Associated Press
TOKYO – Toyota Motor Corp. got 180,000 orders for the new Prius hybrid in Japan in just a month, far surpassing its target of 10,000 vehicles in monthly sales, the automaker said Friday.
The third-generation Prius, which rolled out a month ago, has been a big hit here, partly because of tax-breaks and other new government incentives that are meant to perk growth during the nation's downturn.
The Prius was the No. 1 selling vehicle in Japan for May, clinching the top spot in the domestic market for the first time and overtaking Honda's new hybrid, the Insight, which fell to third after taking the top spot in April.
A worker examines a newly assembled Prius at Toyota Tsutsumi Plant in Toyota, central Japan, in this photo taken on June 5, 2009.
Competition in the hybrid vehicle market has intensified after the Insight debuted in February in Japan at 1.89 million yen ($19,700). Toyota is offering its new Prius at just over ¥2 million, about ¥300,000 cheaper than the previous model. The upgrade has a larger 1.8-liter engine but gets better mileage than the older one.
The new Prius is just starting to arrive in the U.S., where sales for last month totaled just 700. Dealers are still selling mostly the second-generation Prius, making for total Prius sales of 10,091 for May, Toyota spokesman Paul Nolasco said.
Strong hybrid sales are a rare bright spot for Japan's automakers, which have been battered by the global slowdown, a strengthening yen and the U.S. credit crunch.
Toyota, the world's biggest automaker, which also makes the Camry sedan and Lexus luxury models, recorded its worst loss in its seven-decade history for the fiscal year ended March.
In Japan, hybrids are now tax-free, delivering savings of about ¥150,000 for a Prius buyer. Other fuel-efficient models qualify for lower savings.
Also helping is a "cash-for-clunkers" program similar to the plan initiated by President Barack Obama, which offers vouchers worth up to $4,500 for a gas-guzzler turned in for a new car in the U.S.
In Japan, people who trade in a car 13 years or older get a ¥250,000 rebate for buying an ecological model. Those without a trade-in get ¥100,000.
Toyota is also continuing to sell the old-style Prius in Japan at the same price as the Insight. That's relatively unusual as manufacturing of old models is usually discontinued with the arrival of the new model. Those sales numbers aren't included in Friday's orders number from Toyota.
But while hybrid sales are booming, demand for other models is plunging.
The overall auto market continues to sag in Japan. Vehicle sales in Japan fell for the 10th straight month in May, dropping 19.4% from the same month the previous year, according to the Japan Automobile Dealers' Association.
The decline has been easing from previous months as sales fell 29% in April and 31.5% in March. Toyota's vehicle sales in Japan tumbled 24% in May from the same month a year ago.
Copyright © 2009 Associated Press
Saturday, 20 June 2009
Japan looking sunny for makers of solar panels
The Times
June 20, 2009
Robert Lindsay
Talk that the clouds were finally lifting from the world’s solar power market helped to make PV Crystalox Solar, the long-suffering solar supplier, the second-best performer in the FTSE 350.
Kyocera Corp, of Japan, the world’s sixth-largest solar panel maker, triggered the sunny mood when it reported a 50 per cent increase in orders for rooftop panels from households in January to April.
Japan is the remaining hope for PV Crystalox, which supplies panel manufacturers such as Kyocera with wafers.The Japanese Government has moved to bolster demand for solar panels and next year hopes to guarantee prices for surplus electricity produced by home panels. No one knows if this will be enough to counteract falling demand from Europe, but Kyocera said that there had been improvement in European orders. Sharp, PVC’s biggest customer, recently predicted that its solar panel business would return to profit next year, amid a surge in demand from Japan.
David Cunningham, an analyst at Arbuthnot, reiterated “buy” advice with a 160p target. PVC rose 8p, 10 per cent, to 89¾p.
The FTSE 100 closed up 65.07 points at 4,345.93 amid high-volume trading, with banks and commodity stocks on the rise. Most traders refused to trust the move since it came on “triple witching” day, when futures and options expire and funds must close positions and reinvest.
There was a sudden rise in the index in mid-morning, rumoured to be driven by frantic buying by a fund that had missed an auction. The FTSE 350’s top gainer was Mitchells & Butlers as Joe Lewis, the Bahamas-based billionaire, who has been critical of the pub group’s management, raised his stake from 21.7 to 22.3 per cent.
Carnival, the cruise ship operator, continued to recover after its outlook statement on Thursday, which was better than expected, gaining 97p to £16.68. Aviva, the insurer, was bolstered 18½p to 336¾p by a “buy” note from Deutsche Bank, which lifted its price target from 350p to 385p.
Smiths Group fell 14½p to 649p, making an 11 per cent slide over the week, amid concerns over the weak dollar and slow orders for its detection business and medical products, which are squeezed by hospital budget cuts.
British Airways rose 1.9p to 136.4p despite rising crude prices amid suggestions that shareholders might not object if it followed Air France-KLM, which on Thursday announced a €575 million convertible bond issue.
Taylor Wimpey, up 3p at 34p, led a housebuilders’ rally after saying that there were signs of housing market stability. Berkeley Group rose 18½p to 773p despite Saad selling down more of its stake.
Rightmove, the home search website, rose 4¼p to 350p after it briefed analysts that the number of estate agents closing had dropped sharply and that it believed house prices will increase next year. Cannacord, the broker, raised its target price to 387p.
• New York: Microsoft offered encouragement to Wall Street as its shares rose 2.6 per cent after Goldman Sachs’ announcement that it expected growth from the software group. The Dow Jones industrial average was at 8,556.13 points, up 0.53, at midday.
June 20, 2009
Robert Lindsay
Talk that the clouds were finally lifting from the world’s solar power market helped to make PV Crystalox Solar, the long-suffering solar supplier, the second-best performer in the FTSE 350.
Kyocera Corp, of Japan, the world’s sixth-largest solar panel maker, triggered the sunny mood when it reported a 50 per cent increase in orders for rooftop panels from households in January to April.
Japan is the remaining hope for PV Crystalox, which supplies panel manufacturers such as Kyocera with wafers.
David Cunningham, an analyst at Arbuthnot, reiterated “buy” advice with a 160p target. PVC rose 8p, 10 per cent, to 89¾p.
The FTSE 100 closed up 65.07 points at 4,345.93 amid high-volume trading, with banks and commodity stocks on the rise. Most traders refused to trust the move since it came on “triple witching” day, when futures and options expire and funds must close positions and reinvest.
