thanking people (always say thanks when people say nice things about you!) individually on our blog. We love your feedback, so keep it coming!

 

Brunella

 

 

 

 

 


Currently rated 5.0 by 1 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Tags:
Categories: carbonica | green websites
Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (1) | Comment RSS

Book of the week

July 18, 2009 09:34 by Carbonica

The food wasted each day in the UK and the US alone would be enough to alleviate the hunger of 1.5bn people.

 

FT Weekend review, 18 July 2009

By Fiona Harvey

Next time you pick up a lunchtime sandwich, take a moment to think about where it has come from. Think of the effort it took to grow the wheat for the bread, to feed the cows to make the cheese, to cultivate the salad from seed. Imagine if you took a few bites from it and simply threw the rest straight in the bin. And if you did that every day, with everything you ate.

Supermarkets and high-street sandwich chains regularly discard a quarter as many sandwiches as they sell. Most of that food is perfectly edible, but little of it is given away to the poor or homeless. Instead, it is destroyed and often sent to landfill. Meanwhile, 1bn people go hungry, in a globalised economy.

Consumers are no better. In the UK alone, according to government estimates, a third of the food we buy goes into the bin. The appalling amounts wasted in restaurants and fast food eateries is another story. Tristram Stuart’s Waste: Uncovering the Global Food Scandal lays bare our wasteful habits, from the farm to shrinkwrapped supermarket packaging and beyond. Stuart, a freegan and environmental campaigner, has based his book on painstaking research carried out over several years of first-hand experience of foraging in supermarket bins, as well as interviews with company executives and trawls through the meagre data provided by governments and businesses.

The book, with 68 pages of detailed notes and 69 pages of bibliography, bristles with facts but points also to the huge gaps in our knowledge of waste. Most retailers, for instance, prefer not to say how much food they waste, regarding it as a trade secret. Giving it away would put them at a competitive disadvantage, they tell Stuart.

Waste is certainly one of the most important environmental books to come out in years. But it is more than that. It is an indictment of our consumer culture that should make us all feel deeply ashamed. The scale of our food waste problem – and its effect on the developing world – revealed in this book will leave you shocked. And, the author hopes, demanding change.

Avoiding the unnecessary wasting of food is deeply ingrained in most cultures. “Your eyes are bigger than your belly” was how children who helped themselves to more than they could eat were scolded in the Belfast of my childhood. Those who failed to finish, or gorged themselves on too much, would be reminded first of the starving children in Africa then, for good measure, of the Irish famine of the 1840s.

. . .

We need not go back so far to discover raw memories of food shortages. Rationing during the second world war and early 1950s left its mark on British life for decades, and famines during and following the war scarred Europe and parts of Asia. In the past two decades, we have seen famines in Africa roll horrifically across our television screens.

Human societies have found ingenious ways to eke out our valuable food resources: to store, pickle and preserve; to find uses for byproducts; to fatten animals on scraps; and even to burn or distil the last residues. Much of our cultural heritage is defined by what we eat. As Stuart reminds us in his chapter-heading – quotations from the Bible, Koran and folk sayings – we have evolved elaborate rules and customs that embody the imperative to use food efficiently.

Yet our culture of thrift, built up over millennia, seems to have broken down within a few decades into a culture of carelessness. The food wasted each day in the UK and the US alone would be enough to alleviate the hunger of 1.5bn people – more than the global number of malnourished. How did this happen?

Retailers must shoulder a large part of the blame. The illusion of plenty they like to foster, by constantly refilling shelves and ensuring there is always more food than can be bought in a day, comes in for an excoriating attack. These practices, in turn, force suppliers to overproduce for fear that if the retailer runs out of a product, they will be held to blame.

If this sounds like poor economics, it isn’t. Food has become so cheap in most developed countries that retailers make more profit from selling one more sandwich than they lose from throwing it in the bin if it remains unsold. So overstacking the shelves is a no-brainer.

Food producers play along because they need to keep their contracts with retailers, and they incorporate the cost of waste into their products.

Stuart records seeing stacks of ready-meals, metres high, being crushed at a food producer’s plant instead of being sold. They had not even passed their sell-by date – it was just that the retailer decided it did not need so many. They were retailer branded, so could not be sold elsewhere. The edible food had to be landfilled.

Red tape does not help. Confusion over best-before, sell-by and display-by dates causes massive waste of edible food. So did the over-regulation, until recently, of food sizes and shapes by the European Union. As a result of a knee-jerk reaction by the UK government after the foot-and-mouth disease outbreak in 2001, food scraps from school kitchens and the like cannot even be given to pigs as swill.

Stuart catalogues appalling waste all through the food supply chain: the farmer whose tasty, blemish-free carrots are only deemed fit to feed animals because they are a mite too bendy to be sold in supermarkets, which assume buyers can only cope with straight veg; retail chains that padlock their bins or deliberately spoil the edible contents, for fear their customers will forage in them; consumers who fall for buy-one-get-one-free offers to buy food they will not eat.

Wasting food in rich countries cannot be seen in a vacuum. It has a disastrous effect on the poor. Cheap food is an illusion – the pressure on agricultural land for people to feed themselves and produce for export markets is causing widespread deforestation in the Amazon, south-east Asia and Africa, and soil degradation across the world. Our careless waste pushes up prices for globalised commodities such as grain and rice, forcing poor people to go hungry or beggar themselves.

This book exposes all of these effects clearly, logically and readably. It made me more angry than any book I have read for a long time.

