Manchester Climate Fortnightly

We have moved!

2010-07-19T14:31:00.000-07:00

MCFly has got a new web site-

http://manchesterclimatefortnightly.wordpress.com

Cheers

Marc Hudson
(MCFly editor)

Steering Group meets at long long last

2010-06-18T14:24:00.000-07:00

OK, so that may not be quite the most exciting news headline you'll ever read, but this stuff does matter*. Please read on!

On the evening of Thursday 17 June, the "Steering Group" (SG) for the Manchester Climate Change Action Plan finally met. MCFly has been reporting on this group since it was first mooted, back in the back end of 2009. Essentially, its purpose is to be a group. That steers. The Action Plan. You know, the Action Plan that you've heard so much about from the Council; on their website, on their twitter feed, in the pages of Manchester Pravd.. People, on their facebook group, on the big screen in Piccadilly Gardens, on the blog of Richard Leese and the blog of the Executive Member for the Environment, via your Council Tax bill, via the Manchester Evening News and via interviews by officers and members when they pop up on BBC radio and Northwest Tonight and on Granada tonight. You know, that Action Plan.

But anyhow, about this group; It has a chair- Steve Connor, of the ethically inclined communications outfit "Creative Concern". That's the same Creative Concern who were heavily involved in the unsuccessful "Yes" campaign for the Transport Innovation Fund referendum of 2008. Mr. Connor has a blog called "headstretcher".

At the moment there is no Vice Chair (but that could change.) The SG was to be a twelve member body, but when the original nine met they decided to give themselves the option of expanding to 15, since they are keen to "plug gaps, grab talent and increase the diversity of the group." This expansion may go some way to help redress a pretty pale and male set up as it stands (Steve Connor is joined by Phil Korbel, Dave Coleman, Richard Paver, Paul Andrews, Nigel Murphy, Nigel Rose and two other... men.) The SG is not to be panel of experts, bur rather a stakeholder group. MCFly will report on these as they are announced.

The original plan was for the Steering Group to meet four times a year, but after discussion, it will meet "6 to 8 weekly in the first instance" with two more meetings before the November 30th "Stakeholder conference". The next meeting will be in late July, and IS open to the public (if you ask nicely).

They'll be preparing a report for that Stakeholder conference,and have as their immediate priority "to do a push on getting more organisations to endorse the plan and start preparing their own plans. That includes McFly readers of course!" Given the truly appallingly low take-up rate by organisations invited to endorse the Action Plan so far (46 out of 1067), that seems like a very good place to start. Watch this space.

MCFly says:
MCFly's gift to Steve Connor would be a lawn-mower. Or a scythe. Or perhaps a flamethrower. Anything that will help him hack away at the sky-high grass that has grown under everyone's feet since November 2009, when the action plan was launched with a certain hullaballo and self-satisfaction. We're more than half way to the first "stakeholder conference" (Tuesday November 30th. Book yer annual leave now) and there's been virtually no work on telling the public about what's going on. The website for the Plan doesn't allow people to make comments on it (positive or negative) and does not explain how businesses and organisations can "endorse" it. There's been no effort to maintain and nurture the incipient networks established in the hurly burly of writing last year's Action Plan. The second half of 2010 had better be substantially less crap than the first. Just sayin'.

*Sort of: MCFly is with John Maynard Keynes on this - "in the long run, we're all dead." It's just, he didn't mean gnawing on the bones of a beloved pet cat while wondering why we didn't ever pull our finger out on carbon dioxide mitigation in the 2010s...

Manchester's Food and Sustainability Question time.

2010-06-10T15:18:00.001-07:00

Thurs June 10, Manchester. Eighty people tonight heard five speakers debate “Food and Sustainability” at the University of Manchester. The event, hosted by the now venerable EMERGE, covered packaging, carbon footprints, vegetarianism and supermarkets.

