GREEN WATCH is Glastonbury community radio’s monthly one hour show exploring all that’s eco, green and sustainable. The January edition goes on air this week, with a repeat on Saturday 30th January on GFM 107.1FM, between 2.00 and 3.00pm.
Launched last November, with a first or pilot show recorded at Shapwick Heath National Nature Reserve, the interest in a dedicated local green programme is growing as more people hear about it.
GFM’s development manager, Allan Trinder, says: “The aim of Green Watch is to highlight local countryside places, people, events and news of interest, including wildlife observations, eco-friendly tips and advice, what’s on around the communities, practical conservation, sustainable living... in fact all things environmental and green.”
In December the programme visited Somerset Organic Link, and focussed on their local food supply and delivery service run in combination with Somerset Local Food Direct. Christina Ballinger and Roger White explained their part in supplying fresh local organic food to the doorsteps of local customers.
January’s Green Watch makes a return visit to another part of Shapwick Heath NNR in the company of Natural England’s reserve manager, Simon Clarke, and conservation volunteer Karen Haddy. Karen explains what it is like being a volunteer and how she has gained new skills, which she hopes will help her find paid work in nature conservation.
Regular contributor Amy Lawson, who runs the Eco-friendly shop in Glastonbury and newly opened Eco-friendly Bites at the Peat Moors car park – serving refreshments to passersby, using locally sourced Somerset food – gives the what’s on news and eco friendly tips and advice.
Also included is Sunrise Celebration Festival organiser, Dan Hurring, who gives an insight into how the event began and explains about their eco policies which drive the whole not-for-profit festival, run by Natural Communities, a community interest company.
“Tickets to the festival are selling fast and we have a reduced price offer of £95 until they run out or the end of January, whichever is the sooner,” says Dan. He also explains how they will give life-long free entry to Sunrise for what are judged the best, most innovative, green ways by which ticket holders travel to this year’s festival (3 to 6 June). Details on how to register are on the website.
Additional regular contributors are being lined up to take part in the show, and visits to local eco homes, green events, farms, wildlife and country sites are being planned for the months ahead.
· Glastonbury 107.1 FM broadcasts free to air on the FM waveband across Glastonbury, Street and Wells and surrounding villages. It is a not-for-profit community interest company. News and contributions for Green Watch are very welcome, as is anyone with an interest in green issues and radio broadcasting who would like to help the programme. www.glastonburyfm.co.uk or telephone 01458 835299
· Sunrise tickets and details are available from www.sunrisecelebration.com or 0845 108 0259
Paul Lund
Friday, January 29, 2010
Monday, January 25, 2010
Crispin School’s message to everyone
Blog 14 – by Paul Lund
Crispin School, in Street, held its first community climate change debate, organised by students and staff to bring together their local community with the aim of identifying the urgent action that is needed. Up to 100 parents, pupils, school staff, governors and members of the public gathered for the evening last week (13.1.10).
To quote the programme for the evening: “United community action is the only way in which climate change can be solved. By taking part in this debate you are personally taking part in something much larger which will not only impact this local community but also the national community.”
The event was also a stage in the year 11’s Citizenship GCSE, but the pupil’s enthusiasm in meeting their audience and hosting the event was truly inspiring and showed real commitment beyond simply obtaining their course marks.
Green leadership comes from Frances Thomson, the school’s deputy head and climate action champion. “The school is a three times holder of the Eco schools national Green Flag award, and we’re hoping to reach our fourth,” said Frances, who chaired a panel of five experts for the debate. To receive the Green Flag award the school has to reapply every two years and meet a set of standards under the Eco-Schools programme. “We have set aside a Sustainable Learning Room in school to show pupils examples of sustainable living and some of our pupils took part in the pre-Copenhagen march in London, called the Wave, and afterwards they met Prime Minister Gordon Brown at Number 10,” Frances told me. They are also aiming for a 10 per cent reduction in their school’s C02 emissions this year.
Before the debate started, introductions and an outline of global warming were carefully presented by students Charlie Johnson, Ben Judge and James Paterson in front of the audience. This would be a daunting task for anyone, but rehearsals clearly paid off as it was done perfectly.
Four topics were raised for the panel of experts to discuss after which members of the audience were invited to ask questions.
Under ‘bridging the energy gap...’ both Mike Beal from Sustainable Shapwick and Charles Graham of the Green Party supported clean renewable sources, including hydropower (wave and tidal barrage) as well as reducing and saving energy. Producing electricity locally, where it is needed, is less wasteful, said Charles, as power through the grid results in a net loss. Ross Edwards, PRO for EDF Energy with responsibilities for public communications at Hinkley Point power station, defended the role of nuclear energy for the future saying power stations were being designed to be safer and nuclear electric generation had equal C02 emissions, in total, as those associated with wind energy production. He didn’t say what the disadvantages were with cost and waste disposal.
‘Community climate action...what do we need to do, and are young people today ready for the challenges of tomorrrow,’ had Dr Stewart Barr, senior geography lecturer at Exeter University, urging people to lobby and protest to make their views heard by government. Everyone agreed that young people today will be the future negotiators of climate deals, and they will look back at the disarray exhibited by current world politicians at Copenhagen. It was also clear that working on smaller, local, issues made sense as individuals and communities saw the effect of such things as saving money by home insulation, growing your own food and reducing the amount of unnecessary items we buy. A show of hands indicated half the audience would give up air travel entirely if that was what it would take to reduce aviation carbon emissions.
‘Adapting to climate change...what will the impacts be and will we be able to cope’ was tackled by Lucy Hunt, South West regional development manager for the Environment Agency, who explained how managed retreat from coastal areas will be necessary and how the EA has strategies in place to work with communities.
Lastly, ‘Copenhagen, should we be optimistic or pessimistic’ had most people in agreement that staying positive was the only way forward and that better deals must be done in the next round of talks by world leaders.
As a former schools education officer and projects coordinator for RSPB and BTCV, I have seen hundreds of schools involved with creating their own nature areas and environmental resource centres, all of which were ‘sowing the seed’ of care and respect for our natural world. Now that we have the most serious of global issues to contend with, it is through education and giving young people of school age the skills and opportunities to influence others, especially their communities, that a new era of understanding and human change will come about.
It has been said before that adults are all too often set in their habits and won’t act in significantly different and lasting ways. For many people it is hard to switch after decades of plentiful supplies of cheap energy and fuels to embrace an uncertain future that will involve the need to save and cut back.
Some with the best intentions, even those who experienced war time rationing, can be of the opinion that they are too old to bother about climate change or to carry out simple things like reducing electricity through using energy saving light bulbs.
Younger generations growing up now will need a very different view of the world and their place in how to shape it, if things are to change for the better.
Education for sustainable development, as practiced by Crispin School, is something all children and students need to encounter in their timetables, and if Crispin is anything to go by then the subject will be as popular as media and the arts.
For more information about the Green Flag awards and Eco-Schools programme go to www.eco-schools.org.uk
Paul Lund
Crispin School, in Street, held its first community climate change debate, organised by students and staff to bring together their local community with the aim of identifying the urgent action that is needed. Up to 100 parents, pupils, school staff, governors and members of the public gathered for the evening last week (13.1.10).
To quote the programme for the evening: “United community action is the only way in which climate change can be solved. By taking part in this debate you are personally taking part in something much larger which will not only impact this local community but also the national community.”
The event was also a stage in the year 11’s Citizenship GCSE, but the pupil’s enthusiasm in meeting their audience and hosting the event was truly inspiring and showed real commitment beyond simply obtaining their course marks.
Green leadership comes from Frances Thomson, the school’s deputy head and climate action champion. “The school is a three times holder of the Eco schools national Green Flag award, and we’re hoping to reach our fourth,” said Frances, who chaired a panel of five experts for the debate. To receive the Green Flag award the school has to reapply every two years and meet a set of standards under the Eco-Schools programme. “We have set aside a Sustainable Learning Room in school to show pupils examples of sustainable living and some of our pupils took part in the pre-Copenhagen march in London, called the Wave, and afterwards they met Prime Minister Gordon Brown at Number 10,” Frances told me. They are also aiming for a 10 per cent reduction in their school’s C02 emissions this year.
