Thursday, 19 November 2009

Matters coming to a head...

This from the latest Northwest Business Insider
Heineken UK today officially launches its new biomass plant at Royal Brewery in Manchester. The brewing giant, formerly Scottish & Newcastle UK, has invested £17.5m in Manchester and the same amount at the John Smith's brewery in Tadcaster. Construction started in 2007 and both plants have been operational since October. The plants will initially burn woodchip to generate steam and electricity, with the ability to fit equipment to burn spent grain at a later date. Any excess power will be sold to the National Grid. Hugh Jones, director of solutions at the Carbon Trust, said: "It seems appropriate to launch this
project as we approach the crucial climate-change talks in Copenhagen.
Businesses must take the lead in using energy more wisely and efficiently, and I
am very encouraged to see."

We at MCFly will drink to that... (well, one of us will. The other Doesn't Drink)

How much can you grow?

I’ve been vexed by the discovery of a document which details how much fruit and vegetables a garden the size of an average allotment produced. The project ran in 1975 at Harlow Carr, a RHS garden in Yorkshire. While the weather in 1975 might have been a bit kinder than it has been in Manchester in recent years, I’m still mystified by the volume of produce listed from this small area (250 sq. metres). As an allotmenteer who (possibly a little obsessively) records what is harvest from our plot I have a fairly accurate picture of what we’ve grown over the years. It comes no where need the numbers achieved during this 1975 project.

This project was done under the auspices of the National Society of Allotment and Leisure Gardeners (NSALG) with the aim of showing how vegetables for a family of 4 could be provided. The blurb also states that ‘most of the work was carried out by the garden apprentice. Approximately 180 hours work went into the feature.’ Yields were as follows:

CROP WEIGHT OF HARVEST
Carrots 146 lbs
Parsnips 23 lbs
Beetroot 156 lbs
Lettuce 270 heads
Radish 42 bunches
Broad Beans 78 lbs
Peas 37 lbs
Cabbage 234 lbs
Brussel Sprouts 27 lbs
Turnips 46 lbs
Runner Beans 116 lbs
French Dwarf Beans 36 lbs
Marrows 28 lbs
Courgettes 53 lbs
Onions 57 lbs
Spring Onions 45 bunches
Potatoes 208 lbs
Leeks 34 lbs
Celery 57 heads
Spinach 11 lbs
Spinach Beet 145 lbs
Sweetcorn 38 cobs

PLUS
Gooseberries
Blackcurrants
Rhubarb
Cucumbers

We spend much longer than most people can cultivating our allotment and would consider it to be fairly productive. We don’t have full beds over winter but through the summer and autumn, into October its all full. What I don’t understand is how you’d achieve this as a family – when you’ll be wanting to harvest one or two cabbages a week, a pound or two of beetroot, carrots, a bunch of spinach etc. You surely are not going to dig up the entire crop of everything and swiftly put something else in the bed in its place – where would you store it all?

There is a lot written about how much food can be produced from a small area like an allotment and I just wonder if they are in part derived from projects like this one.

I would be interested to know how much other people grow – just growing to feed your household. Does anyone have any comments?

Guest Blogger, Debbie Ellen

Tuesday, 17 November 2009

Now if we can just turn runways into allotments...

Crains Manchester Business is bloody brilliant. They do daily free email bulletins (on top of the weekly newspaper, which MCFly has subscribed to from its first issue...)

Yesterday they reported the following:
1:32 pm, November 16, 2009
Operator sought to open bar in airport control tower

Passengers could soon be supping pints in the place where air traffic controllers once policed Manchester’s airspace.
Manchester Airport is seeking an operator to turn the airport’s decommissioned control tower into a bar.
The tower has 360 degree views around the airport and is located within Terminal 1, which has just undergone a £50m refurbishment.
The control tower is split over five levels, with the fifth level earmarked as the space for a 1,100 sq ft high-end bar.
Andrew Harrison, commercial director at Manchester Airport, said he hoped the bar would be able to rival some of “the most sophisticated venues” in the city centre. He said the airport was looking for “a cutting edge operator” to manage the project.
The bar will be reached via a lift or staircase from level 2 in the departures area, where a merchandising stand could be set up to attract customers.
Property developer Milligan Retail is helping the airport to select a tenderer.
So, it's progress; now all we need is for the runways to be converted into permaculture plots....

Monday, 16 November 2009

And ye shall know the truth, and it shall set you free...

MCFly attended the Faith Network of Manchester conference about Faith and the Environment, at the wonderful MERCi building in Ancoats. It was one of those evenings where everyone (between 35 and 45 people, slightly older than average 'climate' meetings tend to be) had a good time, but that you leave with nagging doubts about its effectiveness. Good grub, good chat, but not as incisive or interactive as it might have been...

After housekeeping and a brief intro to the history of MERCi (sustainable in many ways) we had four speakers.
On Buddhism, Clive Pyot spoke about his own community and the precepts he tries to follow. For more on Buddhism and the environment, see here. If it was true back in ol' Gautama's day that all existence is suffering, what's it gonna be like when the positive feedback loops kick in, eh?