There was a sudden rise in the index in mid-morning, rumoured to be driven by frantic buying by a fund that had missed an auction. The FTSE 350’s top gainer was Mitchells & Butlers as Joe Lewis, the Bahamas-based billionaire, who has been critical of the pub group’s management, raised his stake from 21.7 to 22.3 per cent.
Carnival, the cruise ship operator, continued to recover after its outlook statement on Thursday, which was better than expected, gaining 97p to £16.68. Aviva, the insurer, was bolstered 18½p to 336¾p by a “buy” note from Deutsche Bank, which lifted its price target from 350p to 385p.
Smiths Group fell 14½p to 649p, making an 11 per cent slide over the week, amid concerns over the weak dollar and slow orders for its detection business and medical products, which are squeezed by hospital budget cuts.
British Airways rose 1.9p to 136.4p despite rising crude prices amid suggestions that shareholders might not object if it followed Air France-KLM, which on Thursday announced a €575 million convertible bond issue.
Taylor Wimpey, up 3p at 34p, led a housebuilders’ rally after saying that there were signs of housing market stability. Berkeley Group rose 18½p to 773p despite Saad selling down more of its stake.
Rightmove, the home search website, rose 4¼p to 350p after it briefed analysts that the number of estate agents closing had dropped sharply and that it believed house prices will increase next year. Cannacord, the broker, raised its target price to 387p.
• New York: Microsoft offered encouragement to Wall Street as its shares rose 2.6 per cent after Goldman Sachs’ announcement that it expected growth from the software group. The Dow Jones industrial average was at 8,556.13 points, up 0.53, at midday.
The race is on to create a new world of energy
The Times
June 20, 2009
Jeroen van der Veer
We stand at the early dawn of a new energy future. It will be powered by alternative energy and cleaner fossil fuels. If governments adopt the right rules and incentives, by the middle of this century renewable sources will provide nearly 30 per cent of the world’s energy. Society will be on the road toward sustainable mobility. The world’s highways will rumble and whir with vehicles powered by all manner of energy: petrol, diesel (yes, still there), electricity, biofuels, natural gas and hydrogen.
In the years ahead, conventional diesel and petrol cars will go increasingly far on every litre of fuel. Biofuels will account for up to 10 per cent of liquid transport fuel in the next few decades. Our Shell scenario-makers think that by 2020 up to 15 per cent of new cars worldwide could be hybrid electrics, such as Toyota’s Prius, some of them capable of plugging in to recharge their batteries. After 2030, fuel cell vehicles powered by hydrogen will be a small but growing part of the fleet. By 2050, more than a billion extra vehicles are expected on the world’s roads, more than double today’s total.
Greater variety of fuel choices will be a boon for consumers. Different fuels will be stronger in different regions. In South America, biofuels will likely predominate. In Brazil, ethanol from sugar cane already supplies more than 40 per cent of demand for petrol. China, meanwhile, plans to expand production and use of hybrid and electric vehicles, tapping its vast coal deposits to generate power.
As more vehicles go electric, the environmental footprint of the world’s power generators will become even more important. Wind, solar and hydropower will account for 30 per cent of electricity generation by 2030, up from about 18 per cent today. Many new coal-fired power plants are expected to capture CO2 emissions and store it safely underground, rather than pump it into the atmosphere. Plants increasingly will turn coal into a gas, rather than burn it. They will then burn the gas to generate power, or use it as raw material for a variety of chemical products, while CO2 will be captured and stored. Such integrated plants will begin to resemble refineries. Likewise, refineries can gasify heavy oils — and use the gas to produce hydrogen — and generate heat and electricity — while capturing and storing the CO2.
Indeed, fossil fuels, coal, oil and natural gas, will continue to provide more than half the world’s energy in 2050, building a long bridge to an era when alternatives can take over. A growing population and higher standards of living for billions of people in the developing world will mean that we need all available sources of energy to keep the world’s economies humming. So, while the world races to build up alternative fuels, it must also find new sources of fossil fuels, including unconventional ones, such as oil sands. And we must accelerate efforts to make fossil fuels cleaner, by reducing the CO2 emitted in their production and use.
None of this will be easy, or cheap. Industry and government regulations must change on a huge scale and at an unprecedented pace. According to the International Energy Agency, by 2030 we will need to invest $5.5 trillion merely in renewable energy. That’s like buying more than 18,000 Boeing 747 jumbo jets at $300 million apiece (only about 14,000 have been built since its introduction in 1970). Billions more must go into upgrading electricity transmission networks to handle increased demand and the on-and-off power generated by wind and solar.
Much of this money will come from private companies, but governments will need to continue using tax credits and other incentives to encourage the growth of renewables. They are still small relative to the world’s overall energy needs. Including hydropower, renewables account for about 7 per cent of global energy. Wind today supplies about 1 per cent, with approximately 70,000 turbines. Biofuels, thanks partly to billions of dollars in government subsidies, now also supply about 1 per cent.
To judge from society’s experience with nuclear power and other technologies, new energy sources take at least 25 years to reach significant scale. To illustrate the challenge, in the case of wind the world will need another 1-1.5 million turbines covering an area nearly the size of France in order to reach 10 per cent of the electricity generated by 2030. That means expanding today’s worldwide turbine production of about 15,000 a year to just under 100,000 a year by 2030.
Energy companies are already preparing for the future, increasing production of natural gas, the cleanest fossil fuel, investing in renewables, such as sustainable biofuels, and researching ways to capture CO2 and store it safely underground. But the enormity of the challenge means that government should do its part to encourage society’s shift to a new energy system. For instance, new technologies with great promise to reduce CO2 emissions will require initial government support to achieve quickly the scale necessary to have real impact.
One critical step is to put a price on greenhouse gas emissions — doing so in all leading countries, not merely a few. I prefer a system that caps emissions and allows companies to trade emission allowances, as Europe’s already does. Cap-and-trade systems should encourage a relatively steady CO2 price, which will have the strongest influence on energy consumers’ behaviour and on the efficiency designed into factories, homes and offices. It will also harness the ingenuity of industry and channel investment to the most efficient emission reductions.
While energy policy can drive technology, it may ultimately raise costs and be politically unpopular. As society and political leaders face difficult choices, they should remember that failure to act now could force us into more painful choices down the road.
Influencing consumer behaviour may prove toughest of all. While technology will give society greater energy choices, it remains unclear whether people are willing to become better users of energy.
Despite the massive hurdles, the push to create a new energy system will benefit us all. It will reverse the rapid rise in the greenhouse gas emissions responsible for global warming. It will provide new business opportunities for companies and entrepreneurs. It will create well-paid jobs in a thriving new industry. Competition among energy sources will drive innovation, keep energy affordable and increase global energy security. The race is on.