Before the debate started, introductions and an outline of global warming were carefully presented by students Charlie Johnson, Ben Judge and James Paterson in front of the audience. This would be a daunting task for anyone, but rehearsals clearly paid off as it was done perfectly.
Four topics were raised for the panel of experts to discuss after which members of the audience were invited to ask questions.
Under ‘bridging the energy gap...’ both Mike Beal from Sustainable Shapwick and Charles Graham of the Green Party supported clean renewable sources, including hydropower (wave and tidal barrage) as well as reducing and saving energy. Producing electricity locally, where it is needed, is less wasteful, said Charles, as power through the grid results in a net loss. Ross Edwards, PRO for EDF Energy with responsibilities for public communications at Hinkley Point power station, defended the role of nuclear energy for the future saying power stations were being designed to be safer and nuclear electric generation had equal C02 emissions, in total, as those associated with wind energy production. He didn’t say what the disadvantages were with cost and waste disposal.
‘Community climate action...what do we need to do, and are young people today ready for the challenges of tomorrrow,’ had Dr Stewart Barr, senior geography lecturer at Exeter University, urging people to lobby and protest to make their views heard by government. Everyone agreed that young people today will be the future negotiators of climate deals, and they will look back at the disarray exhibited by current world politicians at Copenhagen. It was also clear that working on smaller, local, issues made sense as individuals and communities saw the effect of such things as saving money by home insulation, growing your own food and reducing the amount of unnecessary items we buy. A show of hands indicated half the audience would give up air travel entirely if that was what it would take to reduce aviation carbon emissions.
‘Adapting to climate change...what will the impacts be and will we be able to cope’ was tackled by Lucy Hunt, South West regional development manager for the Environment Agency, who explained how managed retreat from coastal areas will be necessary and how the EA has strategies in place to work with communities.
Lastly, ‘Copenhagen, should we be optimistic or pessimistic’ had most people in agreement that staying positive was the only way forward and that better deals must be done in the next round of talks by world leaders.
As a former schools education officer and projects coordinator for RSPB and BTCV, I have seen hundreds of schools involved with creating their own nature areas and environmental resource centres, all of which were ‘sowing the seed’ of care and respect for our natural world. Now that we have the most serious of global issues to contend with, it is through education and giving young people of school age the skills and opportunities to influence others, especially their communities, that a new era of understanding and human change will come about.
It has been said before that adults are all too often set in their habits and won’t act in significantly different and lasting ways. For many people it is hard to switch after decades of plentiful supplies of cheap energy and fuels to embrace an uncertain future that will involve the need to save and cut back.
Some with the best intentions, even those who experienced war time rationing, can be of the opinion that they are too old to bother about climate change or to carry out simple things like reducing electricity through using energy saving light bulbs.
Younger generations growing up now will need a very different view of the world and their place in how to shape it, if things are to change for the better.
Education for sustainable development, as practiced by Crispin School, is something all children and students need to encounter in their timetables, and if Crispin is anything to go by then the subject will be as popular as media and the arts.
For more information about the Green Flag awards and Eco-Schools programme go to www.eco-schools.org.uk
Paul Lund
Friday, January 8, 2010
Climate challenge intensifies
Blog 13 – Climate Challenge & Communities 05.1.10 by Paul Lund
We know that ‘unprecedented’ weather disasters are causing human suffering, economic loss and deaths around the world and what affects people also affects wildlife. Climatologists believe climate change is now indisputable and that carbon dioxide (C02) levels must be reduced or the situation will get worse. Furthermore, we could arrive at a ‘tipping point’ over climate change when changing conditions will become unstoppable, giving rise to serious disasters to life on Earth.
After all the debate at the Copenhagen Summit, the economic argument for mitigation measures to slow or stop climate change caused by our carbon emissions is well rehearsed. Put simply paying billions of dollars now for nations to stop polluting, to invest in new clean technology or for people to not cut down rainforests makes more economic sense than if the rich countries have to compensate for the damage that will eventually be caused.
The Stern Report (Lord Nicholas Stern), commissioned by the government, identified the economic cost of unmitigated climate change to be greater than any depression or world wars. It could take 20 percent or more of global gross domestic product. It could eventually lead to the collapse of world trade in the final throws of society breaking down, as other climate change effects are compounded. The bigger the polluter is, like a big bank, the more their failure to come clean and change their ways is not an option when the stakes are so high.
It seems a mad situation to be in, and I wonder how far it will go the other way? Will this policy end up paying holiday makers not to fly, or parents offered sums of money to walk rather than drive their children to school. Probably not, but seriously much more will have to be done at the local level to meet the carbon reduction targets the government has set. If people don’t believe they have to, or can’t afford to change, then we might not achieve what is necessary.
The start of this new decade will focus minds on what to do next at international and national level with climate change agreements, targets, and how communities at local level can continue to make a difference.
Community side of climate change
Large industries in the UK have their subsidies from government to ‘transition’ to a low carbon economy, but what we don’t have yet is a substantial ‘community fund’ to reward towns and villages that have formed green groups and are making significant changes to their overall carbon footprints. As with nations, transparency on quantifying how much C02 reduction has been achieved will be an issue, but communities who achieve reductions at all levels should benefit.
Part of why I think this would be a good idea is because government has so far left the voluntary sector to largely take up local green campaigning and with it the challenge of changing people’s minds towards living sustainably. This is being done with very little support financially or organisationally from the public sector toward the thousands of small groups now active. Although many work with little or no monetary support, this community role requires knowledge and understanding of the social as well as climate changes taking place; the groups are encouraging positive action and many would benefit with funding that is not dependant on time consuming form filling.
Campaigners started Transition Towns, others formed Sustainability or Go Green groups and some of these groups have been active now for several years. Their members report finding the ‘job’ is harder to do and part of the reason for this is that more people seem unwilling to accept or engage with what is happening to our world and more volunteers are dropping out because of fatigue or simply wanting less pressure and stressful things to spend their un-paid time doing.
In some areas there has been demand for self-help guidance and de-stressing sessions. In Glastonbury meetings among Transition activists have started with meditation and guided visualisation techniques to help people cope with their emotions and anxieties in dealing with the issues and problems.
The Energy Saving Trust recognises this and has set up some support for community groups. Their free Green Communities membership provides a range of services including newsletters, training, networking and help with funding. Green Community Heroes is their award which recognised four groups and one individual, nationally. The Wiltshire village of Urchfont was one of the lucky winners of the award last year.
· A tip, if you are feeling the campaign pressure of working on climate change issues then step back, if you can, and become a mentor to others. Experienced green / environmental community workers are valuable assets in every county and many new groups would benefit from your advice, and helping others could be a way to help yourself.
People who support and work for environmental ‘good causes’ do so not for the recognition but for the ethical and scientific principles involved, but it is none-the-less an achievement to be honoured or have their work validated. More might be done by the communities, government – even the royal family – to popularise the efforts being made by individuals and groups.
My own view is that each county could add a best green village and town award going forward to regional and national level awards, especially if the award brings significant investment to go further – encouraging every other village and town to try to win.
Setting the green example
Government’s support for the environment is seen by activists as having double standards as airport expansion is approved, investment or support for nuclear power is put before renewable, and there is a lack of positive greening in much of the legislation.
If communities are going to be fully engaged in tackling the causes of climate change then all the voluntary green groups must be fully supported and be ‘resource-enabled’ to make real differences. This could mean all the groups participating in planning changes would contribute to targets and local strategies. ‘Military-like’ efficiency would be necessary if hundreds of more groups are to be involved in return for the rewards.
In Somerset, Callie Gauntlett, a volunteer with the campaigning group Milverton Climate Challenge, says more should be done: “I think everyone should have smart meters to measure what electric appliances are costing and the power they are using; all homes should make some electricity from solar PV and we would like to see local bus transport turn electric.”
