FEATURE 14
tive. In the words of a colleague of ours this is equivalent to ‘whistling in the wind’, except the colleague in question uses an alternative word to ‘whistling’. What appears to be lacking is a clarion voice
from the sector that lifts the debate from the relative introspection of an ‘intelligent lift’ system and the carbon savings generated to a debate which may encompass spending $30billion p.a. to fully compensate those South American countries that host the Amazon Rainforest for not cut- ting it down.3
absorbs one fifth4
Given that the Amazon currently of all carbon emissions, and
deforestation in the region generates a further fifth5
of the global carbon emissions, a serious
intellectual challenge from the university sector to current practice regarding a ‘sustainable’ alterna- tive is likely to be of more impact than distracting university staff with a sustainably sourced meal deal at £4.99. A conundrum persists within the drive to
reduce the consumption of finite resources. The Green League reveals that UK HE carbon emissions have increased. The average increase per university is 7.4 per cent6
. Apparently this
is ‘incredibly worrying’. There is an inherent weakness within the rationale which calls for a reduced consumption of fossil fuels. If consump- tion is reduced, what economists call the law of supply and demand will produce a decrease in price as a result of a fall in demand. In response to this price fall, other consumers who previously had either not consumed or had consumed less will be able to afford the energy and consequently consume more. Nicholas Stern, economist and author of the
influential Stern Review has written extensively about Carbon Capture and Storage (CSS) tech- nology. “We need to know now if CCS can work on a commercial scale, whether the transport and storage of CCS7
can work on a commercial scale, and whether the transport and storage of
We need to know now if Carbon Capture and Storage can work on a commercial scale and whether the transport can be done safely
❝ and storage of CO2 Nicholas Stern, economist and author of the influential Stern Review
UB_cover_story.v2.md.indd 14 12/9/11 17:19:54
$30billion p.a. would be needed to fully compen- sate those South American countries that host the Amazon Rainforest for not cutting it down
CO2 can be done safely.”8 A MINER PROBLEM Generally, technology
becomes cheaper and more effective and efficient as we use it, learn from our mistakes and test new developments. Given that China, India and Poland among a number of countries are planning to build hundreds more coal-fired power stations over the next few decades, the earlier a substantive investment programme in CCS and in geo-engineering projects such as carbon scrubbing is initiated, the better. It is worth noting that the prestigious Royal Society produced a report in September 2009 looking at ‘geo-engineering’, which includes both removing carbon dioxide and other ways of cooling the planet. The Society concludes that the most promising method of geo-engineer- ing is to capture CO2
from ambient air (carbon
The IEA estimates that China will build 600 gigawatts of coal-fired capacity in the next quarter century
THE COST OF SUSTAINABILITY
scrubbing). However, they point out that “at this stage no cost-effective methods have yet been demonstrated and much more research and development is needed.”9 Put simply, reducing our own carbon
emissions will not be effective because others will consume in place of us. If we really want to tackle this issue, relatively wealthy countries need to compensate countries with the rainforests so that they do not need to generate income by cutting them down. In addition, the provision of the necessary resource to fit carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology to carbon generat- ing power stations could be a way forward. The power and purpose of the body of UK universi- ties lies in its intellectual capital, credibility and its ability to communicate and persuade – not its ability to manage its own heating and lighting systems efficiently.●
Karen Stephenson, Partner at legal firm Veale Wasbrough Vizards and Jim Snaith, Head of the Department of Business Studies, Faculty of Business, London South Bank University
3. United Nations Environment Programme, REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestations and forest Degradation, under which forest owners are effectively paid not to cut down trees.
http://www.unep.org/climatechange/reddplus/ 4. Science Daily,
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090218135031.htm; 5.United Nations:
http://www.unep.org/climatechange/reddplus/Introduction/tabid/29525/Default.aspx; 6.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/jun/07/green-league-table-universities-environment1 7. Carbon Capture and Storage 8. Stern, N. (2009) A blueprint for safer planet
9.www.twopercentfortheplanet.org
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