© Clive Mear/Tearfund

Owen Paterson and climate change

Owen Paterson is the UK's environment minister, and has just reacted to last week's landmark report on climate change arguing that there's not too much to worry about.

His wilful complacency on climate change would be shocking from any Government minister, but it's doubly so because he's in charge of the environment. Surely David Cameron should move him to somewhere he'd do less damage. But then, what harm might Mr Paterson do elsewhere... ?

Here's what he said on climate change:

 "People get very emotional about this subject and I think we should just accept that the climate has been changing for centuries.

"I think the relief of this latest report is that it shows a really quite modest increase, half of which has already happened. They are talking one to two and a half degrees.

"Remember that for humans, the biggest cause of death is cold in winter, far bigger than heat in summer. It would also lead to longer growing seasons and you could extend growing a little further north into some of the colder areas. more ...

© Scottish Government

Where would Jesus get his energy from?

Earlier this week, Martin Wharton, the Bishop of Newcastle, spoke out against wind farms claiming this as his Christian duty.

He stated that:

"It is a basic Christian truth that we all have a duty and a responsibility to care for and exercise wise stewardship over God's creation, which has been entrusted to us."

He expressed his concerns that wind farms were damaging the landscape of parts of his diocese. This has always been a subjective point held by, according to opinion polls, a vocal minority of people.

I'm no expert on theology but I do have a massive amount of respect for the work of the Church and leaders of all faiths. My experience of dealing with faith leaders is that they tend to have a much more global view of things.

For example, take the work of Operation Noah in bringing a Christian focus on the issue of climate change.

more ...

© Conservative Party

Conservative conference: pick up the pace, or pick up the pieces?

Greg Barker, the UK's Energy and Climate Change minister, has been doing the media rounds today in response to the IPCC report.

Barker said on the BBC's Daily Politics show (and presumably elsewhere - he's been almost omnipresent) that "Government has a record of solid action [on climate change], the rest of the world needs to pick up the pace".

The second half of that is uncontroversial. Friends of the Earth agrees that all nations need to join together to tackle the unprecedented challenge of curbing global emissions to avoid the worst impacts of a warming planet.

But you can hardly expect to have any credibility calling for this on the international stage without some evidence that you're stepping up at home. The former diplomat and UK's chief climate change negotiator, John Ashton CBE, said as much in a highly revealing speech hosted by Friends of the Earth earlier this year. more ...

© Hadley Centre

Politicians are asleep on the job - scientists issue climate wake-up call

Today's report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been called another wake-up call. I don't know how many more alarm bells politicians need. It's worse than trying to wake up a teenager for school in the morning.

The long and short of it is we need to cut carbon pollution fast if we want to avoid dangerous climate change and much more extreme weather. This means leaving the vast majority of fossil fuels in the ground and not searching for more through using methods such as fracking.

  more ...

© Friends of the Earth

It's about time someone took on the energy companies

I'm just back from Brighton, where Ed Miliband has set the Big Six energy companies in a tizz by announcing that a Labour government would freeze energy bills for 20 months after the next election.

And surprise surprise, the energy companies don't like it. The first thing they say will have to go if they are forced to freeze prices is investment in clean energy. Projects like new wind turbines, energy storage and wave power. more ...

© Getty Images

Scientists to report on climate change - our top four predictions

We can all see the climate changing around us - and the economic and environmental benefits from energy efficiency and developing renewable energy - but what is the latest scientific understanding of climate change?

Every five years or so, the world's scientists produce a series of mammoth reports assessing the latest knowledge on climate change. These reports let us know whether we should be very worried or just plain worried. The first of the latest series of reports - the IPCC's 5^th Assessment Working Group 1 report - is due on 27 September 2013, and in this blog I predict what they will say.

A more detailed Q&A briefing on the report is available here.

Here are my top four predictions:

1. Extreme weather

The scientists will say they have much greater certainty than before that manmade climate change is already contributing to extreme weather around the globe. They will say that more extreme weather will happen in the future, especially extreme rainfall and heat-waves.