At South Somerset Climate Action group, Joe Burlington says we should be taking action on all possible fronts to safeguard our future: “Councils should be doing more to help, especially over what can be done with energy saving and adaptation in older, more difficult, dwellings under the planning regulations.” He also wants to see all useless floodlighting of buildings stopped as an immediate energy saving measure and many workshops and teaching events held to show people how to use or make renewable energy installations.
The Pilton Go Green Group’s chairman is Reverend David Osborne, who also chairs the Bath and Wells Diocesan Environment Group. He says, “people’s awareness of green issues has grown and therefore the situation is changing as everyone becomes more informed; Pilton Go Green Group feels it is important to respond to this changing situation and as an election is coming we have invited politicians to a ‘green question time’ public meeting on 24th February, 7.30pm at the Village Hall.” David adds that they are fortunate as a village group in Pilton to not need much funding and have found support from the district council and Glastonbury Festivals with the cost of small projects.
As far as local practical schemes go, Paula Jordan, a member of Pilton Go Green Group says “We would like to grow more food on our allotment and set up a cooperative type of trade among villagers; I also think more people could be encouraged to have solar PV panels on their homes if they were cheaper, perhaps through a discounted multiple order.”
All these groups differ in what they want to do and the needs they have. They find various ways to take action, but I think as more communities join in there will need to be extended measures to reward and value such grass roots mobilisation. If this is not forthcoming, then much more support and organisational involvement (like it or not?) will need to come from local government to meet the 2020 targets. Councils so far have seen community based climate change issues as budget dependent and if legislation does not tell councils to act then staffing and green community support will be discretionary.
Staying positive
The situation is not helped by wavering general doubts and some vocal opponents in some communities. Even some members of parliament seem completely out of touch with the science and economics concerning climate change. Others find it hard to understand how with global warming we can still have snow storms in Europe’s winter months. The number of individuals airing their unscientific arguments is small against the majority of people who believe we must do something. However, space is easy to grab in the press and media because editors, especially on radio programmes, like to ‘balance the argument’ – “do you or don’t you believe in climate change and man’s part in it” – but this does lead to a feeling the country is divided down the middle, when the one in 10 callers who don’t believe go head to head with one of nine who does.
Until the scientific world makes enough quantifiable evidence available then this will continue, much as it must have done when the flat Earth proponents argued against those who said the world was definitely round. At some point it must have seemed pointless to argue any longer, unless you are a conspiracy theorist who likes a good game.
Community green groups do a great deal to help and educate their local populations and most of them do so without any pay for what they do and little in terms of income to support their costs.
It would be a great help if a green ‘Secret Millionaire’ paid a visit to our communities and gave them some help towards the many projects that could be started.
· Joe Burlington in South Somerset said they need a paid administrator to help with their group’s work and Callie Gauntlett in Milverton said if their group had enough money they would spend it on a shared fundraiser working for all the Somerset green groups.
For more information about Green Community Heroes, and how the Energy Saving Trust can help, you can sign up for free support by calling 08448 480077, or log on to energysavingtrust.org.uk/community
Paul Lund
We know that ‘unprecedented’ weather disasters are causing human suffering, economic loss and deaths around the world and what affects people also affects wildlife. Climatologists believe climate change is now indisputable and that carbon dioxide (C02) levels must be reduced or the situation will get worse. Furthermore, we could arrive at a ‘tipping point’ over climate change when changing conditions will become unstoppable, giving rise to serious disasters to life on Earth.
After all the debate at the Copenhagen Summit, the economic argument for mitigation measures to slow or stop climate change caused by our carbon emissions is well rehearsed. Put simply paying billions of dollars now for nations to stop polluting, to invest in new clean technology or for people to not cut down rainforests makes more economic sense than if the rich countries have to compensate for the damage that will eventually be caused.
The Stern Report (Lord Nicholas Stern), commissioned by the government, identified the economic cost of unmitigated climate change to be greater than any depression or world wars. It could take 20 percent or more of global gross domestic product. It could eventually lead to the collapse of world trade in the final throws of society breaking down, as other climate change effects are compounded. The bigger the polluter is, like a big bank, the more their failure to come clean and change their ways is not an option when the stakes are so high.
It seems a mad situation to be in, and I wonder how far it will go the other way? Will this policy end up paying holiday makers not to fly, or parents offered sums of money to walk rather than drive their children to school. Probably not, but seriously much more will have to be done at the local level to meet the carbon reduction targets the government has set. If people don’t believe they have to, or can’t afford to change, then we might not achieve what is necessary.
The start of this new decade will focus minds on what to do next at international and national level with climate change agreements, targets, and how communities at local level can continue to make a difference.
Community side of climate change
Large industries in the UK have their subsidies from government to ‘transition’ to a low carbon economy, but what we don’t have yet is a substantial ‘community fund’ to reward towns and villages that have formed green groups and are making significant changes to their overall carbon footprints. As with nations, transparency on quantifying how much C02 reduction has been achieved will be an issue, but communities who achieve reductions at all levels should benefit.
Part of why I think this would be a good idea is because government has so far left the voluntary sector to largely take up local green campaigning and with it the challenge of changing people’s minds towards living sustainably. This is being done with very little support financially or organisationally from the public sector toward the thousands of small groups now active. Although many work with little or no monetary support, this community role requires knowledge and understanding of the social as well as climate changes taking place; the groups are encouraging positive action and many would benefit with funding that is not dependant on time consuming form filling.
Campaigners started Transition Towns, others formed Sustainability or Go Green groups and some of these groups have been active now for several years. Their members report finding the ‘job’ is harder to do and part of the reason for this is that more people seem unwilling to accept or engage with what is happening to our world and more volunteers are dropping out because of fatigue or simply wanting less pressure and stressful things to spend their un-paid time doing.
In some areas there has been demand for self-help guidance and de-stressing sessions. In Glastonbury meetings among Transition activists have started with meditation and guided visualisation techniques to help people cope with their emotions and anxieties in dealing with the issues and problems.
The Energy Saving Trust recognises this and has set up some support for community groups. Their free Green Communities membership provides a range of services including newsletters, training, networking and help with funding. Green Community Heroes is their award which recognised four groups and one individual, nationally. The Wiltshire village of Urchfont was one of the lucky winners of the award last year.
· A tip, if you are feeling the campaign pressure of working on climate change issues then step back, if you can, and become a mentor to others. Experienced green / environmental community workers are valuable assets in every county and many new groups would benefit from your advice, and helping others could be a way to help yourself.
People who support and work for environmental ‘good causes’ do so not for the recognition but for the ethical and scientific principles involved, but it is none-the-less an achievement to be honoured or have their work validated. More might be done by the communities, government – even the royal family – to popularise the efforts being made by individuals and groups.
My own view is that each county could add a best green village and town award going forward to regional and national level awards, especially if the award brings significant investment to go further – encouraging every other village and town to try to win.
Setting the green example
Government’s support for the environment is seen by activists as having double standards as airport expansion is approved, investment or support for nuclear power is put before renewable, and there is a lack of positive greening in much of the legislation.
If communities are going to be fully engaged in tackling the causes of climate change then all the voluntary green groups must be fully supported and be ‘resource-enabled’ to make real differences. This could mean all the groups participating in planning changes would contribute to targets and local strategies. ‘Military-like’ efficiency would be necessary if hundreds of more groups are to be involved in return for the rewards.
In Somerset, Callie Gauntlett, a volunteer with the campaigning group Milverton Climate Challenge, says more should be done: “I think everyone should have smart meters to measure what electric appliances are costing and the power they are using; all homes should make some electricity from solar PV and we would like to see local bus transport turn electric.”
At South Somerset Climate Action group, Joe Burlington says we should be taking action on all possible fronts to safeguard our future: “Councils should be doing more to help, especially over what can be done with energy saving and adaptation in older, more difficult, dwellings under the planning regulations.” He also wants to see all useless floodlighting of buildings stopped as an immediate energy saving measure and many workshops and teaching events held to show people how to use or make renewable energy installations.