• Jeroen van der Veer is the departing chief executive of Royal Dutch Shell
June 20, 2009
Jeroen van der Veer
We stand at the early dawn of a new energy future. It will be powered by alternative energy and cleaner fossil fuels. If governments adopt the right rules and incentives, by the middle of this century renewable sources will provide nearly 30 per cent of the world’s energy. Society will be on the road toward sustainable mobility. The world’s highways will rumble and whir with vehicles powered by all manner of energy: petrol, diesel (yes, still there), electricity, biofuels, natural gas and hydrogen.
In the years ahead, conventional diesel and petrol cars will go increasingly far on every litre of fuel. Biofuels will account for up to 10 per cent of liquid transport fuel in the next few decades. Our Shell scenario-makers think that by 2020 up to 15 per cent of new cars worldwide could be hybrid electrics, such as Toyota’s Prius, some of them capable of plugging in to recharge their batteries. After 2030, fuel cell vehicles powered by hydrogen will be a small but growing part of the fleet. By 2050, more than a billion extra vehicles are expected on the world’s roads, more than double today’s total.
Greater variety of fuel choices will be a boon for consumers. Different fuels will be stronger in different regions. In South America, biofuels will likely predominate. In Brazil, ethanol from sugar cane already supplies more than 40 per cent of demand for petrol. China, meanwhile, plans to expand production and use of hybrid and electric vehicles, tapping its vast coal deposits to generate power.
As more vehicles go electric, the environmental footprint of the world’s power generators will become even more important. Wind, solar and hydropower will account for 30 per cent of electricity generation by 2030, up from about 18 per cent today. Many new coal-fired power plants are expected to capture CO2 emissions and store it safely underground, rather than pump it into the atmosphere. Plants increasingly will turn coal into a gas, rather than burn it. They will then burn the gas to generate power, or use it as raw material for a variety of chemical products, while CO2 will be captured and stored. Such integrated plants will begin to resemble refineries. Likewise, refineries can gasify heavy oils — and use the gas to produce hydrogen — and generate heat and electricity — while capturing and storing the CO2.
Indeed, fossil fuels, coal, oil and natural gas, will continue to provide more than half the world’s energy in 2050, building a long bridge to an era when alternatives can take over. A growing population and higher standards of living for billions of people in the developing world will mean that we need all available sources of energy to keep the world’s economies humming. So, while the world races to build up alternative fuels, it must also find new sources of fossil fuels, including unconventional ones, such as oil sands. And we must accelerate efforts to make fossil fuels cleaner, by reducing the CO2 emitted in their production and use.
None of this will be easy, or cheap. Industry and government regulations must change on a huge scale and at an unprecedented pace. According to the International Energy Agency, by 2030 we will need to invest $5.5 trillion merely in renewable energy. That’s like buying more than 18,000 Boeing 747 jumbo jets at $300 million apiece (only about 14,000 have been built since its introduction in 1970). Billions more must go into upgrading electricity transmission networks to handle increased demand and the on-and-off power generated by wind and solar.
Much of this money will come from private companies, but governments will need to continue using tax credits and other incentives to encourage the growth of renewables. They are still small relative to the world’s overall energy needs. Including hydropower, renewables account for about 7 per cent of global energy. Wind today supplies about 1 per cent, with approximately 70,000 turbines. Biofuels, thanks partly to billions of dollars in government subsidies, now also supply about 1 per cent.
To judge from society’s experience with nuclear power and other technologies, new energy sources take at least 25 years to reach significant scale. To illustrate the challenge, in the case of wind the world will need another 1-1.5 million turbines covering an area nearly the size of France in order to reach 10 per cent of the electricity generated by 2030. That means expanding today’s worldwide turbine production of about 15,000 a year to just under 100,000 a year by 2030.
Energy companies are already preparing for the future, increasing production of natural gas, the cleanest fossil fuel, investing in renewables, such as sustainable biofuels, and researching ways to capture CO2 and store it safely underground. But the enormity of the challenge means that government should do its part to encourage society’s shift to a new energy system. For instance, new technologies with great promise to reduce CO2 emissions will require initial government support to achieve quickly the scale necessary to have real impact.
One critical step is to put a price on greenhouse gas emissions — doing so in all leading countries, not merely a few. I prefer a system that caps emissions and allows companies to trade emission allowances, as Europe’s already does. Cap-and-trade systems should encourage a relatively steady CO2 price, which will have the strongest influence on energy consumers’ behaviour and on the efficiency designed into factories, homes and offices. It will also harness the ingenuity of industry and channel investment to the most efficient emission reductions.
While energy policy can drive technology, it may ultimately raise costs and be politically unpopular. As society and political leaders face difficult choices, they should remember that failure to act now could force us into more painful choices down the road.
Influencing consumer behaviour may prove toughest of all. While technology will give society greater energy choices, it remains unclear whether people are willing to become better users of energy.
Despite the massive hurdles, the push to create a new energy system will benefit us all. It will reverse the rapid rise in the greenhouse gas emissions responsible for global warming. It will provide new business opportunities for companies and entrepreneurs. It will create well-paid jobs in a thriving new industry. Competition among energy sources will drive innovation, keep energy affordable and increase global energy security. The race is on.
• Jeroen van der Veer is the departing chief executive of Royal Dutch Shell
Senergy makes a break for expanding Middle East renewables
Published Date: 20 June 2009
By PETER RANSCOMBE
SCOTLAND can learn from Middle East renewable energy projects, according to the head of a fast-growing energy firm.
James McCallum, the chief executive and founder of the Aberdeen-based energy services firm Senergy, said he wanted to bring back knowledge and experience from the United Arab Emirates to help develop Scotland's renewable energy sector.McCallum recently moved to Abu Dhabi to expand Senergy's work in the Middle East, building on the firm's experience in the North Sea oil and gas sector.First Minister Alex Salmond yesterday opened Senergy's new office in Edinburgh, from where the firm will train clients.Senergy, which employs about 400 staff, said it wanted to expand its work in the renewables sector, which accounts for about 3 per cent of the company's £70 million turnover.The firm said it aims to double its turnover in the next three years and wants 40 per cent of its revenues to come from the renewable energy sector by 2013.McCallum told The Scotsman: "In ten years' time, it's impossible to imagine Senergy being successful and still based solely in the North Sea. We need to be in the Middle East market."But the other thing that's exciting about being in the Middle East is that, ironically for the lowest-cost producing region in the world in terms of fossil fuels, in cities like Abu Dhabi, you're seeing an awareness of the need for balanced energy."They're taking a more enlightened approach to what they can do. So they're investing in solar power and also looking at wind and carbon capture."