This chimes with research just published that said in 2012 climate change had made the US heat-waves, Superstorm Sandy, shrinking Arctic sea ice, drought in Europe's Iberian peninsula and extreme rainfall in Australia and New Zealand more likely. more ...

© Friends of the Earth

The law is not a punch-bag for the government - another flagrant attack on democracy

It is round two of the government's boxing match against judicial review- the means for taking public authorities to court and to stop them breaking the law. The government now wants to restrict the ability of campaign groups to take them to court in another flagrant attack on democracy, as I explain here.  

In a 60 page consultation on the "impact of judicial review on economic recovery and growth"; the "inappropriate use of judicial review as a campaign tool" and "the use of the delays and costs associated with judicial review to hinder actions the executive wishes to take", it has presented another set of worryingly restrictive proposals, adding to those introduced in July.

To complete the picture, Justice Minister Chris Grayling penned an article in the Daily Mail entitled "The judicial review system is not a promotional tool for countless Left-wing campaigners". more ...

© Rettet den Regenwald

EU votes on biofuels, but what does the result mean?

European legislation is never straight forward, but seldom has the outcome of a vote confused analysts on all sides as much as that on biofuels legislation on September 11.

The Parliament's plenary was voting on the reform of the EU's controversial biofuel policy.  Rather than leading to significant reductions in greenhouse gases from road transport, the policy in its current form has led to global food price rises, deforestation and, ironically, increasing emissions.

Before the vote activists handed rapporteur Corinne Lepage 243,998 petitions sent by European citizens calling for an end of food-to-fuel (see photo above).

MEPs voted on over 50 amendments at break-neck speed; some of which were carried or rejected with majorities of less than 10 votes out of 766 MEPs. Contrary to expectations, voting happened largely along traditional party lines, with the conservative block voting to weaken safeguards on biofuels. Only within the ALDE group (the European liberals) voting was more varied between individuals.

The key amendments voted for were: more ...

© The Guardian

The true costs of cheap meat

Eating more sustainable diets - which includes eating less but better meat - is a key theme of our campaign.  Alex has written a book on the true cost of cheap meat which explores many of the reasons why this matters and how change can happen. This blog first appeared on the Eating Better website on 5^th September 2013

Half a year ago the horsemeat scandal broke in Britain. Last week, the authorities let it be known that no supermarket that sold adulterated beef meals will face any charges. They had done their due diligence, and could not be held responsible for the contents of the horse-stuffed beefburgers and ready meals.

Amazing. Even the Daily Mail thought this was an outrage (confession: I wrote the Mail's op-ed). What was interesting was that of the 300+ commenters on the Mail's website, 99% were positive to the article's message about the bullying, ruthless supermarkets. Those that were not already vegetarians told their fellow readers to go to the butcher's instead. These aren't Guardian subscribers, remember. more ...

© istock

U-turn? Nope, the Gagging Bill still gags us

Today MPs have a second short window to scrutinise the Gagging Bill as it makes its breakneck passage through Parliament.

There's a perception being fostered by some MPs and journalists that it's all ok for charities now - the Government has done a u-turn. This is not true.

On Friday Leader of the Commons Andrew Lansley announced that he would amend the Bill's definition of controlled spending: from expenditure which has the incidental "effect" of influencing electoral outcomes, to spending that is deliberately "intended" to change electoral outcomes. This is a welcome concession, but media reports that it represents a complete u-turn are extremely wide of the mark.

Charities and campaigning groups across the voluntary sector - from the Royal British Legion to Oxfam - remain steadfastly opposed to the Lobbying Bill in its current form, which will place huge and unjust constraints on our legitimate activities. more ...

What's the strategy for industrial strategy?

Industrial strategy is high on the Government's playlist of late, with reports being published for industries that the Coalition believe to be of high economic value. For energy, we have seen reports for the oil and gas, nuclear, and offshore wind sectors.