After brief opening remarks by Lucy Danger (including a shout out to the brilliant FareShare project), chair Mark Shayler (Eco3, previously Environment Manager Asda), gave a brief spiel (about embedded water etc) and introduced the five panelists; Stefan Stainsby (WRAP's Love Food Hate Waste Campaign)
Julie Bagnoli (Business Link & Isinglass Restaurant), Pat Foreman (Foods North West), Chris Shearlock (The Co-operative Group) and Debbie Ellen (Independent Researcher & Community Grower).
The first question was perhaps the best of the evening (that's not to say that things went downhill – for the most part they didn't).
What was the biggest threat to Manchester/Northwest in the coming decade(s)?
Chris Shearlock spoke of two- one being outbid for the “nice things” (exotic fruits etc) by the emerging economies,and also biodiversity loss (Plan B). He worried that the biodiversity crunch would come sooner than the climate crunch.
Debbie Ellen saw four interlinked problems 1) skills shortage (with lots of farmers being over 55, and only 5% under 35), 2) access to affordable land, 3) erratic weather and 4) lack of training in vegetarian and vegan cooking in the catering trade. She also gave a shout out to the Manchester Climate Change Action Plan (subject of the latest MCFly youtube video)
Pat Foreman endorsed the previous points and chipped in with concerns on the ability to innovate. Julie Bagnoli pointed to the tiny availability of locally grown food.
The next set of questions were, IMHO, a bit of a diversion- around packaging. It's emotive and obvious, but as Chris Shearlock pointed out, not the biggest 'carbon' part of the problem, and needs to be weighed against increased spoilage if food is under-packaged.
The chair kept things moving along fairly nicely, giving both audience and panel chances to expand and interact. Shearlock came across as very well-briefed (as you'd expect of the point-man for Britain's biggest farmer!), and adamant that life cycle analysis was crucial for looking at whether food flown in from Kenya was 'lower carbon' than locally produced. He defended Fairtrade while acknowledging it wasn't always the lowest carbon option (pointing out its other advantages, of a secure price for Majority World growers).
On whether vegetarianism/veganism was the most important action an individual could take, Shearlock and Ellen and Bagnoli said yes. Foreman, in keeping with her general “let the market decide/let's all be practisch” approach suggested it wasn't but rather thinking about what was bought and when, while Stefan Stainsby, as befits his WRAP role pointed to not wasting food while proclaiming he didn't want a nanny state.

MCFly ducked out slightly early (along with a few others who'd presumably found the two hour duration a bit punishing), so can't say if there were any final surprises.

How could the event have been improved? More vegetarian food during the mingler! Name badges and the various forms of soft coercive mingling that help English people overcome their reserve. Perhaps a tighter focus on some of the really pressing issues facing us. A few fun memes like “Permanent Global Summertime”. But nothing fundamental, nothing structural. This was no Dire Mountain.
Other impending food related events-
Create your own Abundance - June 12 2010
Feeding Manchester 4 - June 25, 2010

Green Monday (tell me now how do you feel?)

2010-06-07T23:15:00.000-07:00

Last night around 100 business people (and one spy) met for the first Green Monday event to be held in the North west. Held at Old Trafford Football ground, the event succeeded in providing food for thought (three short speeches and Q and A), space for info exchange (themed discussion tables) and scope for networking (wine, beer and the usual flurry of business cards being exchanged). Putting aside the (inevitable) failure to deal with the scale of the challenge facing this species, it was... a pretty good event, and hopefully the first of a regular series.

After brief comments intros, Paul Turner, Head of Sustainable Development at Lloyds Banking Group kicked things off with a succinct talk that pointed out that the Environmental Sustainability agenda covered many bases- pricing power, access to markets, access to capital, risk management, employee retention – but was still seen as an item only in the 'cost' column of the ledger by some. He added that only 30% of business schools have environmental issues in their core curriculum, and worried publicly about the risk of 'environmental sustainability' being seen as something to be cut during a recession.
He seeded an image that was then picked up by other speakers and questioners, when he cited Wayne Gretzky (Canadian ice hockey legend) opining that the reason for his success was that he “skated to where the puck is going to be”

He was followed by Chris Matthews, Head of Environment and Sustainability atUnited Utilities, who looked at the most important current issue facing his business (water scarcity), the most innovative project UU have on the go at the moment - gas-to-grid (energy from your sewage) and the “emerging trend”, which he felt was the focus on biodiversity. The final speaker was Chris Lewis, Head of Environment at AstraZeneca. He covered a lot of ground, including the observation that AZ, while externalising their supply chain, were retaining 'ownership' of the carbon footprint that the supply chain created.
Questions from the floor covered biomimicry, the moment when the speakers realised how serious the situation was, what they want from the Coalition Government, the impact that the lack of a 'global deal' would have on their future plans and the possibility of growth on a finite planet.