The Pilton Go Green Group’s chairman is Reverend David Osborne, who also chairs the Bath and Wells Diocesan Environment Group. He says, “people’s awareness of green issues has grown and therefore the situation is changing as everyone becomes more informed; Pilton Go Green Group feels it is important to respond to this changing situation and as an election is coming we have invited politicians to a ‘green question time’ public meeting on 24th February, 7.30pm at the Village Hall.” David adds that they are fortunate as a village group in Pilton to not need much funding and have found support from the district council and Glastonbury Festivals with the cost of small projects.
As far as local practical schemes go, Paula Jordan, a member of Pilton Go Green Group says “We would like to grow more food on our allotment and set up a cooperative type of trade among villagers; I also think more people could be encouraged to have solar PV panels on their homes if they were cheaper, perhaps through a discounted multiple order.”
All these groups differ in what they want to do and the needs they have. They find various ways to take action, but I think as more communities join in there will need to be extended measures to reward and value such grass roots mobilisation. If this is not forthcoming, then much more support and organisational involvement (like it or not?) will need to come from local government to meet the 2020 targets. Councils so far have seen community based climate change issues as budget dependent and if legislation does not tell councils to act then staffing and green community support will be discretionary.
Staying positive
The situation is not helped by wavering general doubts and some vocal opponents in some communities. Even some members of parliament seem completely out of touch with the science and economics concerning climate change. Others find it hard to understand how with global warming we can still have snow storms in Europe’s winter months. The number of individuals airing their unscientific arguments is small against the majority of people who believe we must do something. However, space is easy to grab in the press and media because editors, especially on radio programmes, like to ‘balance the argument’ – “do you or don’t you believe in climate change and man’s part in it” – but this does lead to a feeling the country is divided down the middle, when the one in 10 callers who don’t believe go head to head with one of nine who does.
Until the scientific world makes enough quantifiable evidence available then this will continue, much as it must have done when the flat Earth proponents argued against those who said the world was definitely round. At some point it must have seemed pointless to argue any longer, unless you are a conspiracy theorist who likes a good game.
Community green groups do a great deal to help and educate their local populations and most of them do so without any pay for what they do and little in terms of income to support their costs.
It would be a great help if a green ‘Secret Millionaire’ paid a visit to our communities and gave them some help towards the many projects that could be started.
· Joe Burlington in South Somerset said they need a paid administrator to help with their group’s work and Callie Gauntlett in Milverton said if their group had enough money they would spend it on a shared fundraiser working for all the Somerset green groups.
For more information about Green Community Heroes, and how the Energy Saving Trust can help, you can sign up for free support by calling 08448 480077, or log on to energysavingtrust.org.uk/community
Paul Lund
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Eyes of the world relied on Copenhagen – but it didn’t deliver
“It was not what we had hoped for or wanted,” sums up the outcome of Cop15.
If you are a supporter of the environment you will be sadly disappointed at what our world leaders were able, or not able, to do after two years of planning, two weeks of face to face talks, and a cost of £130 Million - if not more - to bring together 193 nations under the UN Copenhagen Climate Change Conference and Summit.
On the other hand, if you think the rich nations can live without the environment and compensate for a changing climate then these talks won’t mean much at all, but could have threatened your lifestyle and income – especially if you happen to be the owner of a Texan oil or Russian gas well.
There has probably been no other meeting of world leaders in history with so much at stake – namely the very survival of our biosphere or life support system – and yet the whole event was vandalised by denials, self interests, political game play and arguments to render the negotiation process virtually null and void. A “weak agreement” led to no agreement at all but a “note to ....” say countries outside that agreement wouldn’t block it. No country was satisfied with what had been achieved.
One wonders if we have reached a point in human history when no united international decision or consensus can ever be made or achieved by such a diverse and combatant group of nations. Talk in the US is that world government was being imposed through the UN, and even that the communists’ are behind the green movement and trying to topple capitalist nations. It makes me think the “Age of Stupid” is alive and doing very well, thank you, but among the intelligent thinkers what has the United Nations really achieved with Copenhagen, and what are the chances of any better legally binding deal being done in Bonn or Mexico next year?
What was achieved?
Firstly, I was impressed at how all the nation delegations agreed that man is responsible for rising CO2 levels and the incontrovertible science that greenhouse gases trap heat around the Earth causing the climate systems to change and the cost of adaptation must be met. A “new level of ‘geopolitics’ has arrived,” said the commentators.
a) A general agreement that we must limit the rise in temperature to 2 degrees C on 1990 levels or the future for most significant life forms will be under threat. This limit does not, however, avoid some drastic changes to the world map and where people will be able to live in future. The less developed countries or small island states, who are suffering most from sea level rise and drought, wanted that level to be fixed at 1.5C. This could, after the next scientific assessment, become the real target.
b) Agreement was reached about the need for saving the rain forests and to do this tropical countries would be given billions of dollars not to cut down trees.
c) $100 billion to be given annually by rich nations to those suffering most by climate change by 2020 was supported, but not fixed. The poor countries wanted $200 billion with signatures.
d) A Climate Accord was drafted and agreed to by a group of leading nations, but nothing binding.
e) Politicians said “Real progress” had been made.
The world’s communities were watching and reading the news to find out what was decided and finally feeling the urgency and seriousness of the position we have now arrived at. My only reservation was that this news was confined, on British television at least, to News bulletins and not on the BBC or ITV main programme schedule, as for example with coverage of election night. Those who are late night telly watchers would have seen an interesting range of documentary climate focussed programmes across the channels. Sky News had the most consistent TV news coverage, in my view.
What wasn’t agreed?
a) Finally, it was only agreed to “take note of the Climate Accord,” rather than endorse it.
b) No legally binding deal, or treaty; something everyone was disappointed at not reaching. China and India have problems in accepting any deal that limits their growth. There is also dispute about how the world can verify what each nation state is achieving in reduced emissions.
c) Decisions over Targets for mitigating or reducing the rise in C02 levels – 20% or 30% by 2020 and 80% by 2050 – on 1990 /2005 levels, could not be agreed by all nations so a treaty was not agreed.
d) The NGOs and least or less developed countries said it was a “failure, with no deal agreed.”
Although the conference venue looked more like a Swedish Ikea store on TV, with open plan gourmet cafes, plastic chairs and bright colours, rather than a place were serious deals must be done, I think it had the look of somewhere influenced by creative people, which should have produced positive results. However, if I were a resident of the Danish capital, I would be fairly worried now that my city will be dubbed the place that failed the world!
Even more worrying is whether Mexico City will now become Copenhagen’s failed twin in December 2010?
Can we stand yet another year of indecisive action by the world, while poor countries most affected by climates suffer and while animals and plants, humans and communities die, because nations are reluctant to make the change before the climate makes it for everyone?
It seems to me that our ‘relationship’ with the Earth is seriously in danger now of breaking down. Political processes and world leaders have been found wanting on what are the most important decisions which affect mankind and all life.
Many people seem to distrust the science and will argue against taking action without any real evidential knowledge. We are not married or sufficiently wedded to the principles of “for better or for worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health, till death do us part we will love, cherish and protect our environment and home planet and do whatever it takes to live in harmony with nature.” Maybe making these vows, and signing a pledge or ‘Earth Marriage’ certificate of commitment for the rest of their lives, is something people might like to do together and symbolically perform in their communities?
Oh, and for anyone who still thinks people can live in cities and avoid the excesses of climate change without ever needing to change their lifestyle – then think carefully about why we need a stable natural environment to support our food and water supplies, provide foundations for economies, or simply to live happily and not in fear of frequent climate disasters causing damage and destruction to the places we live in.
Divorce from the environment – our environment – is not an option since we cannot live on Earth and survive without functioning ecosystems and planet based climate control.
