The UK's first desalination plant providing drinking water for Londoners and people in the south-east has been granted government approval.
The plant in Beckton, east London, will start producing water sometime in 2009, in times of drought or low rainfall.
The site will provide up to 140m litres of drinking water a day - enough for nearly one million people.
But critics say the plant is a "sticking plaster" solution to the water crisis.
Planning permission for the plant was granted by the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Department of Communities and Local Government.
It is expected to run for up to 40% of the time over the next 25 years but critics say it is unnecessary.
Climate change
Richard Aylard, from Thames Water, said: "The desalination plant is a vital part of our plans to secure future water supplies to the capital.
"With pressures such as climate change and population growth, the plant is essential alongside our continuing progress in reducing leakage and proposals for a new reservoir in Oxfordshire."
But environmental campaigners condemned the government's approval of the plant.
"It is a sticking plaster solution to the water crisis we have in the south-east," said Rob Oates from the World Wildlife Fund.
"The government should instead conduct a bigger, strategic review of people's water usage and work to reduce demand and leakage, introduce metering in homes and encourage residents to install water-saving technology."
He added: "At the moment, half of the drinking water supplied to homes is used for flushing toilets and washing dirty clothes, which is madness."
full article
Wednesday, 18 July 2007
Tuesday, 17 July 2007
Raft of flaws found in popular carbon offsetting schemes
A television documentary has uncovered flaws in a series of carbon offsetting schemes intended to make good the global warming gases emitted by flights and other polluting activities.
An episode of Dispatches on Channel 4 on Monday entitled "The Great Green Smoke Screen" will show academics and environmentalists questioning the ethics and impact of offsetting - and suggesting that offsetting schemes have not been effective as claimed.
Two of the country's biggest carbon offset companies, the Carbon Neutral Company and Climate Care, and offsetting schemes at BA, BP and Sky are scrutinised by the programme.
Carbon offsetting has becoming popular in recent years as a way for individuals and business to mitigate the effects of emissions, for example from cars or planes, as publicity has grown about the threat and speed of climate change.
Dispatches claims that schemes run by Climate Care, and promoted by BA, took no account of the "multiplier" effect which increased the damage done by aviation fumes in the stratosphere by a factor of three. In other words, the schemes funded by BA passengers only mitigate one third of the damage that their flights cause. Climate Care, which uses a multiplier of two on its website, told Dispatches that it was unhappy about the way Britain's biggest airline ran its scheme.
A project funded by BP to siphon methane gas from excrement at pig farms in Mexico will only produce half the savings claimed on the company's website, which is now being amended.
In Bulgaria, Sky funds a hydro-power plant that turns water into low-pollution electricity but the manager, Vladislav Tsvetkov, said that Sky's money, though welcome, was "not required" - a view backed by the Bulgarian bank which lent the capital. The manager later retracted his comments and the Carbon Neutral Company which administers the offsets insisted the money had been critical in establishing the plant.
At Donkleywood forest in Northumberland, the Carbon Neutral Company said the planting of the trees helped the climate. But it emerged that 70 per cent of the funding came from the Forestry Commission.
The programme analysed the behaviour of the electricity suppliers which offer customers the opportunity to match their bills to wind and solar power with "green tariffs" while doing no more than meeting their legal obligations to buy renewable power.
Dispatches questioned whether big companies such as HSBC and Sky had any right to claim they were "carbon neutral" as a result of buying offsets to undo the effects of their pollution. Instead the programme hinted that more should be done to limit the polluting activity in the first place.
Dieter Helm, professor of energy policy at Oxford University, told the programme: "It's very, very fashionable for big companies who are actually engaged in pretty polluting activities to somehow embrace the slogan that they have gone carbon neutral, so we can go on consuming their products knowing that actually we're not damaging the environment. If only it was that simple.
"The idea that they can assuage their consciences by buying some offsets in the international market as a substitute to cleaning up their act - this is good perhaps PR and publicity, but substance I think is seriously lacking."
full article
An episode of Dispatches on Channel 4 on Monday entitled "The Great Green Smoke Screen" will show academics and environmentalists questioning the ethics and impact of offsetting - and suggesting that offsetting schemes have not been effective as claimed.
Two of the country's biggest carbon offset companies, the Carbon Neutral Company and Climate Care, and offsetting schemes at BA, BP and Sky are scrutinised by the programme.
Carbon offsetting has becoming popular in recent years as a way for individuals and business to mitigate the effects of emissions, for example from cars or planes, as publicity has grown about the threat and speed of climate change.
Dispatches claims that schemes run by Climate Care, and promoted by BA, took no account of the "multiplier" effect which increased the damage done by aviation fumes in the stratosphere by a factor of three. In other words, the schemes funded by BA passengers only mitigate one third of the damage that their flights cause. Climate Care, which uses a multiplier of two on its website, told Dispatches that it was unhappy about the way Britain's biggest airline ran its scheme.