These are three very different sectors, to say the least: so what's going on? With three potentially conflicting industries, it begs the question, does the Government have an integrated plan for the economy? Or is it simply hedging its bets on industries that seem to promise high returns in the future?

Oil, gas and nuclear: old industries getting new money

The Government's strategies for oil, gas and nuclear appear to be throwing good money after bad. more ...

© Images of Money

Rehumanise yourself: how to get money where it's needed

"There need never ever be a shortage of finance, so the question becomes, once you create the finance, what can you do with that? And who's going to decide?"

So said economist Ann Pettifor at our Transforming Finance conference back in May. Her point was this: it may not seem like it to the most-of-us struggling with declining living standards, but at the macro level, the world is swimming in loot. Money sloshes into property, speculation, infrastructure (mainly high-carbon), and buying stuff, or sits in people's accounts. It can be magicked into existence by central banks, as in programmes of 'quantitative easing' (QE) across major economies. It lurks in sovereign wealth funds, and in the banks that effectively decide where most of the money in society goes, through choosing to whom and for what purpose they'll give out loans or finance investment. more ...

© Friends of the Earth

Summer madness - from fracking to gagging, a monthly review of news, views and action from Friends of the Earth

What a great summer we've had. And whilst we've all been enjoying it you won't be surprised to know that Friends of the Earth didn't all decamp to the beach but have been gallantly fighting the good fight.

First up, of course, has been fracking. In the next few weeks the International Committee on Climate Change will publish its long-awaited report on the science of climate change (IPPC WG1). It is highly likely to say that - like their report five years ago -a fossil fuel intensive economy is incompatible with preventing 2 degrees of climate change (dangerous in every sense of the word). Yet the Government, and particularly George Osborne, is intent on lavishing the oil and gas industry with tax breaks and lax planning rules.  Madness! Which is why Friends of the Earth has been actively supporting the protestors at Balcombe and is committed to stopping the dash for gas. more ...

© Friends of the Earth

Fracking: an important victory but the fight goes on

I've just got back from leave and found out that Cuadrilla withdrew its planning application to extend shale oil exploration near Balcombe for another six months.

The move follows nearly 2,000 objections to the application by the public. Friends of the Earth raised legal and planning concerns, including issues about the extent of the horizontal drilling the company planned. 

Cuadrilla now say they will provide details of where this will take place. We also argued that a whole new application was required, not just amendments to the existing permit. It looks like this will happen too.

Obviously we don't know what has gone on behind the scenes (although we have requested some information to find out), but it looks very much like the council and Cuadrilla have conceded our points and they've had to go back to the drawing board.

But whilst we have won this battle, the fight continues.  more ...

© Nicola Dempsey

Green space in the city: it's changing. Are you ready?

How do we transform our cities into clean, happy and affordable places for all? Join the debate over at Big Ideas Change The World.

When local government budgets are cut, parks and green spaces are hit hard.

Why? Local authorities don't have to provide quality green space - so it's easier to justify budget cuts.

In 2011, 80% of local authorities had to cut staff, and expected parks and green spaces to deteriorate.

We don't know the full extent of the situation. Organisations like CABE Space and GreenSpace - who used to conduct nationwide research - no longer exist due to funding issues. more ...

Stop the Gagging Bill

Imagine if Friends of the Earth hadn't been able to run our Bee Cause campaign. We wouldn't now have the Government committing to a Bee Action Plan to save Britain's wonderful bees.

Or imagine if we hadn't been able to run our Big Ask campaign which brought about the Climate Change Act. Or our campaign to bring in doorstep recycling.

This isn't just a thought exercise. Today MPs are debating a Bill that - if it had been passed 10 years ago - would very likely have curtailed much of Friends of the Earth's work on our most important campaigns.

That Bill is (deep breath) the Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Bill. But for campaigners, it might be better termed the Gagging Bill. It's a complex piece of legislation but its repercussions for us are quite simple. If passed in its current form, it could effectively shut down Friends of the Earth's work from May next year. more ...