The End of the Line is making waves for fish stocks recovery
Retailers are beginning to respond but we must keep up the pressure for sustainable catches
Felicity Lawrence
guardian.co.uk, Friday 19 June 2009 16.58 BST
The End of the Line began life as a ground-breaking book by the environment journalist Charles Clover in 2004. It was an impassioned description of the wanton destruction being wreaked on fish stocks by industrial fishing round the world. It left me feeling both angry and despondent. Now it's been turned into a film of the same title, and it's a must-see.
Perhaps it's the gorgeous, uplifting pictures of underwater life, or the fact that Charles has kept going with his crusade for over 20 years, but the effect on me of the film was different: it's more galvanising than depressing. It too makes you angry, but film has the power to reach a wider audience and it feels as though this one may just lead to action. If it doesn't, as Prof Boris Worm, the gloriously named marine conservation expert who appears in it, says, we'll end up with no seafood at all in 50 years' time.
Humanity has always exploited the oceans, but until the 1950s our ability to inflict damage on the sea was restricted by the physical limitations of boats and the elements. Since then, highly capitalised, often subsidised fleets with more and more advanced equipment have been able to exploit every last depth, deploying technologies originally designed for military use – from sonar to satellite mapping – to target everything that moves. Governments and the industrial fishing industry with their annual quotas and over-optimistic calculations of stocks persist in the notion that we can negotiate with biology. But we can't.
It was another marine conservationist, Prof Callum Roberts, who first helped me see how our current fishing policy would end in collapse.
He has a collection of old photographs of fishermen and their catch going back a hundred years and more. Irish fishermen in the early 20th century standing next to common skate caught near their shores that were nearly twice their own size; the common skate as its name implies was abundant then but is now extinct in many areas. The hold of a 1905 Lowestoft fishing boat employing over a dozen men is so bursting with mackerel that the fish fill the decks to the gunnels. Anglers of the time stand next to their trawl from a day's leisurely fishing: prize specimens so large and plentiful they are strung up row upon row. They reminded me of the Victorian pictures of old colonial hunters in Africa photographed next to their bag from a day's hunting. They happily shot every tiger that moved, little thinking they might wipe them all out.
Roberts is a great optimist though. He says that where marine reserves are introduced and proper no-catch zones are enforced before areas collapse, biodiversity can recover quite well and fish stocks around the exclusion zones can increase, giving fishermen batter catches. It is nearly, but not completely, too late.
Fortunately, consumer attitudes are changing. When I wrote my own chapter on fish in Eat Your Heart Out in 2008, about 7% of world fish stocks were certified or being assessed by the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) as sustainable sources of seafood. Supermarkets and high street chains were beginning to respond to pressure from campaign groups such as Greenpeace to take endangered species out of their shops.
Now, the supermarkets have increased their targets for sustainable fish, and The End of the Line's film release has prompted a flurry of announcements – most notably from M&S and Pret a Manger – to move even faster. And there's no doubt the MSC label is starting to appear on a wider range of fish in supermarkets and restaurants.
There is reason to hope that fish stocks can still recover, but we need to keep asking for sustainable catches. Keep the pressure up.
Felicity Lawrence
guardian.co.uk, Friday 19 June 2009 16.58 BST
The End of the Line began life as a ground-breaking book by the environment journalist Charles Clover in 2004. It was an impassioned description of the wanton destruction being wreaked on fish stocks by industrial fishing round the world. It left me feeling both angry and despondent. Now it's been turned into a film of the same title, and it's a must-see.
Perhaps it's the gorgeous, uplifting pictures of underwater life, or the fact that Charles has kept going with his crusade for over 20 years, but the effect on me of the film was different: it's more galvanising than depressing. It too makes you angry, but film has the power to reach a wider audience and it feels as though this one may just lead to action. If it doesn't, as Prof Boris Worm, the gloriously named marine conservation expert who appears in it, says, we'll end up with no seafood at all in 50 years' time.
Humanity has always exploited the oceans, but until the 1950s our ability to inflict damage on the sea was restricted by the physical limitations of boats and the elements. Since then, highly capitalised, often subsidised fleets with more and more advanced equipment have been able to exploit every last depth, deploying technologies originally designed for military use – from sonar to satellite mapping – to target everything that moves. Governments and the industrial fishing industry with their annual quotas and over-optimistic calculations of stocks persist in the notion that we can negotiate with biology. But we can't.
It was another marine conservationist, Prof Callum Roberts, who first helped me see how our current fishing policy would end in collapse.
He has a collection of old photographs of fishermen and their catch going back a hundred years and more. Irish fishermen in the early 20th century standing next to common skate caught near their shores that were nearly twice their own size; the common skate as its name implies was abundant then but is now extinct in many areas. The hold of a 1905 Lowestoft fishing boat employing over a dozen men is so bursting with mackerel that the fish fill the decks to the gunnels. Anglers of the time stand next to their trawl from a day's leisurely fishing: prize specimens so large and plentiful they are strung up row upon row. They reminded me of the Victorian pictures of old colonial hunters in Africa photographed next to their bag from a day's hunting. They happily shot every tiger that moved, little thinking they might wipe them all out.
Roberts is a great optimist though. He says that where marine reserves are introduced and proper no-catch zones are enforced before areas collapse, biodiversity can recover quite well and fish stocks around the exclusion zones can increase, giving fishermen batter catches. It is nearly, but not completely, too late.
Fortunately, consumer attitudes are changing. When I wrote my own chapter on fish in Eat Your Heart Out in 2008, about 7% of world fish stocks were certified or being assessed by the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) as sustainable sources of seafood. Supermarkets and high street chains were beginning to respond to pressure from campaign groups such as Greenpeace to take endangered species out of their shops.
Now, the supermarkets have increased their targets for sustainable fish, and The End of the Line's film release has prompted a flurry of announcements – most notably from M&S and Pret a Manger – to move even faster. And there's no doubt the MSC label is starting to appear on a wider range of fish in supermarkets and restaurants.
There is reason to hope that fish stocks can still recover, but we need to keep asking for sustainable catches. Keep the pressure up.
Friday, 19 June 2009
Climate Talks Ease Concern in Farm Belt
By IAN TALLEY
WASHINGTON -- House Democrats are on the verge of a deal with rebelling Farm Belt legislators on a climate-change bill, a move that could pave the way for a full House vote on legislation as soon as next week.
Dozens of Democrats -- mostly from Midwest agricultural states -- are concerned that the bill, which aims to cut greenhouse-gas emissions, could disproportionately raise energy prices for residents and businesses in their states.
