The former head of the British financial services authority has suggested population decline and smaller families are good for the Climate; and?…

According to Lord Adair Turner, population decline should not be feared. It is certainly true that if the population of the UK were to shrink, so would our carbon emissions. Of course, this suggestion might have come with more authority if it had been made while he was still in post.

We have, in the last couple of centuries, unfortunately set up the financial world in such a way as to need a growing population. An increasing size of financial market in each country is required (according to current expertise) yet while there are some gains to be had in efficiency by each person, it is not possible for people to become more efficient endlessly. Furthermore, by this metric, a falling population would be a bad thing, as this would necessitate a shrinking market – even if it were shrinking slower than the population.

Continue reading “The former head of the British financial services authority has suggested population decline and smaller families are good for the Climate; and?…”

Has the Pandemic forced a new way of working on the BBC natural history unit?

In filming for the BBCs mating game, the film-makers for the BBC were forced to work in a different way to normal.

Given rules that were put in place to stop the epidemics spread, it was impossible in many instances to send film makers on trips all over the world. As a result, they were forced to rely on local wildlife film-makers.

The producers of the series, found that not only did this make it easier to get the footage required, but also meant that it was easier to know timings of when specific parts of the series would be complete.

Over the last couple of decades high definition cameras have become the norm and in recent years, local people around the world have been trained to use them. With the advance of 4G signal in wilder parts of the world, it is now possible to stay in touch with crews even when they are in the field. This also means that the carbon price of the production can fall dramatically.

The British government claims that 30% of of UK land is set aside for nature; what rubbish

At the current time 26% of the UK is designated as a national park, area of outstanding beauty or other form of protected area. However, to claim that this whole area is set aside for nature, is absurd. British national parks, unlike African ones still have human habitation within them.

Continue reading “The British government claims that 30% of of UK land is set aside for nature; what rubbish”

I wrote in the past looking at consensus on human caused climate change – new study

There is a constant argument that we should not be acting on climate change because we have not reached consensus. This really is not the case.

A look at 90,000 studies which looked at the climate found that 99.9% of them agreed that humans were the cause. The degree of certainty is now the same as that on evolution or on plate tectonics -the debate is over.

It is true that you can still find supposedly learned men and women who will disagree, but we are now at the point where it is akin to arguing the world is flat. Yes there are thousands of “flat earthers” worldwide, but those denying climate change should be put in the same category as those who deny the shape of the earth (and think that the millions of people who would have to be in on it are all dutifully keeping quiet.

This study has been compiled by Cornell University and shows that the miniscule minority still fighting against this truth, is now just a small number of noisy voices.

This is terrifying! In the USA there are 30 US senators and 109 representatives who “refuse to acknowledge the scientific evidence of human-caused climate change”.

It is now time for Facebook and twitter to stop giving an unchallenged voice to purveyors of falsehoods. Denying the science of climate change is likely are more dangerous for the future of the human race than denying the obvious facts about vaccines.

Is the UK in danger of setting lofty goals and never trying to meet them?

Over the last few years the UK has set itself some impressive goals. Unfortunately there is little joined up thinking about how to actually try to meet some of those goals in question.

Boris Johnson continues to put up impressive targets. At the Cop conference coming up the UK will be asked how it will deliver – this is now what the government has to focus on.

I would be embarrassed to chair a meeting with Boris Johnsons record on climate, but then it would seem that my capacity for embarrassment is higher than his.

UK one of the most nature depleted countries; is that a surprise for anyone?

The UK is in the lowest 10% of countries in terms of wildlife depletion. It is also last amongst the G7 of developed nations. It is thought that we have about half of our biodiversity left (average world levels in 75%). More alarming, it is thought that long-term 90% is the lowest level biodiversity can reach safely and sustain itself long-term.

It should be noted, that this biodiversity loss in the UK is not a new thing. Indeed, the UK has survived in this state for quite some time.

There is currently a conference going on in Kumning China, which is trying to address this.

Addressing biodiversity loss alongside carbon reduction would be the most sensible. Halting the loss of carbon sinks, is also very good for the wide range of biodiversity that thrive in its ecosystems. Can we move to doing both in tandem?

A new act in the US congress might have the capability to slow or halt deforestation, or at least force instigators to face financial penalties

The Forest ACT bill would make global suppliers responsible for the illegal deforestation that their products cause.

This is a long overdue issue. Currently, large companies will structure things in such a way, that small farmers and other land users are encouraged to deforest their land, knowing that the big company wishes this, and will buy all their resources.

It cannot work this way. If these companies are made legally responsible for any deforestation that occurs to provide their products, they will manage to put an end to illegal deforestation over night.

As well as enacting this process nationally, the bill would require USA trade partners to buy in on these new rules.

Will it work? Who knows, but it is likely to have a huge impact on deforestation, as if this rule is implemented, it will never pay to deforest.

It cannot be the be all or end all, but is a fantastic first step.

Back at the beginning of August the Prime Minister’s spokesman said UK net zero emission goal is to far away, have they done anything about it?

Allegra Stratton is the spokesperson for the British Prime Minister’s office, number 10 Downing Street. She stated that the UK target of zero emissions by 2050 was too far away. She stated that the science is clear and we need to be making changes now.

It is true that we have intermediate targets. We aim to reduce carbon emissions by 68% by 2030 and by 78% by 2035.

Continue reading “Back at the beginning of August the Prime Minister’s spokesman said UK net zero emission goal is to far away, have they done anything about it?”

The website was hacked! nothing lost, and wildlife tourism to Africa can return

Hello everyone! We survive

So, the website was hacked. Nothing was stolen, from what I was told they were just able to delete the website. Thankfully we back up, so we have survived.

We have added a significant extra layer of protection which should make it impossible for the same problem to arise (it had nothing to do with the attack on Facebook and WhatsApp). While we do on occasion have sharing buttons, that is the extent of our link so we were safe.

Bigger news, many red list countries have been upgraded allowing travel. These countries include

Continue reading “The website was hacked! nothing lost, and wildlife tourism to Africa can return”

What should we do when our government makes a big show of new climate commitments which are actually recycled?

The British government is continually making good noises about cutting emissions.

At the beginning of June they announced half a billion pounds for a blue planet fund – but this was merely repurposed money, from the conservative manifesto in 2019. A total of £11.6 billion has been pledged to fight climate change by the British government in this term, which means that this pledge is nothing more than deciding where to spend the money.

Is £11.6 billion spent across a parliamentary term a good amount of money. 

It is certainly a lot of money, however in 2020 the government spend over 900 billion pounds, meaning that this advertisement is roughly 0.2% of our spending each year for the next 5 years. This is not fighting for our lives and that of our children’s future. Indeed if we truly consider environmental change an existential threat to our current way of life if this is chump change.

The fact that new pledges the government make then come out.of this small amount should be an embarrassment. I suspect that it will be highlighted multiple times during the the climate conference being held later this year. I hope other countries point out the absurdity of this position.

We are an island country! We stand to have our country changed dramatically if the amount of sea level rise that is possible actually happens. The idea that we can’t even put 1% of our GDP towards fighting this is a problem and one which future generations would have a right to point to.

See Animals Wild

Read more news

Join as a wild member
to list your wild place & log in

Join as an ambassador supporter to
support this site, help save wildlife
and make friends & log in

Join as an Associate member
to assist as a writer, creator, lister etc & to log in

List a wild destination

List a destination in
the shadow of man

List a hide for animals more easily seen this way

Highlight some news
missed, or submit a
one-off article

Browse destinations for fun or future travel

Temporary membership
start here if in a hurry

Casual readers and watchers