go to homepageNewsletterSave this Site
Carbon Footprint Surveys Have an in depth assessment of your Business Carbon Emissions. more... Energy Performance Certificates More energy laws coming into force in 2008. more...
Porsche Challenges Congestion Charge Reuters 3rd April 2008 LONDON (Reuters) - Luxury carmaker Porsche launched a legal challenge on Wednesday to a tax on gas-guzzling cars proposed by London mayor Ken Livingstone who is campaigning for a third term in office.
Shop around for low carbon suppliers. Unwrapping the way forward at grass roots Home Climate change is high on consumers' shopping lists Customers are definitely leading companies to drive climate change and carbon reduction right up ...read
Europe - compost can turn agricultural soils into a carbon sink, thus protecting against climate change Applying organic fertilizers, such as those resulting from composting, to agricultural land could increase the amount of carbon stored in these soils and contribute significantly to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, according to new research. Carbon sequestration in soil has been recognized by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the European Commission as one of the possible measures through which greenhouse gas emissions can be mitigated. ScienceDaily reports that one estimate of the potential value of this approach -- which assumed that 20% of the surface of agricultural land in the EU could be used as a sink for carbon -- suggested it could constitute about 8.6% of the total EU emission-reduction objective. "An increase of just 0.15% in organic carbon in arable soils in a country like Italy would effectively imply the sequestration of the same amount of carbon within soil that is currently released into the atmosphere in a period of one year through the use of fossil fuels," write Enzo Favoino and Dominic Hogg, authors of the paper. "Furthermore, increasing organic matter in soils may cause other greenhouse gas-saving effects, such as improved workability of soils, better water retention, less production and use of mineral fertilizers and pesticides, and reduced release of nitrous oxide." However, capitalizing on this potential climate-change mitigation measure is not a simple task. The issue is complicated by the fact that industrial farming techniques mean agriculture is actually depleting carbon from soil, thus reducing its capacity to act as a carbon sink. According to Hogg and Favoino, this loss of carbon sink capacity is not permanent. Composting can contribute in a positive way to the twin objectives of restoring soil quality and sequestering carbon in soils. Applications of organic matter (in the form of organic fertilizers) can lead either to a build-up of soil organic carbon over time, or a reduction in the rate at which organic matter is depleted from soils. In either case, the overall quantity of organic matter in soils will be higher than using no organic fertilizer. "What organic fertilizers can do is reverse the decline in soil organic matter that has occurred in relatively recent decades by contributing to the build-up in the stable organic fraction in soils, and having the effect, in any given year, of ensuring that more carbon is held within the soil," they explain. But calculating the value of this technique to climate change policies is complicated. To refine previous calculations and to take account of the positive and negative dynamics of carbon storage in soil, Favoino and Hogg modelled the dynamics of compost application and build-up balancing this with mineralization and loss through tillage. Their results suggest that soils where manure was added have soil organic carbon levels 1.34% higher than un-amended soils, and 1.13% higher than soils amended with chemical fertilizers, over a 50-year period. "This is clearly significant given the evaluations reported above regarding carbon being lost from soils, and the increasing amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere," they say. The potential role of compost in reducing greenhouse gases by Enzo Favoino and Dominic Hogg is published on Monday 25 February in a special issue of Waste Management & Research, entitled Greenhouse Gases & Solid Waste Management.
UK - Britain invests in waste digesting energy plants Britain is to invest in several anaerobic digestion plants as it seeks to cut emissions of greenhouse gas methane and boost renewable energy production, Environment Minister Hilary Benn said on Monday. Reuters reports that Benn said the government would invest about £10 million ($19.50 million) to help build several commercial-scale anaerobic digestion demonstration plants. Anaerobic digesters take slurry, grass clippings, food waste and other agricultural products to produce heat or electricity and cut emissions of potent greenhouse gas methane. Agriculture emits about 7 percent of Britain's greenhouse gases and an industry report last year suggested that anaerobic digestors could cut UK methane emissions from dairy, cattle and fattening pig enterprises by up to 75 percent. "Anaerobic digestion has a lot of potential, not least because it will help us meet three of our needs at the same time," Benn said, noting it produced renewable energy, reduced emissions of greenhouse gas methane and helped to divert organic waste from landfill. Germany builds around 1,000 digesters a year and leads the world in the technology with Britain trailing far behind. Energy Minister Malcolm Wicks told the conference that proposals to build anaerobic digestion plants would receive "the top level of support" under proposed reforms to the government's renewable energy policy. "Farmers have a vital role to play in the UK in meeting our climate change targets and increasing our energy security," Wicks said.