Lawmakers and industry officials close to the negotiations said the two sides could reach an agreement within days, under which rural utilities could receive a small share of free emission credits -- less than 1% of the total that would be handed out. The credits allow the holder to emit a certain amount of greenhouse gases.
"We're very optimistic about progress" in negotiations, said Drew Hammill, a spokesman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.). "We should know in the next couple of days if we'll be able to introduce the bill next week."
If a deal is reached, prospects for passage in the House are stronger than in the Senate, where many lawmakers still have reservations about the climate-change proposal. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) said he planned to take up a version of the House bill later this year.
Under the deal, distribution of the credits to the electric industry would be based largely on retail sales, not emissions. Since many rural states rely on coal-fired power and have fewer customers than coastal states, their electric bills could rise disproportionately. The additional credits would help them offset the costs of cutting greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide.
The deal also could appease Farm Belt lawmakers by giving the U.S. Agriculture Department's Farm Service Agency greater involvement in oversight of the market for "offsets," credits for projects that cut greenhouse gases. Many of the projects would likely come from the agriculture sector, such as planting trees that absorb carbon dioxide.
Write to Ian Talley at ian.talley@dowjones.com
WASHINGTON -- House Democrats are on the verge of a deal with rebelling Farm Belt legislators on a climate-change bill, a move that could pave the way for a full House vote on legislation as soon as next week.
Dozens of Democrats -- mostly from Midwest agricultural states -- are concerned that the bill, which aims to cut greenhouse-gas emissions, could disproportionately raise energy prices for residents and businesses in their states.
Lawmakers and industry officials close to the negotiations said the two sides could reach an agreement within days, under which rural utilities could receive a small share of free emission credits -- less than 1% of the total that would be handed out. The credits allow the holder to emit a certain amount of greenhouse gases.
"We're very optimistic about progress" in negotiations, said Drew Hammill, a spokesman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.). "We should know in the next couple of days if we'll be able to introduce the bill next week."
If a deal is reached, prospects for passage in the House are stronger than in the Senate, where many lawmakers still have reservations about the climate-change proposal. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) said he planned to take up a version of the House bill later this year.
Under the deal, distribution of the credits to the electric industry would be based largely on retail sales, not emissions. Since many rural states rely on coal-fired power and have fewer customers than coastal states, their electric bills could rise disproportionately. The additional credits would help them offset the costs of cutting greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide.
The deal also could appease Farm Belt lawmakers by giving the U.S. Agriculture Department's Farm Service Agency greater involvement in oversight of the market for "offsets," credits for projects that cut greenhouse gases. Many of the projects would likely come from the agriculture sector, such as planting trees that absorb carbon dioxide.
Write to Ian Talley at ian.talley@dowjones.com
Benn warns on climate challenge
By Clive Cookson, Science Editor
Published: June 18 2009 23:00
Britain faces a century of sweltering summers, with more extremes of both flooding and drought, according to the latest assessment of the impact of global warming on the UK climate. Sea level is likely to rise by 36cm by 2080 – with an outside chance of a 1-metre rise.
“The real message of these projections is that we have got to respond, we’ve got to act,” Hilary Benn, environment secretary, said on Thursday. “Climate change is the greatest challenge that we face as a world.”
The study, carried out by the Meteorological Office, is a much more elaborate and detailed reworking of the UK Climate Impact Projections originally published in 2002. It uses the latest scientific models to produce what the Met Office calls “the most comprehensive set of probabilistic climate projections at the regional scale compiled anywhere in the world”.
The conclusions are broadly consistent with those reached seven years ago, though the projected temperature changes are more alarming and the rainfall changes less so. While southern England is likely to have 20 per cent less summer rainfall in the 2080s than today, the risk of a severe decline leading to desert-like conditions is less than previously estimated.
But average summer temperatures are projected to rise by 1.6ºC during the 2020s and about 4ºC in the 2080s. The build-up of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that has already taken place through human activities means that summers will be at least 2ºC hotter in the 2040s, whatever international agreements are reached to cut future emissions.
“We now know that some further climate change over the next two to three decades is already unavoidable,” said John Beddington, the government chief scientist. “But what the projections also show is that strong mitigation action now can start to make a real difference by 2050 and lead to very different climate outcomes by the 2080s.”
In a business-as-usual high-emissions scenario, peak summer temperatures in the south-east could be 12ºC above today’s, with summer highs in London regularly exceeding 40ºC. That is 2ºC above the record UK temperature, recorded in Gravesend during the heatwave of August 2003.
Winter rainfall is projected to rise by 10-20 per cent over most of the country by the 2080s. And the number of intense rainstorms will increase throughout the year, leading to a greater risk of flooding.
The report drew strong support from all sides of the political spectrum and from environmental campaigners. “This extremely valuable report is an important wake-up call on the need for urgent action to slash emissions,” said Andy Atkins, executive director of Friends of the Earth.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009
Published: June 18 2009 23:00
Britain faces a century of sweltering summers, with more extremes of both flooding and drought, according to the latest assessment of the impact of global warming on the UK climate. Sea level is likely to rise by 36cm by 2080 – with an outside chance of a 1-metre rise.
“The real message of these projections is that we have got to respond, we’ve got to act,” Hilary Benn, environment secretary, said on Thursday. “Climate change is the greatest challenge that we face as a world.”
The study, carried out by the Meteorological Office, is a much more elaborate and detailed reworking of the UK Climate Impact Projections originally published in 2002. It uses the latest scientific models to produce what the Met Office calls “the most comprehensive set of probabilistic climate projections at the regional scale compiled anywhere in the world”.
The conclusions are broadly consistent with those reached seven years ago, though the projected temperature changes are more alarming and the rainfall changes less so. While southern England is likely to have 20 per cent less summer rainfall in the 2080s than today, the risk of a severe decline leading to desert-like conditions is less than previously estimated.
But average summer temperatures are projected to rise by 1.6ºC during the 2020s and about 4ºC in the 2080s. The build-up of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that has already taken place through human activities means that summers will be at least 2ºC hotter in the 2040s, whatever international agreements are reached to cut future emissions.
“We now know that some further climate change over the next two to three decades is already unavoidable,” said John Beddington, the government chief scientist. “But what the projections also show is that strong mitigation action now can start to make a real difference by 2050 and lead to very different climate outcomes by the 2080s.”
In a business-as-usual high-emissions scenario, peak summer temperatures in the south-east could be 12ºC above today’s, with summer highs in London regularly exceeding 40ºC. That is 2ºC above the record UK temperature, recorded in Gravesend during the heatwave of August 2003.