On the global deal question- both the Chrises felt that the lack of a deal meant little to them- their businesses were forging ahead because it was the right thing to do, it saved them money and it was a key feature for their ability to attract and retain talent. Paul Turner of Lloyds demurred slightly, saying the lack of a deal (at Copenhagen, Cancun etc etc) mattered insofar as it provides non-progressive countries and companies with an excuse to do nothing, putting first movers at a disadvantage. He pointed out that South Korea had used its stimulus package from early 2009 to 'go green', with 81% of its government pump-priming in clean tech.

On the possibility of growth, Turner was also interesting. MCFly was expecting the usual ducking and weaving. Instead Turner quoted John F Kennedy (“GDP measures everything but that what matters”) and gave a shout out to the New Economics Foundation and Nicholas Sarkozy's calls for environmental/social sustainability to be included in measures of economic well-being. He made a useful distinction between progress and grwoth.

This Q and A was then followed by roughly an hour sat in tables on various themes (decarbonising supply chains, employee engagement etc), and followed in turn by complementary wine and beer (which had nothing to do with MCFly's willingness to schlepp out to Old Trafford).

“Green Mondays” have been running in the Big Smoke for sometime now. With Greater Manchester hoping to be a hub for environmental business, then these sorts of events will be happening more frequently.

Verdict: Within the logic of “industrial ecology/ecological modernisation” Media4change have put on a thought-provoking and interesting event. If MCFly gets along to another, it'll be in suit and tie to blend in better.

Footnote to the Man United guy who refused to even give MCFly so much a business card- I said Manchester CLIMATE Fortnightly, not Manchester CITY Fortnightly. Assuming that was what was hacking you off?

Happy Birthday to MCFly!!

2010-06-01T10:46:00.000-07:00

The next issue is number 50. We've been publishing for two years now, not missing a deadline (tho' we've shaved one or two of the blighters!)

We're having a minor knees up at the Sandbar, Grosvenor St, on Weds 9th June, from 8pm or so.

You are all - new readers and old - very welcome to join us.

Another Talking Shop Bites the Dust?

2010-05-30T05:56:00.000-07:00

And so the organisation formerly known as the North West Regional Assembly - '4NW' - has been read its last rites by the Coalition, and will grace the headlines no more. Which is sort of the point isnt it? It didnt grace the headlines and so you might be forgiven for thinking that its demise was a welcome part of the bonfire of the quangos.

The evidence for the prosecution would include the fact that we the tax-payer funded the organisation to little effect. But it's when you put it in the context of the governace of the North West that things get a little more equiviocal. Once the idea of a devolved region was scuppered (by the disastrous referendum on that subject for the North East), 4NW ended up as a secretariat for the NW Leaders Council - pretty much the only place where all the leaders of the local councils of the region got together. Again - so what?

The most powerful public body in the NW is the North West Development Agency - which as well as giving out many hundreds of millions in grants, is also the distributing agency for a pretty huge wad of EU money too. The NWDA also authored the Regional Economic Strategy which guides its investment decisions. It answers to a Board made up of a mixture Council and business leaders with a few other worthies thrown in but it is not democratically accountable. The Chair of that Board is pretty influential. The previous incumbent of that post, Brian Gray, was the former head honcho of Baxi the heating people, and the new one is Robert Hough. He used to be Deputy Chair of the massive Peel Holdings (think Trafford Centre, Salford Quays/Media City and all the land along the Ship Canal) and his NWDA predecessor went straight from that post to chair the Peel company that runs Media City - Peel Media. Can you see a name that is starting to pop up here a bit? Peel will also benefit massively from a huge NWDA project around the 'Mersey Gateway', and over a £100M of public money went into Media City.

