7
of Heathrow Airport. This decision flies in the face of the Government’s
commitment to reducing carbon dioxide emissions and makes a sham
of its environmental policies.
Sadly, the old polemic has been given new life. Transport Secretary,
Geoff Hoon, has defended the decision aggressively and the old, lame
arguments have been resurrected. It’s all about jobs, money and, oh
yes, that old chestnut, ‘If we don’t, then somebody else will’ - so much
for the green revolution, an economy boosted by new jobs in cutting-
edge technologies that will help to reduce emissions and Government
recognition of the fact that carbon costs. Talk of high speed rail links
and new, less polluting planes may have sugared the pill, but those with
any grasp of the impact that this decision will make to UK emissions
were incredulous at the Government’s wanton disregard of its
commitment to reduce carbon emissions.
Chair of the Environment Agency, Lord Smith, has spoken publicly
against the decision, in a recent interview stating that: ‘It seems really
wishful thinking to believe that you can meet the emissions limits with
future increases in air traffic, when you know you are already at
the old, lame arguments breaking point.’ As head of the organisation tasked with monitoring
have been resurrected. It’s all
emissions, Smith’s comments carry real resonance.
about jobs, money and, oh yes,
Whilst the UK Government makes a mockery of its environmental
policy, the Obama administration has taken the green technologies
that old chestnut, ‘If we don’t, baton, committing to a range of climate conscious initiatives, some of
then somebody else will’
which hope to de-carbon the US economy. The emphasis is on clean
energy and a move away from fossil fuels. After years of climate
scepticism, the new administration is keen to raise public awareness
and communicate the seriousness of climate change to the American
public. Obama has pledged to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 80
percent by the middle of the century and he has directed the car
industry to produce cars that achieve 35 miles to the gallon by 2020.
If any good can come of the current global economic meltdown, the
opportunity to de-carbon economies and do justice to the findings of
the work of Sir Nicholas Stern and his international counterparts, may
be just that. We know that we cannot afford to carry on as before, we
have the facts before us, our carbon-based economy has failed, do we
really have to face environmental meltdown before we realise it is time
to wake-up and smell the coffee?
The US now holds real promise of demonstrating what can be done.
It won’t be plain sailing, there is evidence that the renewable energy
and the answers were there in black and white. industry in the US is suffering from the economic downturn and
The Australian Government commissioned a climate change factories producing solar panels are letting staff go. But with serious
report which came to similar conclusions, but gave greater urgency Government commitment, the long-term benefits can be realised. If
to the need for action and warned that the costs Stern attributed the UK Government has lost its stomach for global leadership in carbon
to climate chaos were, if anything, a little dated and as a result emissions reduction, it seems that we must look to the US to show us
rather conservative. the way – and all the best to them.
Coinciding with the surge of media attention that the Stern report
attracted, the UK Government began to talk of becoming a world leader
in tackling climate change and much was made of the opportunities
that this would bring to industry. Empty rhetoric it would seem, in the
* Erika Yarrow, Editor
light of the Government’s decision to support the proposed expansion
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124