Feed aggregator
New study confirms NOAA finding of faster global warming | John Abraham
Thomas Karl and colleagues were harassed by Republicans for publishing inconvenient science. A new study proves them right.
A new study has shown that a 2015 NOAA paper finding that the Earth is warming more rapidly than previously thought was correct.
Mystery cosmic radio bursts pinpointed
Migrant farm workers may stay after Brexit but red tape goes
Renewables investment in UK will fall 95% over next three years – study
Analysis reveals extent of decline because of subsidy cuts and raises concerns about Britain meeting emissions targets
Investment in windfarms will fall off a “cliff edge” over the next three years and put the UK’s greenhouse gas reduction targets at risk, according to a new analysis.
More than £1bn of future investment in renewable energy projects disappeared over the course of 2016, the Green Alliance thinktank found when it looked at the government’s latest pipeline of planned major infrastructure projects.
Continue reading...Satellite Eye on Earth: December 2016 – in pictures
London at night, snow in the Sahara and Hawaii’s volcanoes are among the images captured by European Space Agency and Nasa satellites last month
A night-time view of western Europe captured by crew members aboard the International Space Station. London is visible in the centre of the image, photographed from more than 250 miles above.
Continue reading...Listening to nature
Feral cats now cover 99.8% of Australia
Feral population of up to 6.3 million, at a density of one cat for every 4 sq km ‘underlines how potent they are for wildlife’
Feral cats cover 99.8% of Australia at a density of one cat for every four square kilometres, according to new research.
The research was published in the journal of Biological Conservation and brings together data from almost 100 surveys completed by 40 environmental scientists from different institutions.
Continue reading...Friends of the Earth ticked off over claims in anti-fracking leaflet
Ad watchdog informally resolves Cuadrilla complaints over leaflet stating chemicals used in fracking can cause cancer and contaminate water
Friends of the Earth has agreed not to reproduce an anti-fracking leaflet after the advertising watchdog upheld complaints made by the energy firm Cuadrilla.
Cuadrilla, which in October was given government permission for plans to frack after appealing two rejections by Lancashire council, made a string of complaints about the leaflet which made claims that chemicals involved in fracking can cause cancer.
Brexit ‘zombie legislation’ could damage wildlife and farming, MPs warn
Cross-party committee of MPs also say farmers face a “triple jeopardy” of lost subsidies, export tariffs and increased competition
Brexit could harm the UK’s wildlife and farming, according to a cross-party committee of MPs, with key protections left as ineffective “zombie legislation” and farmers facing a “triple jeopardy” of lost subsidies, export tariffs and increased competition.
A new report from the environmental audit select committee warns that many of the rules governing food production and the environment in the UK come from EU law and that weakening of these rules would damage the countryside and reduce the viability of farms, food security and safety.
Continue reading...Toadstools in a Shrewsbury graveyard
Shrewsbury We walked to the grave of Mary Webb and found the fungi growing around her neighbours’ headstones
The toadstools opened from the graveyard like fleshy satellite dishes – ears of the necropolis listening to the living. We were in Shrewsbury cemetery to pay our respects at the turning year to those we knew there. The newer part had serried ranks of black or white marble headstones between drives, their funerary decorations modest symbols of grief and remembrance in a utilitarian order to keep the public face of death tidy.
The older part of the cemetery belonged to a much more Gothic sensibility: the graves mostly Victorian to the 1930s, their mossy stones listing on undulating ground and scattered randomly under trees, separated by meadow grasses.
Chicago zoo welcomes baby orangutan
Last endangered Mexican porpoises to be rounded up by US Navy-trained dolphins
Conservation plan involves sending dolphins into Gulf of California to find vaquita and then surface to raise the alarm
US Navy-trained dolphins and their handlers will participate in a last-ditch effort to catch the last few dozen of Mexico’s vaquita porpoises to save them from extinction.
The trained animals will use their sonar to locate the extremely elusive vaquitas, then surface and advise their handlers.
Continue reading...Law needed to limit Brexit's environmental impact, say MPs
Working towards Australian emission standards for non-road spark ignition engines and equipment – Update paper
London visitors' last chance to see Dippy ahead of tour
Enough's enough: buying more stuff isn't always the answer to happiness
The average German household contains 10,000 items. That’s according to a study cited by Frank Trentmann in his sweeping history of consumption, Empire of Things. We’re “bursting”, he says, with the amount of stuff that we have - while all of this consumption is steeping us in debt and dangerously depleting the planet’s resources and systems.
So after Christmas, and the Boxing Day sales, it seems like a good time to ask: what is the purpose of all this consumption?
The consumption cakeIf consumption is about facilitating quality of life, then quantities of money, materials, energy and so on are merely ingredients. They’re not the end product.
If I was baking a cake, would it make sense to use as many ingredients as possible? Of course not.
Yet “more is better” remains the narrative of modern society, and therefore of the economic system we use to make it happen. This makes sense while there is a sustainable correlation between quality of life and material resources consumed.
But this correlation is weakening. There is growing evidence that we are on a trajectory of diminishing returns on quality of life. A growing spate of titles such as Affluenza, Stuffocation and How Much is Enough? speak to the phenomenon.
Yet in the midst of unprecedented wealth, and unprecedented threats (from climate change and mass extinction, to inequality and social fragmentation), is the opportunity to move on to better things – to move beyond the consumer machine, and gear the future economy towards what we are really after in life.
So what are we baking? And what are the optimal amounts of ingredients we need?
Optimising consumption to maximise quality of lifeWhat is the optimal level of income, for example, and of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as a country? What about energy use per person? We scarcely even ask these questions.