© European Parliament

Biofuels - decision time for Europe

Once seen as a useful tool in the struggle against climate change, biofuels made from crops have turned out to be a bit of a nightmare. Not only do they risk increasing rather than reducing greenhouse gas emissions they also drive up food prices and contribute to deforestation.

But decision makers now have a unique opportunity to get things right.

Even the European Union (EU) - which introduced a target that would have led to 10% of petrol and diesel fuels being replaced by biofuels by 2020 - has slowly started to realise the serious problems caused by biofuels. Since a proposal to reform EU biofuel policy was published in September last year, Parliament and Council have separately discussed their reaction to it.        

The Parliament's Environment Committee has supported some positive measures:   more ...

© Friends of the Earth

Fracking fallacies, love from Dave

'Dear elderly, fuel poor householder. We've started fracking. It's highly unlikely, but this just might help cut your energy bills in the early 2020s. Hope this helps. Love from Dave.'  

In a nutshell, that's the Government's position on fracking. And the Government is not alone.

On Wednesday, the Times ran a (£) front page story whose headline read 'Fracking will cut energy bills, says poverty chief'. The sub-editors at The Times had clearly been popping the extrapolation pills on Tuesday evening, as it turned out that the poverty chief in question - Derek Lickorish, who chairs the Fuel Poverty Advisory Group - was nowhere near as unequivocal. Quoted later in the article, in fact he said "Extracting natural gas from shale has the potential to reduce the costs of gas for heating and generating electricity".

As a relatively fit man in my forties, I have the potential to run a marathon. My mum's garage has the potential to house a Ferrari. My son has the potential to play for Chelsea (okay, he probably doesn't). But I can tell you categorically that these are all highly unlikely to happen. more ...

© howlmontreal

Balcombe to Quebec to Yasuni national park - communities fight back

'I want $3.6bn, no questions asked. That's the bounty. And if I don't see the dough, kiss goodbye to this beautiful world.'

Sounds like a scene out of kidnap-movie Ransom, right? Wrong. This is how one could interpret Ecuador's president who this week effectively armed a ticking oil time bomb - set to go off in one of the most nature diverse hotspots on the planet.

President Rafael Correa has given the signal for parts of Yasuni national park to be bulldozed, drilled for oil and concreted because the international community hadn't coughed up the cash to stop him. The national park in question contains more species in an area the size of Trafalgar Square than all the wildlife in North America.

Crudely put, he gave the world a chance to compensate the privileged few who would benefit from taking oil out of the ground. And what's to say he won't ask for more?

Don't get me wrong, I think that developed countries - who've benefitted from trashing the planet through industrialisation - should help poorer countries - by contributing the technologies and funds they need to grow and adapt to climate change. But paying ransom money to leaders pointing a bulldozer at people's livelihoods and homes is bonkers. more ...

© Ulef Ifansasti

When words mean more than actions

Last week half the world's top ten smartphone makers admitted their products are highly likely to contain tin mined in environmentally and socially devastating conditions on Indonesia's Bangka Island.

This followed eight months of international pressure from Friends of the Earth's Make It Better campaign for smartphone megabrands to confirm whether they use tin from Bangka and neighbouring Belitung. And if so, to commit to using their influence to help improve the situation there.

Tracking tin through the supply chain

Our research identified how the tin makes its way through refiners and solder makers into components for gadgets, but since a third of the world's freshly mined tin comes from these islands it's pretty much a no-brainer the tin's in their products.

To paraphrase one of the companies we spoke to, any of the major brands would find it hard not to admit using Bangka's tin.

Now Nokia, LG Electronics, Motorola Mobility, Sony and Blackberry have issued public statements answering our questions. They join smartphone leader Samsung and Dutch electronics giant Philips, which led the pack by responding to public pressure months ago. more ...

© Martin Pettitt

A hard-headed look at nuclear power

All the evidence is that we are facing a planetary emergency, especially with rapidly rising greenhouse gases and warnings from scientists of the potential breaching of tipping points. This isn't a reason to panic but it is a reason to take a hard-headed approach in assessing and reassessing positions on technologies and practices. It also requires an ability to think out of the box and imagine a different future; or as Friends of the Earth's strap-line says, see things differently.