UK - business `too busy to be green` New research finds senior business leaders expect the looming economic recession to hamper efforts to reduce energy consumption, including 'green' IT purchasing habits. Environmental Expert reports that a survey of senior UK business leaders has found that, with a pessimistic economic outlook, they are 'too busy to be green'. That's bad news from a technology perspective, where expenditure on installing energy efficient equipment is likely to suffer when UK companies are saying more difficult economic conditions are having a direct impact on their efforts to save energy. While installing energy efficient lighting topped the list of action taken by 53 per cent of respondents to a survey by energy company E. ON carried out by YouGov, lower heating and air conditioning consumption - which is normally a big part of data centre expenditure - and installing more energy efficient equipment were second and third most popular among 46 and 45 per cent respectively. And another survey of technology executives from 148 companies around the world released last week by consultancy, PriceWaterhouseCoopers found one in five (18 per cent) claim they practice environmentally preferred IT purchasing, where organisations select products and services that have a lesser effect on the environment than competitive products and services. Within the next two years, the Going Green: Sustainable Growth Strategies research carried out by the Economist Intelligence Unit said this figure will rise to over half (53 per cent). And this is backed by research firm Gartner, who last year said energy costs typically make up less than 10 per cent of an overall IT budget. But it warned that, if left unchecked, this could rise to more than 50 per cent in the next few years. However, with 71 per cent of senior business leaders predicting that the UK is either heading for, or already in, a recession, the E. ON survey of 500 UK businesses also revealed that less companies are planning to take action on reducing energy consumption in 2008 when compared to previous years. In 2006, 43 per cent of companies surveyed by E. ON said they took energy action. This peaked last year, rising to over half (52 per cent) of respondents. But only 34 per cent say they will be taking any action during this year, where nearly half say economic recession will impact their ability to be 'greener' by forcing them to cut back on time and resources dedicated to saving energy. And just one in eight actually plans to increase their energy saving initiatives in 2008 to help save money. And although energy is more of an issue than 12 months ago for one in five businesses, 86 per cent of all those questioned still didn't have someone dedicated to managing their energy use.
UK - "overpopulated" by 70 per cent If the UK had to provide for itself from its own resources, it could support a population of only 17 million - 43 million less than its latest official population figure* - according to new research by the Optimum Population Trust. Even if the UK dramatically improved its sustainability with a 60 per cent cut in carbon emissions by 2050 - the target set by the present Government - UK "overpopulation" would grow from 43 to 50 million, the research shows. This is because projected population growth of 17 million**, taking the country's population to 77 million by 2050, would cancel out the sustainability benefits of carbon savings. The sustainability of human populations: How many people can live on Earth?, is based on a new analysis of biological capacity and ecological footprinting data. It suggests that in 2003, the last year for which comprehensive data are available, total world population was 6.3 billion but the sustainable figure was 5.1 billion. Global overpopulation was thus 1.2 billion. However, as standards of living rise across the Earth and human footprints grow, the number of people the planet can support will diminish. The paper suggests that although the UN forecasts a world population rising to 9.2 billion by 2050, the Earth's long-term sustainable population is in the 2-3 billion range. For the UK, a sustainable population is estimated at between 17 and 27 million - less than half the current total and between a third and a fifth of the 85 million who will be living in the country in the last quarter of this century, according to the most recent Government projections**. The size of the discrepancy between the UK's actual population and the number of people it could support sustainably is a result of its affluence combined with a high population density, the paper says. The wealth and population density of the UK mean that its ecological footprint is 3.5 times greater than its biocapacity. If the whole world consumed and generated waste like the UK, it would require 3.5 (an additional 2.5) planets to sustain the human race. To live sustainably, the current UK population of 60 million would have to reduce its average individual footprint by more than 70 per cent. This would mean Britons living a lifestyle similar to citizens of countries such as China, Paraguay, Algeria, Botswana and the Dominican Republic. Even a zero-carbon Britain would have a maximum sustainable population of 40 million if it refused to change its lifestyle and its non-carbon footprint therefore remained unaltered. "In reality," the paper argues, "a 'zero-carbon' UK could never reach sustainability without population reduction: the lifestyle reductions demanded would be too great." The world was living within its ecological means until the 1980s, when it went into overshoot, the study says. Population growth is now the main cause of increasing overshoot, which will be running at almost 100 per cent by 2050: humanity will then be using up, annually, the equivalent of nearly two Earths. Currently, overshoot is 25 per cent, which means humanity requires one and a quarter Earths for its needs. The paper argues that the strain placed on the global ecosystem by such demands means that the UN's forecasts of a world population of over nine billion by 2050 are unlikely to be realised. Instead, resource wars and starvation "threaten the worst population crash in the history of humankind." Copies of the report The Sustainability of Human Populations: How many People can Live on Earth (0.4 MB) are available from the OPT's website at: http://www.optimumpopulation.org/HowManyPeople.pdf
USA - greenwashing "now rampant" Almost 100 percent of companies surveyed failed a green test, run by TerraChoice Environmental Marketing recently. In an effort to describe, understand, and quantify the growth of greenwashing, TerraChoice conducted a survey of six category-leading big box stores. Through these surveys, they identified 1,018 consumer products bearing 1,753 environmental claims. Of those 1,018 products examined, all but one made claims that are demonstrably false or that risk misleading intended audiences. The Six Sins of Greenwashing listed by TerraChoice are:
§ 1.Sin of the Hidden Trade-Off e.g. paper (including household tissue, paper towel and copy paper): "Okay, this product comes from a sustainably harvested forest, but what are the impacts of its milling and transportation? Is the manufacturer also trying to reduce those impacts?" Emphasizing one environmental issue isn't a problem (indeed, it often makes for better communications). The problem arises when hiding a trade-off between environmental issues.