So - on one side an unelected Board running a very powerful public body from which - rightly or wrongly - Peel Holdings benefits considerably. On the other - the democratically constituted 4NW who, up until the recent announcement, were for the first time co-authoring the next regional economic policy. The Chair of the Leaders Board, one Sir Richard Leese, has made it plain that they won't go without a fight. It should also be noted that the reclusive boss of Peel Holdings is a prominent Conservative.

Speaking of Sir Richard brings us to the other way that the wings of the NWDA are currently being clipped - by the creation of Greater Manchester as a 'City Region.' This brings considerable devolved powers and possibly control of funds from both Whitehall and the NWDA. The city region is governed by another council of leaders - this time the council leaders of the ten districts that make up the former county of Greater Manchester. All laudably accountable.

The Coaltion has made the decentralising of powers from Whitehall a central plank of its vision, and the word on the street is that they quite like the City Region concept. The policy nugget that could radicalise this picture is the Coalition's promise to allow referendums [or, for the benefit of pedants 'referenda'] on whether the country's ten biggest cities should have elected mayors. A Manc Boris anyone? It is by no means clear whether such a move would apply to the city of Manchester or the city region - but one could well imagine the concept being popular. A boost to public interest in local government would certainly be welcome... it is the list of ambitious former celebrities eying up a big chair in the Town Hall that scares this correspondent, as would any link between such an incumbent and, er, prominent NW business interests. Whatever happens - it's not going to be dull.

And the relevance of all this to the teeming throng of McFly readers is this... The NWDA, as well as being unaccountable, is all about Gross Value Added (that's pure business growth to you and me) whatever bells and whistles they put on it. Whilst this also features very large amongst the policy drivers of Sir Richard and his elected colleagues, we can be confident that it is tempered by real notions of social justice and, increasingly, sustainable development. Watch this space..

MCFly youtube video launched

2010-05-28T22:50:00.000-07:00

The MCFly Youtube video about Manchester City Council is up.

It's not very polished, let's just leave it at that. But it fulfills (half) a promise that I made in MCFly #49 to have two videos up by the end of the week.

It was fun to make, and future videos will (fingers crossed) be marginally-to-significantly less rubbish.

Comments welcome, but ESPECIALLY, offers of help to improve things.

Ecoteams Schmecoteams

2010-05-26T06:35:00.000-07:00

MCFly spent a glorious sunny Saturday morning... indoors, being depressed by the format and execution of a climate event called “Eco-teams”. Not asking for sympathy - MCFly is an idiot, and getting too old for this stuff.

The event was organised by “Global Action Plan”. They had contacted all sorts of groups, and invited people along to hear about what they do, with the idea of people leaving all fired up to lead “Eco-teams” of 4 to 6 people reducing their emissions over a few months.

As feared, it kicked off with a goodly portion of death by powerpoint. First off, a Council officer gave an overview of the Manchester Climate Change Action Plan. She managed to mention AfSl, FoE etc but not the group that actually created the conditions for broad participation. No surprises there then.

After that the audience sat through a twenty five minute explanation of "Ecoteams," a straight-forward concept that anyone who came was – by definition – sold on. It could have been explained in a two page briefing that could have been sent out earlier, freeing up time and bandwidth
Just when I - and others- were losing the will to live, we had a pseudo-mingler where we had to go around the room to find people who had led meetings, had alternative energy sources at home etc.

I say pseudo-mingler, because that didn't lead on to us forming groups based on where we live, what work we do, what we've already done, what we might want to do. Typical of the underlying (and false) liberal assumptions about individual behaviour change, we spent the day being bombarded with facts and gimmicks but never was any attempt made to find out what people already knew, were already doing, specifically wanted to know.

We then had lots of “put laminate cards of these appliances in order of least to most polluting” games, that you'd get teenagers to play. Nothing wrong with that, but is it the best way to embed an enthusiasm for/interest in being an EcoTeam Leader, and role-playing the difficulties etc?

