Recently

More articles in the archive.

Open letter from Tony Blair 28 February 06

British prime minister Tony Blair has penned an unprecedented open letter to members of the new climate change coalition Stop Climate Chaos. In it he tries to reassure worried campaigners that Britain does take global warming seriously and is redoubling its efforts to address it. “I understand frustrations about the seemingly slow progress in rising to the threat to our planet and our children,” he writes. “I have said repeatedly that I believe climate change is, without doubt, the major long-term threat facing our planet.” However, campaigners may find that the letter is rather short on the practicalities. There is mention of the Government’s target of 5% of transport fuel to be from biofuels by 2010, but nothing on the growth of road traffic, which would wipe out these tiny gains (and which is being spurred on by large increases in government-funded road-building). Nor is there any mention of reducing aircraft emissions – the subject of an excellent article in today’s Guardian by columnist George Monbiot. Chances are that the Stop Climate Chaos coalition – which includes environment groups like Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth as well as development groups like Oxfam and Christian Aid – will remain distinctly unimpressed.

Comments

Douglas Coker

The Friends of the Earth have responded here http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/press_releases/prime_ministers_warm_words_28022006.html

Douglas Coker

Lynn Vincentnathan

is leaders have to get the people on board, which is difficult with vested biz interests blocking things and dragging their heels, kicking and screaming.

I’m thinking that leaders should start using pep talks, backed with warnings, such as: “Everyone needs to put forth a lot of efort in reducing their GHGs at home, work, school, and play. We need everyone’s ideas and actions, young and old, rich and poor alike. What I fear is not only the great harms from GW, but also that we may need very strong regulations and restrictions sometime, maybe soon, down the road, if all people don’t start doing their part now.”

I’d just love to hear Bush say that from the bully pulpit.

Peter Winters BHI

I thought that George Monbiot’s article about flying was good and provocative – although I noticed quite a few letters in yesterday’s Guardian who didn’t agree with him. One of the letters made me think that we should really segment airline clients into 3 quite different types – business, leisure and cargo.

I think it is in the area of business travel that there is greatest leeway for reducing airline traffic. I work in market research – usually conducting international studies in North America and Europe. Five years ago, I was forever on planes, but I have drastically reduced my business flying. Communications has been transformed – and I am keen to set-up systems that avoid me (or those working with me) having to travel by plane. Even in qualitative research, video-streaming technology now allows for it to be possible to watch focus groups without leaving your office.

I suspect it is going to be harder to discourage people from travelling by plane for leisure reasons. Maybe if there are fewer business-class passengers, airlines would have to charge more for leisure travellers?? I don’t know. In any case, it would be great if the “cheap fares” revolution ended.

As for cargo, I think we need a greater understanding of the deals and subsidies going on to be able to propose a remedy.

Peter

Almuth Ernsting

I listened to two speakers from Airport Watch at a meeting this week. They stressed that leisure travel is the bulk of aviation and also aviation growth – they say that we either deal with leisure flights or we won’t curb aviation growth. I think they said that business travel accounts for around 24% of flights in the UK and is no major growth is forecast there. However, I am not completely sure of the exact figures – you can get them by emailing Airport Watch.

Almuith

steven earl salmony

Given its current scale and rate of growth, the unbridled increase of human enterprise on the surface of Earth is not sustainable indefinitely, much less forever.

Like science, democracy is a great blessing, a wondrous gift from God to humanity.

Wtih regard to capitalism, careful attention needs to be given to the way the world economy is organized and operated. If one follows the flow of money in the capitalist system, it becomes possible to see that the world’s major interlocking national economies function much like a global pyramid scheme. There is a noticable upward convergence of money away from most people and into the pockets of a minority. Millions of people at the top of the economic pyramid have most of the wealth while literally billions of the less fortunate among us have every little. How much more money does an Enron executive make when compared to those regular employees of the business?

The Earth cannot sustain skyrocketing absolute global human population numbers, the intensive consumption of limited natural resources by people in first world countries with those in developing countries aspiring to follow our expample, and the seemingly endless expansion of the human economy now overspreading Earth’s body.

As surely as communism was shown to be an enemy of people everywhere in the 20th century, the unrestrained expansion of capitalism in the 21st century will be seen as an enemy of the ecological integrity of Earth.

Peter Winters BHI

You are an absolute mine of useful information!!

Best wishes,

Peter

Leave a Reply