It was with this hard-headed, seeing things differently, approach that we embarked on a review of the evidence for and against new nuclear power stations in the UK. The review could have thrown up information or evidence that would require us to change our current opposition to new nuclear power, but we undertook this review because we consider, objectively and without prejudice, the facts on the issues we work on. This is an important guiding principle given the planetary emergency context we are operating in. more ...

© Thinkstock

Thoughts on nature's bounty, consumption, women's rights and population

At first glance the idea of identifying a maximum population for the planet seems pretty straight-forward. We're trashing it already with 7 billion - surely it can't take anymore?

But dig a bit and it gets more complex. A sustainable population level is intimately tied to how much humans consume and how productive the planet is. Both of these are in themselves hugely complex and changing.

So just over a year ago I set balls rolling to see if we could come up with a rough answer to the question. I think we've done so, but I'd love to hear your thoughts. more ...

© Thinkstock

Lord Howell's idiot's guide to fracking and the North East

Yesterday, in the House of Lords:

 "There are obviously - in beautiful rural areas, worries not just about the drilling and the fracking, which I think are exaggerated - but about the trucks, the delivery and the roads and the disturbance. And those are quite justified worries."

 "But there are large uninhabited and desolate areas, certainly up in the North East, where there's plenty of room for fracking well away from anyone's residence where it can be conducted without any kind of threat to the rural environment."

These comments from Lord Howell of Guildford, George Osborne's father-in-law, prompted stunned responses across the country and were rightly labelled as disgraceful by many.

Lord Howell showed a staggering ignorance about the North East and a complete disregard for the communities who live there. These are communities who have had to live with the environmental impacts of heavy industry and energy infrastructure for generations.

His suggestion that fracking could take place without harm in the 'desolate' North East shows his ignorance about the region's geography.

Here are six points he should have considered: more ...

© Nancy Farrell

Can the Pope be cooler than Mick Jagger?

The new Pope - Pope  Francis- held a big sermon on Copacabana Beach in Brazil last night, on World Youth Day. According to the BBC one million people attended - which puts the Rolling Stones gig at Glastonbury to shame. In his address he urged people to stand-up against inequality and reject the allure of money, power and pleasure (presumably by which he meant hedonistic pleasure rather than all pleasure). Top notch stuff.

But does the Catholic Church really care passionately about the future for young people? I spotted a couple of major omissions. I'd love to know what you think of them, please do comment below.

In our Big Ideas Change the World project we are already identifying changes that are needed if we are to achieve wellbeing for people and the planet, changes that the Pope opposes. Here are two examples.

Nature's bounty more ...

© Thinkstock

Three big ideas for protecting and enhancing nature's bounty

Nature's amazing. Isn't that obvious? It certainly is from the reading I've done for the second topic in our Big Ideas Change the World project. But it isn't obvious to everyone. If it were humanity wouldn't be assailing it in the many ways we are. We've identified three big ideas to protect nature and provide well-being for people.

The second topic is bioproductivity. By 'bioproductivity' we mean nature's ability to produce biomass for food and fibre; the biodiversity that brings resilience to the system; the ecosystem services that nature delivers; plus the knowledge that we can learn from nature. In other words: the whole package of goodies that we get from nature or nature's bounty.

We've tentatively identified a number of big ideas for how we use human's ingenuity, empathy and compassion to nurture bioproductivity and use it wisely - big ideas that fundamentally challenge the business-as-usual approach followed by the UK Government and others which pursues competition and profit above working with nature to produce long-term sustainable yields.  

Here are the three big ideas we're concentrating on: more ...

© Ewan McIntosh

Shale: what colour would sir like his tax breaks?

In its latest two-fingered salute to those that think a new 'dash for gas' isn't a good idea - what with the state of the planet and everything - last week George Osborne's Treasury announced a "consultation" on tax breaks for UK shale gas.

