Hopenhagen

If you haven't done so yet, link up to the Hopenhagen campaign that's been designed to raise awareness and action for the COP15 talks in Copenhagen in six weeks' time.

Heads in the Sand

The charity Global Witness have just released their report Heads in the Sand, which questions government's confidence that supplies of oil will be sufficient to keep us steadily climbing on our current ascent to health, wealth and happiness.They question assumptions behind some of the IEA's predictions, and the report is likely to fan the flames from ITPOE's Oil Crunch report in 2008.

There's an activist irony to the report's cover, which means that it's strident cover will put off many of those safe, secure policy makers, planners and budget holders who most need to read the report. Nevertheless, an important and timely addition to the increasing weight of evidence to back the need for radical planning, change and action.

The human calling

There was an interesting article in the Guardian yesterday quoting one of last year's Do Lectures outstanding speakers, Alistair McIntosh, who captured the minds of many in Cardigan with the simplicity and passion of his call to action for a saner world.

The Guardian article is here, followed by a couple of extracts:

"How do we live in a way that honours rather than endangers the life of our planet? Or, to put it slightly differently, how do we live in a way that shows an understanding that we genuinely live in a shared world, not one that simply belongs to us? This would be a good question even if we were not faced with the threats associated with global warming, with the reduction of biodiversity, with desertification and deforestation, with fuel and food shortages.

In his splendid book, Hell and High Water: Climate Change, Hope and the Human Condition, Alastair McIntosh speaks of our current "ecocidal" patterns of consumption as addictive and self-destructive. Living like this is living at a less than properly human level – McIntosh suggests we may need therapy, what he describes as a "cultural psychotherapy" to liberate us. That liberation may or may not be enough to avert disaster. But what we do know – or should know – is that we are living inhumanly.

We must begin by recognising that our ecological crisis is part of a crisis of what we understand by our humanity; it is part of a general process of losing our "feel" for what is appropriately human, a loss that has been going on for some centuries and which some cultures and economies have been energetically exporting to the whole world. It manifests itself in a variety of ways. It has to do with the erosion of rhythms in work and leisure, so that the old pattern of working days interrupted by a day of rest has been dangerously undermined; a loss of patience with the passing of time so that speed of communication has become a good in itself; a loss of patience which shows itself in the lack of respect and attention for the very old and the very young. It is a loss whose results have become monumentally apparent in the financial crisis of the last 12 months. We have slowly begun to suspect that we have allowed ourselves to become addicted to fantasies about prosperity and growth, dreams of wealth without risk and profit without cost. A good deal of the talk and activity around the financial collapse has the marks of what Alastair McIntosh calls "displacement activity" – it fails to see where the roots of the problem lie; in our amnesia about the human calling.

24% Gold Standard

It feels good to be part of an organisation that's leading the way to make change happen; working with the Countryside Council for Wales on carbon reduction is a great example of what is possible with the potent combination of board level support, executive leadership and implementation from professional, capable officers who love a challenge.

The 24% reduction that CCW have committed to make, with a confident route map of what is needed to make it happen is an lighthouse quality example of what's possible.

Now's the time for other organisations to step up to the mark. Who's next?

Here's the full text of the CCW press release:

CCW sets ambitious plans to

become even greener

THE Countryside Council for Wales has set itself an ambitious target to reduce its carbon dioxide emissions by 24% by 2012.  Already one of the greenest organisations in Wales, the new target calls for innovative thinking - and some investment.

Roger Thomas, CCW Chief Executive said: “As a national leader in measuring and tackling public sector greenhouse gas emissions, CCW is striving to cut further its carbon and ecological footprints.  The target of 24% by 2012 reflects the pace at which changes are needed to avoid the more damaging climate change scenarios.”

Reducing CCW’s carbon footprint will require investment - but reduced consumption will lead to some financial savings. To achieve 24% savings over the next three years costs will include; investing in renewable energy generation technology, greening the pool fleet, improving lighting and IT efficiency and increased use of biodiesel from used cooking oils.

To achieve the target CCW will, for example:

• Cut down are electricity use in buildings;
• Purchase lower emitting vehicles for the pool fleet;
• Increase use of biodiesel;
• Improve lighting efficiency;
• Make even more use of video conferencing;
• Reduce waste to landfill;
• Ensure staff travel using the best environmental option

 This target goes beyond the Carbon Trust Standard which only includes utilities and transport emissions. CCW’s plan also adds the impacts of waste and materials.