Winter rainfall is projected to rise by 10-20 per cent over most of the country by the 2080s. And the number of intense rainstorms will increase throughout the year, leading to a greater risk of flooding.
The report drew strong support from all sides of the political spectrum and from environmental campaigners. “This extremely valuable report is an important wake-up call on the need for urgent action to slash emissions,” said Andy Atkins, executive director of Friends of the Earth.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009
A healthy natural environment is our safety net for climate change
Conservation is now about adaptation – and we must allow natural processes to function if we are to survive, writes Helen Phillips
Helen Phillips
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 18 June 2009 14.25 BST
Today is a significant one for our thinking about climate change, with the latest government projections now suggesting that average summer temperatures will increase by up to 6C, with peaks in London over 40C..
Even under the old scenarios we were looking at a life-changing alteration in our climate and we have already had a taste of some of the potential impacts – the heatwave of 2003, for example, resulted in the death of over 2,000 people in the UK. By the 2040s, that could be just another normal summer. And floods such as those we saw in 2007 – and which cost an estimated £3bn – will be far more commonplace.
These changes will also have an enormous impact on our wildlife and the habitats they rely on. Some of our green and pleasant land could become a dry and dusty one within decades, and some of our native species will face a major struggle for survival.
In the face of these challenges , the imperative of conservation is no longer – if it ever was – about preservation: it's about adaptation and enabling the environment to function naturally. In the process, we may need to accept that some of our wildlife – especially species at the edge of their range – will leave us.
A few animals, like the capercaillie, mountain ringlet or mountain hare, are facing extinction if climate change takes hold in the way that is predicted. But the majority of our wildlife will adapt to the climate if we enable it to do so – by improving natural habitats or managing our landscapes so that they species can migrate in step with the climate. And at the same time we have already seen new species from overseas colonising these shores in increasing numbers – little egrets are now well established, turtles are more commonly sighted off our coastline and butterflies are moving in from Europe.
To some, a healthy natural environment may seem an unaffordable luxury when society is faced with major climatic threats to homes and livelihoods. Many will argue that we need to invest more heavily in technology, to build bigger defences and to put the environment on the backburner – and in some instances, we may have no choice if we are to defend some highly vulnerable communities. But as the default solution, that cannot be the way forward. If we do not work with nature to a much greater degree than in recent decades, we are doomed to failure in the battle against climate change.
To cope with climate change we have to allow natural processes within the environment to function and we need to resist the interference that has characterised so much of our approach over the last century. Collectively we have to ensure that the critical services that a healthy environment delivers are able to operate unimpeded.
For example, peatbogs are the most important store of carbon in the UK – storing more than all the forests of Germany and France combined. Saltmarsh protects hundreds of miles of the British coastline at no cost. The free flood control and storm buffering benefits provided by coastal habitats like saltmarsh and sand dunes have been estimated at over £1bn per year.
Together, land and the oceans absorb around half of all human-produced greenhouse gas emissions. Urban green spaces help cool surrounding built up areas by up to 4C and protecting upland rivers can increase the supply of fresh drinking water – vital given the likely decrease in rainfall. Conserving a healthy natural environment is therefore not only morally correct, it is cost-effective action preparing our nation for the impacts of global warming.
Viewed in this light we are remarkably ill-prepared for the challenges ahead. During the last half century we have, as a society, put in place some spectacularly high hurdles in the way of our ability to respond to environmental change.
Much of our coastline is "defended" by concrete structures that have no capacity to adapt to rising sea levels and in some cases make erosion worse; we have overgrazed and damaged many of our peatlands that play such a critical role in absorbing and storing greenhouse gases; we have exploited our farmland so that soils are damaged and fertility decreased. We have overfished our seas so that fish stocks may simply find the changing climate too much to bear, and crash permanently. On the land, development, pollution and intensive agriculture have forced species to retreat to isolated and fragmented habitats that leave no room for them to move when climate change starts to hit.
Protecting and working with nature makes economic sense, and can be done now. Continuing to rely on as yet undeveloped technologies as our safety net for climate change would be nothing short of a disaster.
• Helen Phillips is the chief executive of Natural England
Helen Phillips
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 18 June 2009 14.25 BST
Today is a significant one for our thinking about climate change, with the latest government projections now suggesting that average summer temperatures will increase by up to 6C, with peaks in London over 40C..
Even under the old scenarios we were looking at a life-changing alteration in our climate and we have already had a taste of some of the potential impacts – the heatwave of 2003, for example, resulted in the death of over 2,000 people in the UK. By the 2040s, that could be just another normal summer. And floods such as those we saw in 2007 – and which cost an estimated £3bn – will be far more commonplace.
These changes will also have an enormous impact on our wildlife and the habitats they rely on. Some of our green and pleasant land could become a dry and dusty one within decades, and some of our native species will face a major struggle for survival.
In the face of these challenges , the imperative of conservation is no longer – if it ever was – about preservation: it's about adaptation and enabling the environment to function naturally. In the process, we may need to accept that some of our wildlife – especially species at the edge of their range – will leave us.
A few animals, like the capercaillie, mountain ringlet or mountain hare, are facing extinction if climate change takes hold in the way that is predicted. But the majority of our wildlife will adapt to the climate if we enable it to do so – by improving natural habitats or managing our landscapes so that they species can migrate in step with the climate. And at the same time we have already seen new species from overseas colonising these shores in increasing numbers – little egrets are now well established, turtles are more commonly sighted off our coastline and butterflies are moving in from Europe.
To some, a healthy natural environment may seem an unaffordable luxury when society is faced with major climatic threats to homes and livelihoods. Many will argue that we need to invest more heavily in technology, to build bigger defences and to put the environment on the backburner – and in some instances, we may have no choice if we are to defend some highly vulnerable communities. But as the default solution, that cannot be the way forward. If we do not work with nature to a much greater degree than in recent decades, we are doomed to failure in the battle against climate change.
To cope with climate change we have to allow natural processes within the environment to function and we need to resist the interference that has characterised so much of our approach over the last century. Collectively we have to ensure that the critical services that a healthy environment delivers are able to operate unimpeded.
For example, peatbogs are the most important store of carbon in the UK – storing more than all the forests of Germany and France combined. Saltmarsh protects hundreds of miles of the British coastline at no cost. The free flood control and storm buffering benefits provided by coastal habitats like saltmarsh and sand dunes have been estimated at over £1bn per year.
Together, land and the oceans absorb around half of all human-produced greenhouse gas emissions. Urban green spaces help cool surrounding built up areas by up to 4C and protecting upland rivers can increase the supply of fresh drinking water – vital given the likely decrease in rainfall. Conserving a healthy natural environment is therefore not only morally correct, it is cost-effective action preparing our nation for the impacts of global warming.