A project funded by BP to siphon methane gas from excrement at pig farms in Mexico will only produce half the savings claimed on the company's website, which is now being amended.
In Bulgaria, Sky funds a hydro-power plant that turns water into low-pollution electricity but the manager, Vladislav Tsvetkov, said that Sky's money, though welcome, was "not required" - a view backed by the Bulgarian bank which lent the capital. The manager later retracted his comments and the Carbon Neutral Company which administers the offsets insisted the money had been critical in establishing the plant.
At Donkleywood forest in Northumberland, the Carbon Neutral Company said the planting of the trees helped the climate. But it emerged that 70 per cent of the funding came from the Forestry Commission.
The programme analysed the behaviour of the electricity suppliers which offer customers the opportunity to match their bills to wind and solar power with "green tariffs" while doing no more than meeting their legal obligations to buy renewable power.
Dispatches questioned whether big companies such as HSBC and Sky had any right to claim they were "carbon neutral" as a result of buying offsets to undo the effects of their pollution. Instead the programme hinted that more should be done to limit the polluting activity in the first place.
Dieter Helm, professor of energy policy at Oxford University, told the programme: "It's very, very fashionable for big companies who are actually engaged in pretty polluting activities to somehow embrace the slogan that they have gone carbon neutral, so we can go on consuming their products knowing that actually we're not damaging the environment. If only it was that simple.
"The idea that they can assuage their consciences by buying some offsets in the international market as a substitute to cleaning up their act - this is good perhaps PR and publicity, but substance I think is seriously lacking."
full article
Energy debts jump
Soaring prices mean two million people owe their energy supplier an average of almost £200, according to the energy regulator
Two million people are now in debt to energy companies as fuel bills have soared, according to new research.
Official figures from Ofgem, the energy regulator, have revealed that the average energy debt has jumped by 33 per cent since 2004, from £150 to just under £200.
Commentators have warned this could be just the tip of the iceberg: the figures include only those with an official debt-repayment plan, not those who have simply fallen behind with their repayments, according to comparison site uSwitch.com.
It said people could save an average of £210 a year by switching to a cheaper dual-fuel supplier, leaving them with enough money to clear their debts and enjoy lower monthly bills.
The debt crisis has been fuelled by a sharp rise in energy costs. The average bill soared by £277 between January 2006 and January 2007, but price cuts so far this year have amounted to just £84.
full article
Two million people are now in debt to energy companies as fuel bills have soared, according to new research.
Official figures from Ofgem, the energy regulator, have revealed that the average energy debt has jumped by 33 per cent since 2004, from £150 to just under £200.
Commentators have warned this could be just the tip of the iceberg: the figures include only those with an official debt-repayment plan, not those who have simply fallen behind with their repayments, according to comparison site uSwitch.com.
It said people could save an average of £210 a year by switching to a cheaper dual-fuel supplier, leaving them with enough money to clear their debts and enjoy lower monthly bills.
The debt crisis has been fuelled by a sharp rise in energy costs. The average bill soared by £277 between January 2006 and January 2007, but price cuts so far this year have amounted to just £84.
full article
Monday, 16 July 2007
CARBON EMISSIONS LINKED TO LIFESTYLE
A carbon-lite life is a happier life, says economic think-tank
The idea that money can't buy happiness has long appealed to those who get their kicks from the simpler things in life. Now it seems that having a large carbon footprint is no passport to contentment either.
Despite living in an age of ever more energy-intensive consumer goods, bigger cars, imported exotic food and cheaper foreign travel, people are barely more contented than they were 40 years ago.
These are the findings of a new report, The (un)Happy Planet Index published today by the new economics foundation.
Researchers from the think-tank analysed relative levels of carbon use in 30 European countries in relation to the physical and emotional well-being of their citizens since the 1960s.
full article
Sex sells, but at what cost?
"Sex sells" is the mantra of advertisers, but our fixation with status symbols and material wealth is undermining our efforts to tackle climate change, argues Matt Prescott. In this week's Green Room, he outlines how he thinks we can love ourselves and the planet
full article
Banthebulb.org
The idea that money can't buy happiness has long appealed to those who get their kicks from the simpler things in life. Now it seems that having a large carbon footprint is no passport to contentment either.
Despite living in an age of ever more energy-intensive consumer goods, bigger cars, imported exotic food and cheaper foreign travel, people are barely more contented than they were 40 years ago.
These are the findings of a new report, The (un)Happy Planet Index published today by the new economics foundation.
Researchers from the think-tank analysed relative levels of carbon use in 30 European countries in relation to the physical and emotional well-being of their citizens since the 1960s.
full article
Sex sells, but at what cost?
"Sex sells" is the mantra of advertisers, but our fixation with status symbols and material wealth is undermining our efforts to tackle climate change, argues Matt Prescott. In this week's Green Room, he outlines how he thinks we can love ourselves and the planet
full article
Banthebulb.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