Paul Lund
23.12.09
If you are a supporter of the environment you will be sadly disappointed at what our world leaders were able, or not able, to do after two years of planning, two weeks of face to face talks, and a cost of £130 Million - if not more - to bring together 193 nations under the UN Copenhagen Climate Change Conference and Summit.
On the other hand, if you think the rich nations can live without the environment and compensate for a changing climate then these talks won’t mean much at all, but could have threatened your lifestyle and income – especially if you happen to be the owner of a Texan oil or Russian gas well.
There has probably been no other meeting of world leaders in history with so much at stake – namely the very survival of our biosphere or life support system – and yet the whole event was vandalised by denials, self interests, political game play and arguments to render the negotiation process virtually null and void. A “weak agreement” led to no agreement at all but a “note to ....” say countries outside that agreement wouldn’t block it. No country was satisfied with what had been achieved.
One wonders if we have reached a point in human history when no united international decision or consensus can ever be made or achieved by such a diverse and combatant group of nations. Talk in the US is that world government was being imposed through the UN, and even that the communists’ are behind the green movement and trying to topple capitalist nations. It makes me think the “Age of Stupid” is alive and doing very well, thank you, but among the intelligent thinkers what has the United Nations really achieved with Copenhagen, and what are the chances of any better legally binding deal being done in Bonn or Mexico next year?
What was achieved?
Firstly, I was impressed at how all the nation delegations agreed that man is responsible for rising CO2 levels and the incontrovertible science that greenhouse gases trap heat around the Earth causing the climate systems to change and the cost of adaptation must be met. A “new level of ‘geopolitics’ has arrived,” said the commentators.
a) A general agreement that we must limit the rise in temperature to 2 degrees C on 1990 levels or the future for most significant life forms will be under threat. This limit does not, however, avoid some drastic changes to the world map and where people will be able to live in future. The less developed countries or small island states, who are suffering most from sea level rise and drought, wanted that level to be fixed at 1.5C. This could, after the next scientific assessment, become the real target.
b) Agreement was reached about the need for saving the rain forests and to do this tropical countries would be given billions of dollars not to cut down trees.
c) $100 billion to be given annually by rich nations to those suffering most by climate change by 2020 was supported, but not fixed. The poor countries wanted $200 billion with signatures.
d) A Climate Accord was drafted and agreed to by a group of leading nations, but nothing binding.
e) Politicians said “Real progress” had been made.
The world’s communities were watching and reading the news to find out what was decided and finally feeling the urgency and seriousness of the position we have now arrived at. My only reservation was that this news was confined, on British television at least, to News bulletins and not on the BBC or ITV main programme schedule, as for example with coverage of election night. Those who are late night telly watchers would have seen an interesting range of documentary climate focussed programmes across the channels. Sky News had the most consistent TV news coverage, in my view.
What wasn’t agreed?
a) Finally, it was only agreed to “take note of the Climate Accord,” rather than endorse it.
b) No legally binding deal, or treaty; something everyone was disappointed at not reaching. China and India have problems in accepting any deal that limits their growth. There is also dispute about how the world can verify what each nation state is achieving in reduced emissions.
c) Decisions over Targets for mitigating or reducing the rise in C02 levels – 20% or 30% by 2020 and 80% by 2050 – on 1990 /2005 levels, could not be agreed by all nations so a treaty was not agreed.
d) The NGOs and least or less developed countries said it was a “failure, with no deal agreed.”
Although the conference venue looked more like a Swedish Ikea store on TV, with open plan gourmet cafes, plastic chairs and bright colours, rather than a place were serious deals must be done, I think it had the look of somewhere influenced by creative people, which should have produced positive results. However, if I were a resident of the Danish capital, I would be fairly worried now that my city will be dubbed the place that failed the world!
Even more worrying is whether Mexico City will now become Copenhagen’s failed twin in December 2010?
Can we stand yet another year of indecisive action by the world, while poor countries most affected by climates suffer and while animals and plants, humans and communities die, because nations are reluctant to make the change before the climate makes it for everyone?
It seems to me that our ‘relationship’ with the Earth is seriously in danger now of breaking down. Political processes and world leaders have been found wanting on what are the most important decisions which affect mankind and all life.
Many people seem to distrust the science and will argue against taking action without any real evidential knowledge. We are not married or sufficiently wedded to the principles of “for better or for worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health, till death do us part we will love, cherish and protect our environment and home planet and do whatever it takes to live in harmony with nature.” Maybe making these vows, and signing a pledge or ‘Earth Marriage’ certificate of commitment for the rest of their lives, is something people might like to do together and symbolically perform in their communities?
Oh, and for anyone who still thinks people can live in cities and avoid the excesses of climate change without ever needing to change their lifestyle – then think carefully about why we need a stable natural environment to support our food and water supplies, provide foundations for economies, or simply to live happily and not in fear of frequent climate disasters causing damage and destruction to the places we live in.
Divorce from the environment – our environment – is not an option since we cannot live on Earth and survive without functioning ecosystems and planet based climate control.
Paul Lund
23.12.09
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Avalon Marshes wildlife on-air
Birdlife on the Avalon Marshes, west of Glastonbury, is diverse at this time of year as winter avian visitors come from Europe and as far away as Russia to mix with British residents, and since the trees are bare more of our own woodland species can be seen foraging and gathering among the branches.
Notably, “flocks of finches and tits can be seen moving through the tree line, whilst among the unusual winter migrants coming from Europe we can see Redwings, Fieldfares and Brambling,” says Simon Clarke, Natural England’s manager for Shapwick Heath National Nature Reserve.
The Brambling, Simon tells us, “Can also sometimes be seen at garden bird tables and traditionally this bird is a harbinger of cold weather to come,” some of which we may be feeling this week.
Wildfowl such as Wigeon and Teal can be seen on the open water of the Avalon Marshes at this time of year and across the Somerset Levels. The areas of reed bed with open water habitats were created after the end of peat extraction, and have now been turned into protected wildlife areas.
Most spectacular are the murmurations or gatherings of millions of Starlings during the winter months which attract large numbers of human visitors to watch the black masses of birds which twist and turn in flight at dusk before dropping down into the reed beds for the night. “They, along with many of the ducks at this time of year, are attracting the attention of birds of prey such as Marsh Harrier, Sparrow Hawk, Peregrine Falcon, Kestrel, and Buzzard who are finding ‘ready meals’ in plentiful supply,” Simon tells us.
“One other highlight to mention is that late December into early January is the peak of the fox mating season, and if you live in a rural area or an area of town with lots of waste ground you will be able to hear the calls of male dog foxes or the female vixens for most of the night,” Simon adds.
Simon Clarke’s infectious enthusiasm for the wildlife of the Marshes and his talent for verbally communicating to audiences have been discovered by Glastonbury FM, community radio for Glastonbury, Street and Wells.
The radio station have started broadcasting an hour long show each month called Green Watch, an environment and eco programme – which I am pleased to be presenting – and Simon has agreed to become a regular contributor of news and reports from the local nature reserves.
The pilot show which includes Simon talking about the starlings at Shapwick Heath NNR, has now been repeated more than once on GFM, prompting people to say how great it is to hear about the local wildlife on the air waves and that Simon is a lively contrast to Chris Packham or Simon King at the BBC.
Having a dedicated programme to showcase this areas’ wild nature and ‘all things eco and sustainable’ is probably unique among the community radio stations and local BBC. As the show builds and becomes more popular its content could be shared with other radio stations as there is so much interest across the county in our spectacular wildlife sights and wonderful range of wild places to visit.
For more details of when Green Watch is broadcast on Glastonbury 107.1FM the station’s telephone number is 01458 835 299 or go to www.glastonburyfm.co.uk
Notably, “flocks of finches and tits can be seen moving through the tree line, whilst among the unusual winter migrants coming from Europe we can see Redwings, Fieldfares and Brambling,” says Simon Clarke, Natural England’s manager for Shapwick Heath National Nature Reserve.