Viewed in this light we are remarkably ill-prepared for the challenges ahead. During the last half century we have, as a society, put in place some spectacularly high hurdles in the way of our ability to respond to environmental change.
Much of our coastline is "defended" by concrete structures that have no capacity to adapt to rising sea levels and in some cases make erosion worse; we have overgrazed and damaged many of our peatlands that play such a critical role in absorbing and storing greenhouse gases; we have exploited our farmland so that soils are damaged and fertility decreased. We have overfished our seas so that fish stocks may simply find the changing climate too much to bear, and crash permanently. On the land, development, pollution and intensive agriculture have forced species to retreat to isolated and fragmented habitats that leave no room for them to move when climate change starts to hit.
Protecting and working with nature makes economic sense, and can be done now. Continuing to rely on as yet undeveloped technologies as our safety net for climate change would be nothing short of a disaster.
• Helen Phillips is the chief executive of Natural England
Malaria, freak storms and great white sharks: what may lie ahead for the UK
Scientists today produced a detailed map of how climate change is expected to affect every part of the UK over the next century. David Adam looks at what the findings will mean for various aspects of life in the UK
David Adam
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 18 June 2009 17.38 BST
Public health
The Department of Health predicts about 1,000 more heat-related deaths each year by the 2020s, mainly among sick and elderly people, rising to 2,800 by the 2080s. Warmer weather could help stomach bugs to thrive, and could see an extra 14,000 cases of food poisoning by the 2080s. But warmer winters are expected to save many people from cold-related deaths, with numbers down 14,000 by the 2020s and 29,000 by the 2080s. Malaria could appear in Britain by mid-century if mosquitoes flourish, but is unlikely to pose a major threat. But increased exposure to ultra-violet light beneath cloudless skies could cause 2,000 extra cases of cataracts each year and 30,000 more cases of skin cancer by the 2050s.
Agriculture
Current levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are below the optimum for photosynthesis, so rising carbon emissions could boost growth and yields in the short-term. Longer growing seasons could help too, but drier summers could hit grass production and, without irrigation, some parts of the country could become too dry for many crops. By the 2050s, yields of winter wheat could rise by a quarter, though these gains might be threatened by pests and weeds that could flourish in the new climate. Oilseed rape may struggle, but the range of sunflowers and maize could spread northwards to take its place. By the 2080s, English wine growers could harvest French grape varieties on the slopes of the Lake District.
Wildlife
The range of many plants and animals will shift northwards with the changing weather, but some may be unable to make the journey unaided. Beech trees that find it too warm on the south coast within a few decades might need humans to plant saplings further north, and butterflies squeezed north towards cooler climes could find their route blocked by a shortage of suitable habitat in the midlands. The situation in the sea is simpler, and more octopus and squid could appear in the English Channel and southern waters, as cold water species such as cod head away. Great white sharks could be regular visitors to the coast by the 2080s, where they could find more bathers enjoying the Mediterranean climate.
People
British holidays could boom, but increased visitor numbers could spell problems for footpaths in already overrun and eroded National Parks such as the Lake District. So could heavier winter rainfall. Cafe culture in cities such as Manchester could blossom, but would people be willing to brave the summer heat? By the 2080s, officials may be forced to rejig the school year, with July and August simply too hot for traditional summer holidays. Climate refugees from increasingly arid and drought-struck southern Europe could head towards UK shores.
Sea level and flooding
Ice caps and glaciers do not need to melt for sea level to rise – warmer temperatures are enough because the sea water expands. By the 2020s, this thermal expansion could raise global sea level by 6cm. But the increase around the UK will not be even because the bedrock beneath is gradually tilting, with the south-east sinking. By the 2080s, sea level could be 70cm higher at the southern end of the UK and 50cm up along the northern coast. An estimated 2 million people will be at risk of flooding and there will be a 17-fold increase in flood risk along the east coast. London could face a £25bn clean up bill after a freak storm surge overwhelms the Thames barrier.
David Adam
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 18 June 2009 17.38 BST
Public health
The Department of Health predicts about 1,000 more heat-related deaths each year by the 2020s, mainly among sick and elderly people, rising to 2,800 by the 2080s. Warmer weather could help stomach bugs to thrive, and could see an extra 14,000 cases of food poisoning by the 2080s. But warmer winters are expected to save many people from cold-related deaths, with numbers down 14,000 by the 2020s and 29,000 by the 2080s. Malaria could appear in Britain by mid-century if mosquitoes flourish, but is unlikely to pose a major threat. But increased exposure to ultra-violet light beneath cloudless skies could cause 2,000 extra cases of cataracts each year and 30,000 more cases of skin cancer by the 2050s.
Agriculture
Current levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are below the optimum for photosynthesis, so rising carbon emissions could boost growth and yields in the short-term. Longer growing seasons could help too, but drier summers could hit grass production and, without irrigation, some parts of the country could become too dry for many crops. By the 2050s, yields of winter wheat could rise by a quarter, though these gains might be threatened by pests and weeds that could flourish in the new climate. Oilseed rape may struggle, but the range of sunflowers and maize could spread northwards to take its place. By the 2080s, English wine growers could harvest French grape varieties on the slopes of the Lake District.
Wildlife
The range of many plants and animals will shift northwards with the changing weather, but some may be unable to make the journey unaided. Beech trees that find it too warm on the south coast within a few decades might need humans to plant saplings further north, and butterflies squeezed north towards cooler climes could find their route blocked by a shortage of suitable habitat in the midlands. The situation in the sea is simpler, and more octopus and squid could appear in the English Channel and southern waters, as cold water species such as cod head away. Great white sharks could be regular visitors to the coast by the 2080s, where they could find more bathers enjoying the Mediterranean climate.
People
British holidays could boom, but increased visitor numbers could spell problems for footpaths in already overrun and eroded National Parks such as the Lake District. So could heavier winter rainfall. Cafe culture in cities such as Manchester could blossom, but would people be willing to brave the summer heat? By the 2080s, officials may be forced to rejig the school year, with July and August simply too hot for traditional summer holidays. Climate refugees from increasingly arid and drought-struck southern Europe could head towards UK shores.
Sea level and flooding
Ice caps and glaciers do not need to melt for sea level to rise – warmer temperatures are enough because the sea water expands. By the 2020s, this thermal expansion could raise global sea level by 6cm. But the increase around the UK will not be even because the bedrock beneath is gradually tilting, with the south-east sinking. By the 2080s, sea level could be 70cm higher at the southern end of the UK and 50cm up along the northern coast. An estimated 2 million people will be at risk of flooding and there will be a 17-fold increase in flood risk along the east coast. London could face a £25bn clean up bill after a freak storm surge overwhelms the Thames barrier.