§ 2.Sin of No Proof - e.g. Personal care products (such as shampoos and conditioners) that claim not to have been tested on animals, but offer no evidence or certification of this claim. Company websites, third-party certifiers, and toll-free phone numbers are easy and effective means of delivering proof.
§ 3.Sin of Vagueness e.g. Garden insecticides promoted as "chemical-free." In fact, nothing is free of chemicals. Water is a chemical. All plants, animals, and humans are made of chemicals as are all of our products. If the marketing claim doesn't explain itself ("here's what we mean by 'eco' …"), the claim is vague and meaningless. Similarly, watch for other popular vague green terms: "non-toxic", "all-natural", "environmentally-friendly", and "earth-friendly."
§ 4.Sin of Irrelevance e.g. CFC-free oven cleaners, CFC free shaving gels, CFC-free window cleaners, CFC-disinfectants. Could all of the other products in this category make the same claim? The most common example is easy to detect: Don't be impressed by CFC-free! Ask if the claim is important and relevant to the product. (If a light bulb claimed water efficiency benefits you should be suspicious.) Comparison-shop (and ask the competitive vendors)
§ 5.Sin of Fibbing e.g. Shampoos that claims to be "certified organic", but for which our research could find no such certification. When I check up on it, is the claim true? The most frequent examples in this study were false uses of third-party certifications. Thankfully, these are easy to confirm. Legitimate third-party certifiers - EcoLogoCM, Chlorine Free Products Association (CFPA), Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), Green Guard, Green Seal (for example) - all maintain publicly available lists of certified products. Some even maintain fraud advisories for products that are falsely claiming certification.
§ 6.Sin of The Lesser of Two Evils e.g. Organic tobacco. "Green" insecticides and herbicides. Is the claim trying to make consumers feel 'green' about a product category that is of questionable environmental benefit? Consumers concerned about the pollution associated with cigarettes would be better served by quitting smoking than by buying organic cigarettes. Similarly, consumers concerned about the human health and environmental risks of excessive use of lawn chemicals might create a bigger environmental benefit by reducing their use than by looking for greener alternatives. Says TerraChoice in their report: "Rather than lose to the competition and disappoint customers, partners and investors, these companies are doing whatever they can to meet consumers' "green" demand. Because there is a massive lack of standards and green measurement best practices, they join the bandwagon and push out a misleading claim or message…moving their industry backwards."
UK - report highlights essential role of renewable energy generation in achieving zero carbon homes A report from the Renewables Advisory Board (RAB), which advises Government on renewable energy issues, provides the first in depth analysis of the role of on site energy generation in the delivery of the Government's policy of ensuring that all new homes are zero carbon from 2016. Amongst it findings is the conclusion that the policy could drive a market for onsite renewable worth £2.3 billion a year from 2016. Other findings from the report, which was produced by Element Energy for RAB, are that: The electricity load created by appliances means that renewables are essential to meet zero carbon standards even where homes are built to the highest levels of energy efficiency The proposed timescale of the Government's green homes policy creates very little demand for renewable energy until 2016. From 2016 the market for onsite renewables rises dramatically and could be worth between £1.4 billion and £3 billion a year, with the base case estimating a market of £2.3 billion a year The projected annual uptake of on site generation is greater than UK manufacturing capacity for all renewable energy technology, and greater than global manufacturing capacity for a number of the most cost effective technologies Technologies that are likely to experience the highest levels of uptake are biomass combined heat and power and solar photovoltaics, but this is sensitive to the level at which government allows offsite generation The average cost of meeting zero carbon standards from on site renewables is expected to be £6,000 per dwelling, with higher costs for small urban developments and the lowest costs for large rural developments. On the basis of the reports findings RAB, which supports the zero carbon homes policy, has made three headline recommendations to Government: Change the proposed policy to create earlier stimulation for onsite renewable energy e. g. Encouraging local authorities to use the planning system to require zero carbon standards in the largest housing developments in advance of 2016. Accelerate the technological and commercial development of Biomass Combined Heat and Power (CHP) E. g. making deployment of biomass CHP a priority of the Environmental Transformation Fund. Minimise the use of remote offsite energy generation in meeting zero carbon standards E. g by settting a tight cap on its use and a high ' buy-out' cost for any offsite generation fund. A copy of the report is available for download from the RAB website: http://www.renewables-advisory-board.org.uk
Full report (PDF 560kb over 200 pages)
Keep in touch with your planet at Carbon Earth
For the latest information on Environmental Legislation you can look at E4 Environment