The Brambling, Simon tells us, “Can also sometimes be seen at garden bird tables and traditionally this bird is a harbinger of cold weather to come,” some of which we may be feeling this week.
Wildfowl such as Wigeon and Teal can be seen on the open water of the Avalon Marshes at this time of year and across the Somerset Levels. The areas of reed bed with open water habitats were created after the end of peat extraction, and have now been turned into protected wildlife areas.
Most spectacular are the murmurations or gatherings of millions of Starlings during the winter months which attract large numbers of human visitors to watch the black masses of birds which twist and turn in flight at dusk before dropping down into the reed beds for the night. “They, along with many of the ducks at this time of year, are attracting the attention of birds of prey such as Marsh Harrier, Sparrow Hawk, Peregrine Falcon, Kestrel, and Buzzard who are finding ‘ready meals’ in plentiful supply,” Simon tells us.
“One other highlight to mention is that late December into early January is the peak of the fox mating season, and if you live in a rural area or an area of town with lots of waste ground you will be able to hear the calls of male dog foxes or the female vixens for most of the night,” Simon adds.
Simon Clarke’s infectious enthusiasm for the wildlife of the Marshes and his talent for verbally communicating to audiences have been discovered by Glastonbury FM, community radio for Glastonbury, Street and Wells.
The radio station have started broadcasting an hour long show each month called Green Watch, an environment and eco programme – which I am pleased to be presenting – and Simon has agreed to become a regular contributor of news and reports from the local nature reserves.
The pilot show which includes Simon talking about the starlings at Shapwick Heath NNR, has now been repeated more than once on GFM, prompting people to say how great it is to hear about the local wildlife on the air waves and that Simon is a lively contrast to Chris Packham or Simon King at the BBC.
Having a dedicated programme to showcase this areas’ wild nature and ‘all things eco and sustainable’ is probably unique among the community radio stations and local BBC. As the show builds and becomes more popular its content could be shared with other radio stations as there is so much interest across the county in our spectacular wildlife sights and wonderful range of wild places to visit.
For more details of when Green Watch is broadcast on Glastonbury 107.1FM the station’s telephone number is 01458 835 299 or go to www.glastonburyfm.co.uk
Friday, December 4, 2009
Copenhagen or bust!
Anthropogenic climate change, or the disruption being caused through human activities releasing the three most potent greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide) is still, according to surveys, not accepted by some non-scientific people. It seems the more evidence that exists then the more some people will deny a proven event had or is happening. Coping with something that threatens to overwhelm maybe one explanation, or belief in conspiracies to fool ordinary people is another.
Local newspapers have recently carried letters from readers clearly frightened by the prospect of what climate change is predicted to bestow on our living world. They describe how difficult it is for them to believe man is responsible. I have sympathy with them and anyone who simply cannot come to terms with the fact we have a serious problem, one which has a magnitude greater than anything faced by mankind in the past.
It is understandable to feel comfort or belief in a few reports which attempt to dismiss human activity being the main driver or cause for making the planet’s temperature rise rapidly. The last 50 years have shown the greatest rise in greenhouse gases and
Charles Darwin had the same problem when he saw the evidence for animal and man’s evolution. Some people today still think humans are not part of the animal kingdom and haven’t evolved from a branch of primates. They are not conspiracy theorists, but believe exactly what the Bible says. Comprehension and believability are stretched in many ways in our daily lives, although we are wiser than we have ever been to what might be fiction rather than scientific fact.
Some people believe the government stands to benefit by ‘inventing climate change disasters’ in order to raise money through green taxes. I can think of better ways they could achieve the same without inventing such an elaborate ploy. Without water pouring into our homes, crops dying of drought, or hurricane winds becoming a frequent occurrence, there will be some who say the news and ‘global warmers’ are scaremongering or that they read the planet is going through a cycle of natural change that will all get better in years to come.
One correspondent wrote that where ‘global warming’ was once used ‘they’ now call it ‘climate change’ to scare us more! In case you haven’t understood how excess green house gasses give rise to global warming which in turn leads to climate change – which is not the same as the weekly change in weather patterns forecast by the Met Office – then it is your knowledge of the science rather than those science writers that’s at fault.
Like everyone else, I would rejoice and sleep easy if we could solve the problem or find a solution that would let the human race get back to normal and stop mitigating or having to adapt to an ever more unstable environment. Of course that doesn’t let us off the hook of the other disasters we will face if world population cannot be controlled, food shortages overcome, or loss of habitats and pollution stopped that threaten almost every wild animal species, let alone the search for alternative forms of reliable clean energy to replace the dwindling supplies of fossil fuels, with their rise in price to levels that will be out of reach of ordinary working citizens.
The summit of world leaders in Copenhagen has already been talked about as doomed before the politicians have even sat down together. Attempts to negotiate the deals and agreements to cut carbon dioxide emissions in advance have stalled and the prospects look bleak unless some breakthrough is found. Drama is also part of the picture when the stakes are high, so whether it will be singing in the streets – “wonderful, wonderful Copenhagen” – or “Copenhagen, we are bust” only time will tell.
We are also told this is a last chance opportunity to broker the kind of deals that will give us the best chance of avoiding disastrous climate change chaos or going past the Tipping Point into non-retrievable climate stability. Maybe some of those world leaders don’t believe the science or they are prepared to chance it rather than lose their country’s industrial wealth and income. Only the intelligent ones will listen to the mass of scientific evidence or see how not agreeing to the cuts will be political suicide, even genocide, if millions of the poorest people around the world, in the most vulnerable situations, lose their lives through anthropogenic climatic change.
Whilst financial institutions and politicians have been found not to be the most trustworthy in society, I cannot think of anything that the scientific community, world-wide, have tried to make us believe and has been found to be a deception. On the contrary, science takes the sceptical approach and needs irrefutable evidence before eminent scientists place their faith in something. For now I would rather believe the scientific community and go all out to curb our carbon emissions rather than wait for ‘unprecedented’ climate disruption and risk passing the tipping point of C02 concentrations that could be unstoppable.
What can any individual do about all this? What can the world’s scientists and the vast number of world-wide non-governmental organisations, charities, agencies, businesses and industries who understand what is happening do about this? What will prime ministers and presidents, governments and the United Nations do to make the Copenhagen climate summit resolve to do everything that’s humanly possible to avert this danger?
The answer will come soon enough.
The UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen takes place from 7-18 December 2009
Paul Lund
Local newspapers have recently carried letters from readers clearly frightened by the prospect of what climate change is predicted to bestow on our living world. They describe how difficult it is for them to believe man is responsible. I have sympathy with them and anyone who simply cannot come to terms with the fact we have a serious problem, one which has a magnitude greater than anything faced by mankind in the past.
It is understandable to feel comfort or belief in a few reports which attempt to dismiss human activity being the main driver or cause for making the planet’s temperature rise rapidly. The last 50 years have shown the greatest rise in greenhouse gases and
Charles Darwin had the same problem when he saw the evidence for animal and man’s evolution. Some people today still think humans are not part of the animal kingdom and haven’t evolved from a branch of primates. They are not conspiracy theorists, but believe exactly what the Bible says. Comprehension and believability are stretched in many ways in our daily lives, although we are wiser than we have ever been to what might be fiction rather than scientific fact.
Some people believe the government stands to benefit by ‘inventing climate change disasters’ in order to raise money through green taxes. I can think of better ways they could achieve the same without inventing such an elaborate ploy. Without water pouring into our homes, crops dying of drought, or hurricane winds becoming a frequent occurrence, there will be some who say the news and ‘global warmers’ are scaremongering or that they read the planet is going through a cycle of natural change that will all get better in years to come.
One correspondent wrote that where ‘global warming’ was once used ‘they’ now call it ‘climate change’ to scare us more! In case you haven’t understood how excess green house gasses give rise to global warming which in turn leads to climate change – which is not the same as the weekly change in weather patterns forecast by the Met Office – then it is your knowledge of the science rather than those science writers that’s at fault.