We have the climate predictions but do we have the political will to adapt?
Rising sea levels, changing rainfall patterns and increases in temperature all demand urgent measures
David King
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 18 June 2009 19.04 BST
The climate predictions for the UK, published today by Defra, underline the extraordinary nature of the challenge to our communities.
Rising sea levels, changing rainfall patterns and increases in temperature, varying from locality to locality, all demand the implementation of adaptation measures to manage the increasing risk to our coastlines, cities, towns and villages, and the infrastructure serving them.
We are fortunate in having the best climate modelling capacity in the world here in the UK. Now the question is whether or not the British public and their councillors, planners, civil servants and politicians have the appetite to provide sufficient funding to devise and implement long-range schemes of adaptation across the 23 river basins, 16 administrative regions and eight coastal regions covered by the report.
Until the past 10 years, risk management against extreme events such as storms at sea, flash floods and hot dry summers, was framed in terms of the frequency of these events.
The Thames Barrier, for example, was designed to withstand a 1-in-2,000 year event, thus preventing London from flooding through surges up or down the river except in the most extreme cases.
But with a changing climate, this language has to be altered. What was a 1-in-2,000 year event in 1982, when the barrier first became operational, will now be a 1-in-1,000 year event later this century. The barrier will need to be retro-fitted to face our changing climate challenges.
Our changing climate has a built in inertia of about 30 years. The increase in greenhouse gases brought about largely by our use of fossil fuels and by deforestation over the past 50 years will continue to cause global warming over the coming decades, even if we were to terminate all emissions now.
But decisions to cut back on emissions now – globally, not just in the UK – will have a dramatic effect on impacts in the period beyond 2040. Here is the political challenge: to reduce the impacts for future generations we must de-fossilise our economies now. Have we, as a global civilisation, developed the capability and the appetite for joint action on a scale never previously achieved for the benefit not of ourselves but for future generations?
In 2005, on behalf of the UK government, I signed a memorandum of understanding with the Chinese government to enable members of our foresight flood and coastal defence team to work with Chinese engineers, scientists and economists on the flood risk to Shanghai and the Yangse basin area of China. The outcome, I believe, was a startling realisation for the Chinese that Shanghai, the jewel in the crown of China's economic miracle, was itself at risk of unmanageable levels of flooding before the end of the century, under a business-as-usual scenario for carbon emissions.
I believe that this may well have been a major factor in the clear change in the Chinese leadership's approach to the need for global action on emissions. Today, China is possibly the most progressive country in the world on taking action on climate change, including significant use of stimulus funds to green its development. The Chinese negotiating position for Copenhagen climate talks in December is now very critical of the laggards among the developed nations, particularly Japan and Canada.
This report is therefore very welcome as a further step towards managing risks for the UK from the global warming impacts that are already in the pipeline. But this is one step in the process. We need to have a full-scale review and refinancing of our adaptation procedures. And on the international scale, we will have to redouble our efforts if there is to be any useful outcome from the Copenhagen negotiations. In the face of the global economic downturn and, specifically, the further major downturn in the Japanese economy and the emerging dependence of the Canadian economy on extracting oil from tar sands, do we have the global political appetite for action on the scale required?
• Professor Sir David King is director of the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment at the University of Oxford. He was chief scientific advisor to the UK government from 2000 to 2007.
David King
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 18 June 2009 19.04 BST
The climate predictions for the UK, published today by Defra, underline the extraordinary nature of the challenge to our communities.
Rising sea levels, changing rainfall patterns and increases in temperature, varying from locality to locality, all demand the implementation of adaptation measures to manage the increasing risk to our coastlines, cities, towns and villages, and the infrastructure serving them.
We are fortunate in having the best climate modelling capacity in the world here in the UK. Now the question is whether or not the British public and their councillors, planners, civil servants and politicians have the appetite to provide sufficient funding to devise and implement long-range schemes of adaptation across the 23 river basins, 16 administrative regions and eight coastal regions covered by the report.
Until the past 10 years, risk management against extreme events such as storms at sea, flash floods and hot dry summers, was framed in terms of the frequency of these events.
The Thames Barrier, for example, was designed to withstand a 1-in-2,000 year event, thus preventing London from flooding through surges up or down the river except in the most extreme cases.
But with a changing climate, this language has to be altered. What was a 1-in-2,000 year event in 1982, when the barrier first became operational, will now be a 1-in-1,000 year event later this century. The barrier will need to be retro-fitted to face our changing climate challenges.
Our changing climate has a built in inertia of about 30 years. The increase in greenhouse gases brought about largely by our use of fossil fuels and by deforestation over the past 50 years will continue to cause global warming over the coming decades, even if we were to terminate all emissions now.
But decisions to cut back on emissions now – globally, not just in the UK – will have a dramatic effect on impacts in the period beyond 2040. Here is the political challenge: to reduce the impacts for future generations we must de-fossilise our economies now. Have we, as a global civilisation, developed the capability and the appetite for joint action on a scale never previously achieved for the benefit not of ourselves but for future generations?
In 2005, on behalf of the UK government, I signed a memorandum of understanding with the Chinese government to enable members of our foresight flood and coastal defence team to work with Chinese engineers, scientists and economists on the flood risk to Shanghai and the Yangse basin area of China. The outcome, I believe, was a startling realisation for the Chinese that Shanghai, the jewel in the crown of China's economic miracle, was itself at risk of unmanageable levels of flooding before the end of the century, under a business-as-usual scenario for carbon emissions.
I believe that this may well have been a major factor in the clear change in the Chinese leadership's approach to the need for global action on emissions. Today, China is possibly the most progressive country in the world on taking action on climate change, including significant use of stimulus funds to green its development. The Chinese negotiating position for Copenhagen climate talks in December is now very critical of the laggards among the developed nations, particularly Japan and Canada.
This report is therefore very welcome as a further step towards managing risks for the UK from the global warming impacts that are already in the pipeline. But this is one step in the process. We need to have a full-scale review and refinancing of our adaptation procedures. And on the international scale, we will have to redouble our efforts if there is to be any useful outcome from the Copenhagen negotiations. In the face of the global economic downturn and, specifically, the further major downturn in the Japanese economy and the emerging dependence of the Canadian economy on extracting oil from tar sands, do we have the global political appetite for action on the scale required?
• Professor Sir David King is director of the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment at the University of Oxford. He was chief scientific advisor to the UK government from 2000 to 2007.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