The waning of GDP

A recent article in CFO magazine has useful quotes from Joseph Stiglitz that relate to the reseach he's been commissioned to conduct by President Nicolas Sarkozy. The French President seems to be alone in the cadre of world leaders in calling for a re-evaluation of the measure that we use to define success. For over a generation since the publication Club of Rome's 'Limits to Growth', the use of GDP as a measure of progress or success has been increasingly questioned by experts far enough away from the system to see how it works.

Classical economists still seem largely stuck an a responsive, tax-and-policy based groove that ignores the nature of a realpolitik that is changing by the day. As prices rise anc climate changes, with a 60% increase in oil prices within six years, peak oil within 10 years, and a four degree rise in tempeature within 40 (all forecasts made this week, by UK Energy Watchdog, The UKs Energy Research Centre, and the Met Office, respectivel), the liklihood of 'old school' thinking fixing emerging problems seems increaingly small.

I've highlghted a few comments from the interesting CFO report:

"Simply put, the GDP is a measure of economic performance that represents the value of all the goods and services in an economy based on prices being charged. But there has long been discussion of the metric's alleged deficiencies; namely, that it does not take into account factors such as disparity in the distribution of wealth, depletion of natural resources, underground economies, and the quality of goods and services"

Stiglitz: "In a performance-oriented society, what you measure affects what you do. If you have the wrong measures, you can wind up doing the wrong thing,"

"[Stilitz] noted that, for example, 41% of all corporate profits in 2007 were generated in the financial sector and tied to debt. In other words, the gains were "borrowed from the future," he said"

As a result, the massive subprime-related losses that financial institutions booked in 2008 wiped out not only the profits from 2007 but also those from the preceding five years. "They were not really profits, but we recorded them as fantastic years," asserted Stiglitz.

"Another fundamental measuring mistake relates to household income. Adjusted for inflation, median household income in 2008 fell to $50,303, which was 4% below its 2000 level and continued a downward trend that had been accelerating for some time. That's "a striking statistic," said Stiglitz, because the GDP per capita for the same period climbed from $33,700 in 2000 to $38,100 in 2008 (adjusted for inflation)"

The counterintuitive trend is explained by the increasing financial inequality within American society, which allows the two measures to go in absolutely different directions. The implication, according to Stiglitz, is that most citizens' standard of living goes down while the GDP goes up.

Another problem with the metric is that in some sectors, such as health care, GDP calculations take into consideration input but ignore output. So as an economy becomes less efficient, input and the GDP increase because of higher spending, "but things you care about actually go down," including citizens' health, opined Stiglitz.

Health-care spending currently accounts for 16% of the U.S. GDP, and that percentage is rising steadily. Yet "health outcomes in the U.S. are not commensurate with spending," he said. That means other countries are spending less and getting better results — witness France, which spends 11% of its GDP on health care and is ahead of the United States in life expectancy and other health metrics.

Stiglitz also addressed the issue of sustainability with respect to climate change, in particular the "false prices" that the United States and other countries use when valuing natural resources. "Our price system is based on the assumption that one of the scarcest resources we have has a zero price, and we know that can't be right," he said.

That scarce asset is clean air. Stiglitz's reasoning is that the Earth has a limited amount of capacity in its atmosphere to absorb the CO₂ emissions that are spewed into the air by factories and cars, and are believed to be the main contributor to global warming.

He noted that many experts believe CO₂ emissions should be priced at around $80 to $100 per ton. When the United States eventually factors the cost of carbon into its economy in that way, it will affect everything that emanates from fossil-fired energy production. Until then, prices will remain distorted.

"Our accounting framework affects how you see the world, and our accounting framework is flawed," said Stiglitz, who as a member of the Council of Economic Advisors under President Clinton lobbied for the United States to use metrics incorporating the effects of natural-resource depletion. "I knew we were on to something important when Congress said that if we did this, our funding would be cut. The coal industry was very adamant that we not [put a price on carbon]."

What can you or I do about this? Whilst the problem of changing a global accounting system may beyond the reach of a single individual, there are many steps to take that create learning and action:

Work through your expenditure and see how far you can reduce it without materially reducing your quality of life. Spend less on pettol and cycle more (less cost, more health)

Watch less (or better, no) TV and use the time to do things that create quality for little or no cost - cooking proper food, conversation music

Redesign your life to holiday at home or in your own country, and save the equivalent of years' worth of savings.

Cancel memberships that you don't need (health clubs, networks, business associations) and use the money for something more useful

Enjoy being.