Like everyone else, I would rejoice and sleep easy if we could solve the problem or find a solution that would let the human race get back to normal and stop mitigating or having to adapt to an ever more unstable environment. Of course that doesn’t let us off the hook of the other disasters we will face if world population cannot be controlled, food shortages overcome, or loss of habitats and pollution stopped that threaten almost every wild animal species, let alone the search for alternative forms of reliable clean energy to replace the dwindling supplies of fossil fuels, with their rise in price to levels that will be out of reach of ordinary working citizens.
The summit of world leaders in Copenhagen has already been talked about as doomed before the politicians have even sat down together. Attempts to negotiate the deals and agreements to cut carbon dioxide emissions in advance have stalled and the prospects look bleak unless some breakthrough is found. Drama is also part of the picture when the stakes are high, so whether it will be singing in the streets – “wonderful, wonderful Copenhagen” – or “Copenhagen, we are bust” only time will tell.
We are also told this is a last chance opportunity to broker the kind of deals that will give us the best chance of avoiding disastrous climate change chaos or going past the Tipping Point into non-retrievable climate stability. Maybe some of those world leaders don’t believe the science or they are prepared to chance it rather than lose their country’s industrial wealth and income. Only the intelligent ones will listen to the mass of scientific evidence or see how not agreeing to the cuts will be political suicide, even genocide, if millions of the poorest people around the world, in the most vulnerable situations, lose their lives through anthropogenic climatic change.
Whilst financial institutions and politicians have been found not to be the most trustworthy in society, I cannot think of anything that the scientific community, world-wide, have tried to make us believe and has been found to be a deception. On the contrary, science takes the sceptical approach and needs irrefutable evidence before eminent scientists place their faith in something. For now I would rather believe the scientific community and go all out to curb our carbon emissions rather than wait for ‘unprecedented’ climate disruption and risk passing the tipping point of C02 concentrations that could be unstoppable.
What can any individual do about all this? What can the world’s scientists and the vast number of world-wide non-governmental organisations, charities, agencies, businesses and industries who understand what is happening do about this? What will prime ministers and presidents, governments and the United Nations do to make the Copenhagen climate summit resolve to do everything that’s humanly possible to avert this danger?
The answer will come soon enough.
The UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen takes place from 7-18 December 2009
Paul Lund
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Go green, go quick
The new e-bikes are transport solutions to carbon reduction with added fun!
Have you tried cycling uphill with only the lightest of effort to turn the bicycle’s pedals, and found yourself effortlessly passing all other cyclists strenuously exerting their legs to move forward? If you have then you were probably riding an electric power assisted bicycle, or simply being towed behind a four wheeler!
Improvements in the design and efficiency of electric bikes, often called e-bikes, have come a long way. They are worth a close look if you haven’t experienced them before. If you have then you probably either own or use one already or hope to have one in the future.
Today’s latest models are refined and visually very appealing, so much so they are positively desirable machines to own. You can travel up to 30 miles at a top motor driven speed of 15.5mph (18.5mph off road) on the popular 250 watt, 37 volt, with the 8 amp hour advanced lithium polymer manganese battery, or a range of up to 56 miles using the 14 amp hour battery.
Jim Duncan runs Reaction Electric (RE), a Somerset based firm dedicated to supplying quality built electric personal transport, especially electric cycles and motor scooters. He told me their mission is simple: “We supply a range of vehicle options for anybody who would like to travel emissions free.”
Reaction Electric focus their dealership on the latest Wisper, Urban Mover, Ultra Motor and other best brands of electric bicycles. They also supply the Vectrix VX1 motorcycle, which RE believe are the most advanced electric motorcycles on the market. This is a very sleek and stylish motorbike that looks fast and appears no different to any other bike in its class, the only difference being it is totally silent and vibration free, whether travelling from one to 62 mph.
Jim invited me to try out the Wisper 905Eco e-bicycle. This is the basic model, in a jet black metallic anodised mountain bike frame, and the first of four in the 905 range. There is also the 806fe folding version that will fit into a car boot or for easy stowage on the train.
The 905 Eco looks and works like a normal bicycle, but with the added elongated box (the battery) fitted behind the saddle and a few handlebar switches you won’t find on a normal pedal bike. I tried very hard to locate the motor and came to the conclusion it must be inside the tubular frame between both pedals. Let me worn you now, they are addictive and once you’ve tried one you won’t be able to walk away and stop thinking about how great it would be to ride one to work or for pleasure.
As its name suggests, a Wisper makes hardly any noise when engaging the motor with an automated switch on the handle bar. The best part, I think, is that you can pedal like a normal bike, using its six speed Shimano gears, but then simply switch on and let the motor take the strain or add pedal power to go a little faster. The weight of the whole bike, without the removable battery, is not far off that of my own mountain bike, though the battery (2.3 to 3.8Kg), when fitted, makes a total bike weight of 48lbs or 21.6kg.
The battery takes from two to six hours to charge, and costs about six pence, on regular tariff. Using a solar photo-voltaic system to charge the battery would mean you are completely eco-friendly, zero carbon, and could take advantage of free sunshine or daylight power for life.
Battery charging is very simple at home or in the work place, via an ordinary three pin socket and the small transformer, which comes with each bike. The battery can either be charged in situ or easily removed from the bike for charging in your living room or elsewhere. A partial recharge of a battery might also be done whilst out shopping or at a cafe. Some premises will be happy to oblige, much like allowing a customer’s laptop to be plugged in whilst having a coffee or lunch.
The urban street based Elektrobay charging posts for EVs, which are starting to appear in towns and cities all over the UK, are designed to charge the electric motorcycles and four wheel EVs, but Jim tells me because the bicycle battery charge needs its transformer, in between the battery and the power source, they don’t advise unsupervised use of the street side charging in this instance.
As with all bicycles, it is recommended the user wears a protective cycle helmet and reflective, hi-vis clothing for added safety. Beyond that there is nothing else required – other than optional accident and theft insurance. They come complete with LED front and tail lights, bell, pannier racks, with bags optional.
The drawback I see in all this is the purchase cost of the bicycle. They can range from £500 to over £1000 depending on the model and make, so this makes them more of a luxury buy for adults. If they are considered as a replacement form of transport, however, then the investment set against the low running cost (the motor is maintenance free) plus the advantages over the cost and hassle of using the car in congested towns and cities, with limited parking and possible penalty costs, makes them a realistic option and solution to most urban travel problems. Going on the open country road, bridle or bike paths with an electric bike and you will experience the effortless pleasure of longer distance travel than pedalling alone would achieve.
“China is now setting an amazing example: having produced over 21 million electric vehicles – many of which are electric scooters – their factory gates are fast becoming vehicle noiseless as thousands of their workers come and go.” Jim Duncan
Reaction Electric is taking advantage of the growing interest and increasing availability of electric vehicle travel. “We believe there’s going to be a growth, across the South West, in the demand for electric vehicles across the whole range, with electric bicycles, scooters, mopeds, motorcycles coming first – it’s very much the technology of the future and its here now,” Jim says. He also told me about his research into the use of electric vehicles – EVs for short – in Germany and Canada, and that China has calculated they have over 21 million EVs owned by their factory workers.
It maybe some time yet before the electric car and van market takes off and replaces the internal combustion engine vehicles, Jim says, but they are already being used for some vehicle fleets and business users in the UK. As a way to reduce carbon emissions they score on two points – reducing ‘fossil car’ use and opportunity for currently using electric power from renewable sources or future carbon capture technologies at the power stations. Efficient use of electricity elsewhere would also allow more EV use without having to add more capacity to the grid.
“If we could cut electricity use for outdoor lighting (using LED) globally by one third, we would free up enough electrons to charge about 25 million electric vehicles – all without adding any new power plants to the grid.” The Climate Group organisation.
Reaction Electric have decided to trial a hire service for people wanting a short term EV use, especially prior to purchase or simply to extend a holiday experience in the South West.
