For the first time since 1847 a shark has attacked a human in British waters! On this occasion it was a Blue shark that attacked the lady in question – she survived.
Continue reading “A blue shark has attacked a woman diving off the coast of Cornwall!”UK government gives go ahead for shell to develop a new gasfield
As if we need any examples of the contradictory actions of rich governments, the UK government is still giving permission for new had fields to be created.
It is known that if we are to keep warning to 1.5 degrees or less, more than 50% of fossil fuels must remain in the ground. As such this move is foolish.
The government could do as much for consumer bills by bringing back the green housing grants-and funding it properly. Many people in the country can afford to do the work themselves but many more don’t stand a chance.
UK electricity generation to be carbon neutral by 2035 says Boris Johnson
By 2030 all cars sold will need to be electric or some other form of fuel. Combustion engines will be banned, this is good news. However, if the national grid continues to burn fossil fuels, the cars will still pollute, even if their efficiency, and therefore the amount of emissions that they create will have fallen.
This will mean that all power in the UK will come from wind, solar, hydro and nuclear.
One of the big advantages, is that this will shield us from price rises of gas impacting electricity prices. Unfortunately, at this time, many houses will still be heated by gas. This can be replaced over time.
At the moment gas power plants are still very important for keeping the lights on in the uk, but this will disappear over the next 15 years.
While there are still challenges, what we need as a country is to be moving in the right direction as fast as possible. Renewables plus nuclear is already above 50% – renewables supplied 43% with nuclear adding another 16%.
By removing carbon emissions from our electricity generation and travel, each family in the UK will cut their emissions by about 17%. No where near finished, but a very good start.
Tory MPs are arguing that the green transition is too expensive, an argument that has proved false many times over – currently being shown to be rubbish by the EU
It is a progressions that is very old
- Deny that there is a problem – in this case deny the increasingly clear evidence of climate change
- Claim that mitigation of the problem (which until recently they denied existed) is way to expensive – why would a sane person listen to some one who has been denying the problem for years
- Once the damage is done, say that it is too late anyway
Temperatures at some Arctic weather stations hit 30 degrees earlier this year. At the same time, down in Antarctica temperatures hit 40 degrees above normal. These readings are not anomolies. We have also seen mass coral bleachings on the great barrier reef (during a La Nina year, which is supposed to be cooler)
Scientists have predicted for decades, that climate breakdown will be incredibly fast when its starts in earnest, and at this point there will be little or nothing that we can do about it.
Have we crossed this terrifying point? We don’t know, but what we do know is that far from giving up saying it is too late and we just need to accept it, we need to accelerate our efforts to green our economy.
It is important to remember that the climate mitigation that was claimed to be too expensive, will be a drop in the bucket compared to the cost of living in a world that is subject to runaway climate change.
Despite what many right wing conservatives currently claim, if oil prices remain high we could be looking at a significant saving not a cost from these decarbonisation projects.
The UK has had a disgusting policy with little basis in science of badger culling, and last year it was expanded with out consultation
In the UK there has been a continual issue with tb in the cow population. It is thought that this is spread by badgers. Despite scientific analysis showing that badgers are responsible for an incredibly small percentage of the spread – and that culls will make the badgers more, not less, likely to spread the illness, the government has given in to farming lobbies and has allowed increasingly large culls of badgers.
Continue reading “The UK has had a disgusting policy with little basis in science of badger culling, and last year it was expanded with out consultation”Wolf
I am disgusted to be British after the latest move in parliament – hunting trophy import ban to be axed, but if we are ending the ban the British government must take responsibility
The British government promised to ban the imports of trophies in to the UK, yet they have given up after “wealthy peers” lobbied against the move and so it was dropped.
I have written on this issue many times over the last few years, as it was raised as an issue over and over again.
Should wealthy individuals be allowed to go and shoot members of an endangered species? I would argue no, never. However, we do not live in a perfect world. There are places where few tourists will go. If these incredible places can be protected by sustainably harvesting a small number of endangered animals I would argue that this is the lesser of two evils.
Re-wilding in the UK
Currently, 70% of the land in the UK is given over to agriculture. Of this, just 15% is used to grow crops for human consumption. A further 22% goes towards feeding livestock. The rest is given over to livestock grazing.
This means that we give over 44% of the country to livestock, and a further 15% of the country to feed the livestock.
If growing food in a lab does indeed take off, 59% of the UK would suddenly be freed up – lab grown meat done properly could have a near 0 carbon footprint, and can be created in close proximity to the shop that will sell it -further reducing or eliminating the transport carbon footprint of food.
Now, assuming that this is to happen we would still need to keep some livestock. This would be needed to harvest cells. Never the less, we could still see a reduction of more than 99% of the livestock and land required. I do not believe that I am the only person who would be far happier satisfying my desire for meat, without the climate implications or indeed the fact that animals have to die to satisfy it (I am not a vegetarian, but over the last few years we have made efforts to reduce our meat footprint).
This would free up more than 50% of the country. What could we do with this?
Well my argument is that this land could be given over to rewilding. With this amount of land, we could suck up vast amounts of carbon a year. 50% of the UK is roughly 120,000 square kilometres. Now roughly speaking, forest suck up 500g per square m per year, or 500 metric tonnes per square km. Therefore, the UK could suck up 60 million tonnes a year. Now it is true that this is not huge compared to our emissions and we might have some other uses, never-the-less I am sure that I am not the only person that is frustrated by the lack of wilderness in the UK. Even just 10% of the gained land being given over to rewilding could make great progress in returning wilderness to the UK.
Matt Ridley argues climate change is doing more good than harm in lecture
Chartwell lectures needs to be careful. If it regularly hosts people like Matt Ridley and allows him to argue that there are more good impacts from global warming than bad, they are likely to lose their following.
In his lecture he identified the following positive outcomes of global warming, I will take each one and respond
Fewer winter deaths: it is true, that warmer winters could lead to fewer deaths. Unfortunately what has been shown so far, is that global warming makes the climate more changeable. As such, while as an average winters get milder there are more extreme cold periods. This inconsistency far from reducing deaths as is posited, is likely to increase deaths due to cold weather.
An increase in global plant growth: This is not as simple as made out. The accompanying increase in temperature is often a bigger impact on the plant – and in most tests, it has been shown that increasing carbon levels while initially having a surge of growth do not increase output permanently.
Fewer deaths from extreme weather: this is closely related to the first, and it is not true.
He then has the nerve to suggest that blame mainstream media from cherry picking.
It is alarming that these stupid views are still being given the space to be spouted. I hope that space for views like this are pushed out soon, as they are not true.
NatureScot has found that there are more than 1000 beavers now living in the wilds of Scotland
Beavers are well and truly back in Scotland. With a population of more than 1000 animals, they are having a big impact on the environment. Less welcome news was that 115 of these animals were killed under licence. Now a population of this size can probably cope with deaths at this level, but it hard to believe that in all these cases this was necessary. At this point, as the population is slowly growing, you would think that translocation would have been a better option. There have also been 31 beavers that were trapped and moved to official reintroduction projects in England and Wales.
Continue reading “NatureScot has found that there are more than 1000 beavers now living in the wilds of Scotland”