Take energy, for example. Around a decade ago, the UN noted that beyond a certain point, increasing energy use does not lead to increases in the Human Development Index (HDI).
Indeed, Canadian scientist Vaclav Smil had shown that the highest HDI rates were found to occur with a minimum annual energy use of 110 gigajoules (GJ) per person. This was roughly Italy’s rate at the time, the lowest among industrialised nations and around a third of the US figure. He noted no additional gains past that point, with diminishing returns past the threshold of only 40-70GJ per person.
Tim Jackson reported a similar pattern in his 2009 book Prosperity Without Growth. In a study from the year 2000, life satisfaction measures were found to barely respond to increases in GDP per person beyond around $15,000 (in international $), “even to quite large increases in GDP”. He noted that countries such as Denmark, Sweden, New Zealand and Ireland recorded as high or higher levels of life satisfaction than the United States, for example, with significantly lower income levels.
By way of comparison, at the time of that study, GDP person in the United States was $26,980. Denmark’s was $21,230, Sweden’s $18,540, New Zealand’s $16,360, and Ireland’s $15,680. Australia’s was $18,940, also with a comparable life satisfaction measure to the United States.
It has long been recognised that GDP is not only a poor proxy for measuring a society’s wellbeing, but that from its inception we have been warned us against doing this. As Ross Gittins put it recently:
It defines prosperity almost wholly in material terms. Any preference for greater leisure over greater production is assumed to be retrograde. Weekends are there to be commercialised. Family ties are great, so long as they don’t stop you being shifted to Perth.
On a related note, in the context of self-reported perceptions of subjective wellbeing in Australia, Melissa Weinberg of the Australian Centre on Quality of Life at Deakin University reported in a presentation earlier this year that once incomes rise above A$100,000 per year, there is little discernible gain in subjective wellbeing.
How can we move beyond the consumer machine?There is no inherent or fixed notion of optimal wealth or consumption. It is for us to create ways of deciding together what is most important to us at any given time and place. Indeed, there are growing efforts around the world to do just that, as part of developing better measures of quality of life.
These include national projects in countries such as Canada, France, the UK and of course Bhutan with its Gross National Happiness. There are also broader projects such as those undertaken by the OECD, the New Economics Foundation and the Genuine Progress Indicator.
Unfortunately, Australia recently did away with its official effort, although the proposed Australian National Development Index (or ANDI) seeks to further the agenda locally, ultimately aiming to become our primary set of national accounts.
Why is this important? Well, given that we’re finding our optimal levels of resource use and income appear far lower than commonly assumed, it is clear that a “good life” does not depend on the continual expansion of these things. Reducing the negative consequences associated with excessive consumption comes with the genuine prospect of improving our lives.
However, in scaling back consumption growth, the good life may also serve to reduce GDP; that is, it may be an inherently recessionary pressure. And that scares us.
But what if we find our broader aspirations for a sustainable quality of life are tracking well, while GDP slows or even contracts? The new measures we decide upon can help anchor our confidence in the necessary changes to how we deal with money, work and consumption. After all, there would be little point in preserving GDP growth at the expense of our actual goal.
What does this mean for the holiday season?It doesn’t necessarily mean you should buy nothing. This isn’t about avoiding or demonising consumption. It’s about asking what would happen if we looked to optimise it and to maximise what is most important in life.
We could focus more on giving the gifts of quality time, good health, less debt, less stress and a flourishing planet to each other. Perhaps even create the space to give more to those less fortunate.
And what if, in 2017, we resolved to explore and hone in on our optimal levels of income, work hours, energy use, GDP and so on? Perhaps even support the development of those new measures mentioned here.
Above all, it is clear that we no longer need to feel compelled by outdated narratives of excessive consumption being good for us, or for the economy generally. There is more to being human, and now more than ever it is time to organise ourselves to that end. After all, the cake that we are baking is a better life for each other. That would be something worth celebrating.
Anthony James does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond the academic appointment above.
Do David Attenborough’s programmes help or hinder the natural world? | Letters
It takes a brave man to take a shot at a national treasure, and they don’t come any more treasured than David Attenborough, so hats off to Martin Hughes-Games for bravery (Why Planet Earth II should have been taxed, 2 January). But I fear he’s wrong. He says programmes like Planet Earth II lull us “into a false sense of security” as wildlife species are decimated across the globe. That is almost certainly correct, but one thing we’ve learned from last year’s EU referendum is that ordinary people just don’t listen to “experts” lecturing them about unfolding, manmade disasters. Planet Earth II, with its beauty and grandeur, and, yes, entertainment value, takes a subtle approach worthy of the most sophisticated advertising campaign: it says, look at this marvellous planet, do you really want to allow its destruction?
Peter Lyth
Hockerton, Nottinghamshire
• At last, someone has dared to say it. I strongly agree with Martin Hughes-Games with reference to the series Planet Earth I and II. Presenting these programmes was a man who has integrity, presence and an attractive air of authority. People admire him and listen to him. Sir David Attenborough was (and is) in an almost unique position to tell it as it is, not how we would all like it to be. These nature programmes were brilliantly produced with extremely skilful photography and, yes, it was great entertainment. But unfortunately it told a very cosy story with scant allusion to what is really happening. Ignorance, greed, unsupportable population growth of our species and a curious assumption that we can trash the planet without consequences. There is only one point on which I would disagree with Hughes-Games. In 100 years’ time, I don’t believe anyone will be thinking or caring about wildlife. By then, it may well be apparent that the journey towards our own extinction had begun in earnest. Probably far too late to exit la-la land.
Carol Knight
Tisbury, Wiltshire
Science to look out for in 2017
New beginning for illegally traded endangered species
Pages