In the run up to the Copenhagen Climate Summit this December, we will all become aware of the seriousness of our greenhouse gas emissions are having on global warming, and the fact that time is running out to take action around the world to stop the worst excesses of climate change.
Deciding to cut back on our personal carbon pollution can now go a step further with the use of EVs, and with the added advantage of lower running costs and an added enjoyment factor.
As a footnote to this article... Jim Duncan spoke to the Glastonbury Town Council last month (November) and the Council has agreed to form a working party to look in more detail at how they might install one or two trial Elektrobay recharging posts at St Dunstan’s Car Park. If this is done then Glastonbury can link itself into a growing network of places where the new wave of electric cars and vans can travel through or operate from. The electric re-charging posts become “filling stations” between home or work, providing a quick partial “top-up” or maybe in some cases, with the new battery technology, virtually a full charge within the time allocated.
A gathering of EVs (all shapes and sizes!) is being planned for Glastonbury on Saturday 10th April 2010. Anyone who owns any type of EV is welcome to contact Jim Duncan and express their interest in being part of this and even a parade around the town.
Paul Lund
References used
www.theclimategroup.org
www.reactionelectric.co.uk Telephone 01823 279622
www.electricbikesales.co.uk
Have you tried cycling uphill with only the lightest of effort to turn the bicycle’s pedals, and found yourself effortlessly passing all other cyclists strenuously exerting their legs to move forward? If you have then you were probably riding an electric power assisted bicycle, or simply being towed behind a four wheeler!
Improvements in the design and efficiency of electric bikes, often called e-bikes, have come a long way. They are worth a close look if you haven’t experienced them before. If you have then you probably either own or use one already or hope to have one in the future.
Today’s latest models are refined and visually very appealing, so much so they are positively desirable machines to own. You can travel up to 30 miles at a top motor driven speed of 15.5mph (18.5mph off road) on the popular 250 watt, 37 volt, with the 8 amp hour advanced lithium polymer manganese battery, or a range of up to 56 miles using the 14 amp hour battery.
Jim Duncan runs Reaction Electric (RE), a Somerset based firm dedicated to supplying quality built electric personal transport, especially electric cycles and motor scooters. He told me their mission is simple: “We supply a range of vehicle options for anybody who would like to travel emissions free.”
Reaction Electric focus their dealership on the latest Wisper, Urban Mover, Ultra Motor and other best brands of electric bicycles. They also supply the Vectrix VX1 motorcycle, which RE believe are the most advanced electric motorcycles on the market. This is a very sleek and stylish motorbike that looks fast and appears no different to any other bike in its class, the only difference being it is totally silent and vibration free, whether travelling from one to 62 mph.
Jim invited me to try out the Wisper 905Eco e-bicycle. This is the basic model, in a jet black metallic anodised mountain bike frame, and the first of four in the 905 range. There is also the 806fe folding version that will fit into a car boot or for easy stowage on the train.
The 905 Eco looks and works like a normal bicycle, but with the added elongated box (the battery) fitted behind the saddle and a few handlebar switches you won’t find on a normal pedal bike. I tried very hard to locate the motor and came to the conclusion it must be inside the tubular frame between both pedals. Let me worn you now, they are addictive and once you’ve tried one you won’t be able to walk away and stop thinking about how great it would be to ride one to work or for pleasure.
As its name suggests, a Wisper makes hardly any noise when engaging the motor with an automated switch on the handle bar. The best part, I think, is that you can pedal like a normal bike, using its six speed Shimano gears, but then simply switch on and let the motor take the strain or add pedal power to go a little faster. The weight of the whole bike, without the removable battery, is not far off that of my own mountain bike, though the battery (2.3 to 3.8Kg), when fitted, makes a total bike weight of 48lbs or 21.6kg.
The battery takes from two to six hours to charge, and costs about six pence, on regular tariff. Using a solar photo-voltaic system to charge the battery would mean you are completely eco-friendly, zero carbon, and could take advantage of free sunshine or daylight power for life.
Battery charging is very simple at home or in the work place, via an ordinary three pin socket and the small transformer, which comes with each bike. The battery can either be charged in situ or easily removed from the bike for charging in your living room or elsewhere. A partial recharge of a battery might also be done whilst out shopping or at a cafe. Some premises will be happy to oblige, much like allowing a customer’s laptop to be plugged in whilst having a coffee or lunch.
The urban street based Elektrobay charging posts for EVs, which are starting to appear in towns and cities all over the UK, are designed to charge the electric motorcycles and four wheel EVs, but Jim tells me because the bicycle battery charge needs its transformer, in between the battery and the power source, they don’t advise unsupervised use of the street side charging in this instance.
As with all bicycles, it is recommended the user wears a protective cycle helmet and reflective, hi-vis clothing for added safety. Beyond that there is nothing else required – other than optional accident and theft insurance. They come complete with LED front and tail lights, bell, pannier racks, with bags optional.
The drawback I see in all this is the purchase cost of the bicycle. They can range from £500 to over £1000 depending on the model and make, so this makes them more of a luxury buy for adults. If they are considered as a replacement form of transport, however, then the investment set against the low running cost (the motor is maintenance free) plus the advantages over the cost and hassle of using the car in congested towns and cities, with limited parking and possible penalty costs, makes them a realistic option and solution to most urban travel problems. Going on the open country road, bridle or bike paths with an electric bike and you will experience the effortless pleasure of longer distance travel than pedalling alone would achieve.
“China is now setting an amazing example: having produced over 21 million electric vehicles – many of which are electric scooters – their factory gates are fast becoming vehicle noiseless as thousands of their workers come and go.” Jim Duncan
Reaction Electric is taking advantage of the growing interest and increasing availability of electric vehicle travel. “We believe there’s going to be a growth, across the South West, in the demand for electric vehicles across the whole range, with electric bicycles, scooters, mopeds, motorcycles coming first – it’s very much the technology of the future and its here now,” Jim says. He also told me about his research into the use of electric vehicles – EVs for short – in Germany and Canada, and that China has calculated they have over 21 million EVs owned by their factory workers.
It maybe some time yet before the electric car and van market takes off and replaces the internal combustion engine vehicles, Jim says, but they are already being used for some vehicle fleets and business users in the UK. As a way to reduce carbon emissions they score on two points – reducing ‘fossil car’ use and opportunity for currently using electric power from renewable sources or future carbon capture technologies at the power stations. Efficient use of electricity elsewhere would also allow more EV use without having to add more capacity to the grid.
“If we could cut electricity use for outdoor lighting (using LED) globally by one third, we would free up enough electrons to charge about 25 million electric vehicles – all without adding any new power plants to the grid.” The Climate Group organisation.
Reaction Electric have decided to trial a hire service for people wanting a short term EV use, especially prior to purchase or simply to extend a holiday experience in the South West.
In the run up to the Copenhagen Climate Summit this December, we will all become aware of the seriousness of our greenhouse gas emissions are having on global warming, and the fact that time is running out to take action around the world to stop the worst excesses of climate change.
Deciding to cut back on our personal carbon pollution can now go a step further with the use of EVs, and with the added advantage of lower running costs and an added enjoyment factor.
As a footnote to this article... Jim Duncan spoke to the Glastonbury Town Council last month (November) and the Council has agreed to form a working party to look in more detail at how they might install one or two trial Elektrobay recharging posts at St Dunstan’s Car Park. If this is done then Glastonbury can link itself into a growing network of places where the new wave of electric cars and vans can travel through or operate from. The electric re-charging posts become “filling stations” between home or work, providing a quick partial “top-up” or maybe in some cases, with the new battery technology, virtually a full charge within the time allocated.
A gathering of EVs (all shapes and sizes!) is being planned for Glastonbury on Saturday 10th April 2010. Anyone who owns any type of EV is welcome to contact Jim Duncan and express their interest in being part of this and even a parade around the town.
Paul Lund
References used
www.theclimategroup.org
www.reactionelectric.co.uk Telephone 01823 279622
www.electricbikesales.co.uk
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)