It's one of those types of consultations: a kind of 'what kind of paper should we use to print the thing we've already decided we're going to do?' type of consultation. While Treasury does appear genuinely interested in working out exactly how big it should make the tax breaks it has already decided it is going to give, it feels a bit like putting lipstick on a pig.

The Chancellor has form on doling out tax breaks to fossil fuel companies. In the last financial year North Sea oil and gas producers qualified for just short of £2 billion worth of tax breaks, thanks to the Treasury's expansion of 'field allowances'. Allowances reduce the total rate of tax payable on some of the profits from certain type of fields. The Treasury wants to use the same principle for shale gas. more ...

© Thinkstock

Cities need powers to curb rip-off landlords and prevent 'unaffordable' rents

The news that renting a home in a third of the UK is unaffordable for many people is shocking. 1.3 million low to middle-income households are spending too much on housing says the Resolution Foundation. A figure that looks set to rise in an age of austerity with wages rising slower than inflation.

Shocking but not surprising. For two decades or more politicians on the left and right have promised to build more to make housing more affordable while wringing their hands when the homes fail to materialise.  But is building more homes really the only answer?

Where are the politicians with the guts to point out that rip-off landlords are also part of the problem? Where are the calls to give cities and local authorities the power to set fair rents?

Friends of the Earth's Big Ideas Change the World project has suggested cities need increased autonomy, including the power to set fair rents. Do you agree or disagree? Please comment below. more ...

© Friends of the Earth

Review of news, views and action - June

It's great to be able to report some good news this issue, after last month's sorry episode of the Liberal Democrat's failing to back a decarbonisation target within the Energy Bill. That is the Coalition Government's positive response to pressure to protect our bees.  At our Bees Summit last Friday they agreed to introduce a national pollinator strategy - the Bee Action Plan we were calling for. Hurrah.

Here at Friends of the Earth we are mighty proud of the role our Bee Cause campaign had in achieving this breakthrough. But we also know that it was a team effort, so hurrah also for all those businesses, researchers, MPs and other civil society groups that piled on the pressure.

We're also not naive enough to believe this is job done. There's a word of difference between a good national pollinator strategy and a bad one - especially if you're a bee. So over the next year we'll be pushing hard to ensure that strategy is robust and leads to real change. This will be tough. There are many vested interests which will resist change. But if we all work together we can succeed.

more ...

© Ian Jackson

Eating better meat, and less of it

Eating better meat, and less of it. 

Yesterday, a major new alliance, Eating Better: for a fair, green, healthy future, was launched focusing on eating less and better meat, with Friends of the Earth as one of the founding members. The 'and better' is important. It shows that what we're doing is about more than eating less of the red and white stuff, the campaigns around which tend to provoke the screaming Daily Mail-style headlines about a nanny state trying to rob people of their daily steak.

So I got a bit miffed when the meat industry press said we were about "less is better" and then went on to winge about our simplistic message around eating less meat.

Yes, less is absolutely part of the message, it has to be. There is growing consensus that from whatever perspective you look at it - health, climate change, land and water use, animal welfare, social justice - that the trend for increased global meat consumption is bad news. more ...

© http://thechangeco.org

Pro-frackers get hot under the collar

It wasn't the best start to a Sunday morning - a text suggesting I have a look at a story in the Mail on Sunday attacking Friends of the Earth's work on fracking. But after initial irritation at the misleading and inaccurate article, my feeling was 'when they start attacking you, you know you're making waves'.

And this journalist has a track-record of being very selective in his use of evidence - this is no exception. Most of what he states as facts are opinions or misconceptions. Let's deal with a few.

He says shale gas will be cheap. That's an opinion, and not one shared by many experts. Former Tory Energy Minister Charles Hendry has written that "betting the farm on shale gas brings serious risks of future price rises".  Bloomberg New Energy Finance, a leading energy investment analyst, recently concluded that going for shale gas in the UK on the basis that it will cut energy bills was 'wishful thinking'. more ...