On Christianity Rev John Hughes spoke about people's definitions of Christianity (he favours “God is, as Jesus is, therefore there is hope”) and Operation Noah and ecofeminism

The representative of Islam, Zahid Hussein, spoke of the Ecomosque project, and Rabbi Warren Elf finished off the session with a brief take on Judaism and the guidance to be found in the Torah.

Because of significant time over-runs, there was no time for questions and discussion in the big group- everyone legged it for the food, which was vegetarian and delicious (huzzah to the cook!)

There was an invitation and expectation that we should all “schmooze”, but this was not done coercively (name badges, enforced mingling etc) so people seemed to largely stick with those they already knew.) After a nice long break, we climbed back to the top of the building. Initially we were told that, as per the plan, we were going to get into groups to tackle very specific questions and come up with one-sentence pledges that would be stitched into a big pledge. Then followed some extended introductions, and since time was then very short, the initial plan was curtailed, and we were invited to be in big groups (of about 10 people) to discuss things generally and fill in a pledge leaf for a pledge tree. In MCFly's experience these groups tend to be dominated by one or three people, with the others drifting off mentally if not physically, so we cast ourselves out of the land of Nod.

MCFly's unsolicited advice- The evening might have been more intriguing and thought-provoking if the speakers had been invited to wrestle with one or more of the following-

  • 1) My faith's doctrine and how it does or doesn't equate with “sustainability.” What are the tensions, what have the tensions been historically?
  • 2) The existing PRACTICE of my faith and how it does/doesn't equate with sustainability (i.e. is there a gap between my doctrine and my faith's practice around environment, and if so why.)
  • 3) What are the OBSTACLES that stand in the way if I try to make my doctrine/practice more in line with sustainability?

After all, for each religion there are problems;

Christians have the dilemma between the two bits of Genesis in which God says “hey, this creation is yours to subdue, fill yer boots” [domination] or else He/She says “look, I'm giving you this to look after” [stewardship]. Further, some evangelical Christians (and yes, I know some- and like them) – are very unconcerned about Climate Change because God Has A Plan. This segues nicely into Buddhism- there are some interpretations that allow people to meh, it's all just one big cycle o' suffering, so what's the point trying to hold stuff together- everything changes”. I'm not saying it's a right interpretation, but it is prevalent.

Islam- well, take a look at the Haj- is flying to Mecca more than once (or even once...) compatible with sustainability? It's one big can of worms- ass soon as you start dissing people's interpretations of what it means to be a good adherent to their faith, it's gonna get messy. (Please not, most of the world's Muslims seem to live in countries with pretty low per capita carbon emissions. Before Westerners start lecturing, we might need to sort out the plank in our own eyes).

Judaism- I am not so clear on the tensions within it on environmental issues, but you could- without conflating Judaism and Israel- take a look at Israel's environmental record (nothing to write home about), and the reasons for the weakness of its environmental movement.

The point is, these problems (and others) exist. If they didn't, we wouldn't be in this mess. It seems a pity to hold an event that focusses solely on the good things that are going on. There has to be SOME time devoted to the problems, and how they might be overcome. If not, we simply violently agree with each other and are none-the-wiser for dealing with the real problems, because they haven't been named. As a Quaker might say, we've not born witness.

Given that the total time spent on the four speakers was closer to an hour than 40 minutes, despite the invocation on the agenda “max 10 mins each” it might have been better to have a fifth speaker- a secular humanist, or an animist or a pagan as well, and kept everyone strictly to their time (with a card held up to give them a two minute warning, or some such).

MCFly's two pence. In vulgar anthropological terms, religion is part of terror management, and also a way of maintaining social solidarity and rules of engagement within (and less commonly between) tribes. To that extent, religions mostly seem to follow the Golden Rule, which Christians will explain as “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Kant's categorial imperative yadder yadder. (And a nice little side line in telling you to behave in this life cos you get your reward in the next. But we digress...)

Well, if you're gonna retrofit the Golden Rule for “the Environment”, you simply need to say that “others” means not just other hairless two-legged apes stumbling about now but ALSO other species AND other humans and species that haven't yet been born.

Voila. We'll send you an invoice.


Random important quote

"Activism is my rent for living on this planet." Alice Walker


Further Reading

The stuff about Buddhism in Only Planet (page 111-113
The Ecology of Eden by Evan Eisenberg (long, but really really amazingly good. If you skim the 'Earth Jazz tosh, that is)
Dancing towards Armageddon by http://www.arcworld.org/

Things MCFly thinks they should read, if someone invents an extra 12 hours in the day

The Great Transformation, by Karen Armstrong

Sunday, 15 November 2009

MCFly 037- Executive Decision

On Wednesday 18 November the Executive Manchester City Council will adopt a 64 page plan about Climate Change. The document, called "Manchester. A Certain Future. Our co2llective action on climate change" has been months in the making. Written by a mix of council officers, academics, activists and business people, it lays out a bold vision (if you ignore the existence of a whopping great international airport) of how Mancunians will be living, moving, working, growing and adapting by 2020. It's freely downloadable and far more readable than the notorious "Call to Action" of January. Wednesday's meeting is open to the public, and starts at 10am, in the Council Chamber, level 3 of the Town Hall Extension.