 

Copyright 2009 The Financial Times Limited

 

 


Be the first to rate this post

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Tags:
Categories: waste
Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (1) | Comment RSS

Time to go nuclear

July 17, 2009 05:03 by Carbonica

The UK government announced this week the first ever carbon budget to cut emissions by 34% from 1990 levels by 2020. Electricity generated from renewables will go up from 9% to 31%.

Electricity generation is the biggest factor in our carbon footprint and it is essential to generate clean electricity in order to decarbonise the economy.

The disappointing element in the carbon budget is that the share of electricity generated by nuclear power comes down from 13% (at present) to 8% (forecast for 2020). From 2020 onwards it is expected that the share will go up with new nuclear plants being built which are now at a planning/drawing board stage.

Britain is rich in resources for wind and tidal energy generation. These are expensive to implement and notoriously unreliable and are unlikely to meet the UK's escalating demands in the next decades, as more household power demand is switched from gas to electricity and combustion motor vehicles gradually phased out in favour of EVs. In view of this, it is essential that all efforts are made to generate electricity in the cleanest possible way.

CSS is an exciting possibility and it's encouraging that developed countries are investing heavily on research to implement this technology (yet untried and untested on a commercial basis). When and if CSS is a reality, it will be the environmentalist's holy grail because we do have coal by the truckload to see to our energy needs for the next century, and so do China and India, who would greatly benefit from retrofitting their coal-fired stations.

However our surest bet at the moment in order to supply reliable and zero carbon electricty at a scale that we can comfortably predict we will meet all future demand is  nuclear power. Our capacity to generate electricity with nuclear energy must be dealt with urgently and the process of planning and building of nuclear stations should be accelerated as a matter of urgency. It is absurb to sit on our hands for over a decade until 2020 while our nuclear capacity is steadily eroded.

A dramatic increase of nuclear capacity can single-handedly deliver a 57% reduction of emissions by 2020, thus comfortably offsetting other emissions such as aviation.

Brunella

brunella@carbonica.org

 

Comments are welcome and are not moderated.

 


Currently rated 5.0 by 1 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

The Manchester Report

July 16, 2009 07:34 by Carbonica

The Guardian newspaper published on Monday a selection of the top ten ideas to combat climate change.

The article is entitled "The Manchester Report" - it's so ridiculous, you've got to laugh. The name of the report is apparently "to underscore the city's carbon hungry past" and the Guardian gathered there last weekend a bunch of candidates who pitched their global warming busting ideas to a panel. The result is the top ten selection (plus the ten runners up).

I completely miss the point of meeting in Manchester, that Ian Katz deputy editor calls "the birthplace of man-made global warming". You've got to be kidding. Poor manchunians, they are so doomed. Who is doing their PR? Is there some alignment of planets or secret sorcerer's motive to meet up at the centre of this epicentre of pollution that will bring about the solution? Answers please.

Since Mr Katz (who is described as "deputy editor responsible for environmental coverage") has decided that industrial manufacturing is the key culprit and origin of global warming then we know the answer (and blame) sounds like it's got to be in Manchester. Bless. I adore to be in the company of intellectual giants.

I must apologise for my flippant tone, but this article is infuriating because it's very much a case of the elephant in the room. Let me explain. As it's no secret that we believe in reforestation as the main solution to global warming, imagine the anti-climax when I didn't see it even mentioned in the top ten, or the runners up. The small matter of deforestation (it alone causes more GHG emissions than could be saved by any of the top ten candidates on the list) and the even smaller matter of protecting our rainforests (whose surface area is in direct correlation with the planet's ability to capture CO2) doesn't obviously deserve the attention of the Guardian's panel and we understand that. We wouldn't expect them to be interested in anything so obvious if one tries to be cutting edge and in order to justify a "report" and expenses for a weekend away in the pit of pollution then one needs to be more recherche.

 

Brunella

brunella@carbonica.org

 

 

Comments are welcome and unmoderated. Irrelevant or inappropriate comments will be removed.


Currently rated 5.0 by 1 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Carbonica supports Prince Charles's awareness campaign to save the rainforests

July 13, 2009 10:45 by Carbonica

Prince Charles's campaign to save the rainforests is going from strength to strength. Carbonica fully supports the campaign and we'd like to ask everyone to visit the website, www.rainforestSOS.org, to demonstrate your support for urgent action. 

The campaign began in May as an initiative to create a climate of awareness and public concern that encourages action to end tropical deforestation. The focal point of the campaign is a 90-second public awareness film, created by the agency HMDG, in which the Prince of Wales appears alongside his sons, Prince William and Prince Harry, an array of well-known figures including Harrison Ford, the Dalai Lama, Daniel Craig, Robin Williams and children from around the world.

Each individual appears alongside an animated frog. The frog, created by Framestore, the Oscar-winning computer generated imagery (CGI) experts behind the film The Golden Compass, serves as a symbol of the rainforest.

The film can be viewed, and the public can demonstrate their support for the cause by visiting www.rainforestSOS.org or by texting ‘SOS’ and their email address to 60777*.

The campaign was given a substantial boost by fashion icon and now environmental activist Vivienne Westwood, who appeared last Friday on Jonathan Ross's BBC1 programme and urged everyone to sign up to the campaign.

 

Brunella

brunella@carbonica.org

 

Comments are welcome and unmoderated. Inappropriate comments will be removed.


Be the first to rate this post

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Search

Calendar

July 2010
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
27282930123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
1234567