On the subject of Certain Futures, MCFly sees two racing certainties;

a) Climate Change is going to hit us in ways we haven't yet considered, and quicker than most people think. Many Mancunians are in for a rude awakening.

b) Without relentless, imaginative and constructive pressure on the City Council and its partners, (and the other Greater Manchester councils) then infighting, apathy, despair and bureaucratic inertia will sap the momentum gained over the last year.

That pressure needs numbers. Not a single one of the existing climate campaigning groups is doing a particularly good job of enthusing newcomers and keeping them involved - every group has a core of usual suspects and many new faces who are replaced by still newer faces within a couple of months. On climate change, Manchester City Council has started to change how it works. Maybe the 'activists' need to do the same.

MCFly 037- Read All About It


Don't have space to list all of these below in the paper edition of MCFly, and hyperlinks work better on a blog anyhow...

Defining Dangerous Climate Change- A call for consistency

Prof Kevin Anderson and Dr Alice Bows

The Greenhouse Development Rights project has just released a brief report (only 10 pages) entitled "A 350 ppm Emergency Pathway."
In this paper, for the first time, a precise and up-to-date representative 350 ppm pathway is developed. Like so: The 350 target reflects a scientifically-grounded assessment of what global climate protection really means. But what would it actually take to bring the atmospheric carbon-dioxide (CO2) concentration back to 350 parts per million? This memo provides a quick, up-to-date overview of the issues here - issues significant to any plausible emergency emissions reduction target.
To that end, it focuses on the extremely limited size of the remaining global CO2 budget, and on the emissions pathways that would enable us to keep within it. And, by way of context, it compares 350 to the 2°C temperature target, and offers a very brief glimpse of the challenges that such emergency targets raise on this North / South divided world.
Clive James isn't a climate change sceptic, he's a sucker - but this may be the reason
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/02/climate-change-denial-clive-james

The People Paradox: Self Esteem Striving, Immortality Ideologies, and Human Response to Climate Change by Janis Dickinson, in Ecology and Society 14 (1)

A Great Jump to Disaster? (Review of James Lovelock's The Vanishing Face of Gaia)
by Tim Flannery in the New York Review of Books


How cities should respond to climate change – new research
.
Researchers at Newcastle University, on behalf of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, have outlined how our major cities must respond to climate change, if they are to continue to grow. Using the UKCP09 data, the report "How can cities grow whilst reducing emissions and vulnerability", looks at the impact of: rises in temperature, increased flooding in winter and less water availability in summer. As well as protecting our homes and buildings against the increased threat of flooding, the report emphasises the need to reduce our carbon emissions, reduce our water usage and move towards cleaner, greener transport.
More details are at http://www.nerc.ac.uk/press/releases/2009/22-growth.asp

A Transition Food Strategy
Having recently help develop ‘A Sustainable Food Strategy for Bristol’, Claire Milne is now helping Edinburgh do the same.
http://transitionnetworknews.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/a-transition-food-strategy/

Wednesday, 11 November 2009

Scrutiny and Overflight, sorry, oversight

At the latest Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee, Manchester Airport was invited to talk about its carbon commitments. The airport, and aviation in general, has been excluded from the council's climate action plan but with a commitment to re-assess this once they move towards cutting the cities total carbon footprint in 2013.

What we at MCFly headquarters were particularly keen to hear was that the airport was taking the council's climate change plan seriously, and preparing for the implications of the total carbon footprint reduction planned.

Rather the Manchester Airport was keen to point out that aviation is only responsible for 6% of UK emissions and that the company (55% owned by the council) was committed to becoming carbon neutral for energy use and vehicle fuel by 2015. Energy use was a particular concern and by reducing use they saved 8,244 tonnes of C02 already. Half of the airports electricity was from renewable sources, with commitments to take this to 100% and a wind turbine was planned for the sister airport at East Midlands.

No attempt was made to question the 'socio-economic' benefit of the airport, with representatives stating that the airport was simply crucial for Manchester's economy and providing jobs. No mention was made of the council's plan or its implications on the day-to-day running of the airport.

Although it is easy to be cynical of the airport and the fact that they don't seem to take any responsibility for the aircafts' carbon footprint once its in the air, figures they provided actually show that 'aircraft on the ground' emitted 125,000 tonnes of C02 in contrast to 164,000 tonnes emitted once the aircraft is in the air...Does that mean that the 125,000 tonnes is their responsibility? After all they are aiming to be carbon-neutral in their ground operations by 2015...
Arwa Aburawa
Freelance Journalist
http://voiceagainstempire.blogspot.com/