The whole day seemed predicated on the tedious and ineffective* “information deficit model”, and the underlying assumption was that Consumer Capitalism was fine as long as it was Green Consumer Capitalism. In academia this is known as "ecological modernisation". All the talk is of “efficiency” and “waste-reduction”, never of justice, or lessening consumption.

Tony Lloyd, recently re-elected MP for Manchester Central bravely took on the post-lunch slot. His advice for effective lobbying?
a) feel entitled to do it
b) lobbying is a discussion, in which you have prove your case (blackmail along the lines of “Do as I say or I won't vote for you” is not effective!!)
c)the most direct (face-to-face) engagement is the best

Two more sessions and then we were done. We had the same person facilitating throughout the day (a mistake. If there are other people who could take some on, then let them. They will benefit from the experience, and the audience will hear a different voice!)

Trouble was, even on its own terms- of encouraging people to become eco-team leaders, this event was at best a half-success. At the end of the event, someone asked me “so, what now? Is there a pack that you get if you agree to be an Ecoteam leader?” This person is intelligent, dedicated and effective. If he/she is not able to get that basic information from a day, then the organisers have some soul-searching to do.

But, I suspect most of the feedback forms they got spoke in glowing terms (English people rarely tell hard truths, even in anonymous feedback forms) and that at least some of those who attended will start up teams. But not as many as could have. Verdict: yet another missed opportunity.

Disclaimer - MCFly is jealous of Global Action Plan's resources, and irritated that a bunch of Londoners have come up and done something that AfSL, FOE, C2RA, MCA between them could have done, only better.

*Ineffective in achieving the ostensible goals of the organisation – creating empowered and effective citizens who maintain long-term reductions of their carbon footprint and that of a bunch of people around. Very effective in allowing people to stay in their comfort zones, tick the boxes that say “information delivered” and so forth.

For how it SHOULD be done, see Cambridge Carbon Footprint

Green Expo report

2010-05-26T06:21:00.001-07:00

by staff reporter Scott Templeton

A slightly nervous looking Cllr Nigel Murphy, the new Executive Member for the Environment, kicked off this exhibition and conference of sustainable building held over two days at GMEX (now known as Manchester Central). Our new Executive Member must still be getting up to speed with his new portfolio as his introduction to the A Certain Future report lasted around 12 minutes rather than the expected half an hour. To be fair this was his first speech on the subject and its probably too early to judge his abilities although his recognition that the Council “does not have all the answers” is a good start. The speech, which he had only looked at early in the morning and was reading word for word, was lacking conviction. However, in it Cllr Murphy reaffirmed the 10:10 pledge to carbon reduction, and suggested that Manchester City Council was the largest organisation taking part in this scheme. This civic boosterism characterised much of the presentation with claims such as “the only UK city to involve stakeholders” in the climate change strategy and the distinctive “original modern” approach to climate change that we are apparently taking continuing that well loved narrative about the greatness of the city so beloved by our leaders.

The exhibition and conference, a two day event, provided a showcase for the “latest ideas, products and technologies that help reduce the environmental impact of building” and there were dozens of companies displaying these solutions. From Malaysian timber housing systems to green roofs this was a reminder of the economic opportunities that are presented by climate change and sustainability needs. This underlying economic opportunity orientation of the event was confirmed when Cllr Nigel Murphy suggestion that there are “significant economic opportunities for cities that grasp this challenge” woke up the early morning crowd of developers, architects and builders.

With dozens of seminars from building green schools to the benefits of biomass providing a good opportunity to learn about some of the building/construction issues facing the industry and showed how these companies are at the forefront of developing new technological solutions to renewable energy systems. Yet this could be the weakness of the event with its focus on business and technology there seemed to be a number of unmentionable issues especially anything to do with politics. In fact the whole event seemed to be devoid of climate change politics or the need to make some increasingly tough decisions about our lifestyles with technology being positioned as the solution to all our worries. This was also reflected in seminars by Chris Birch and Robert Shaw, both directors of sustainability at planning consultancies who gave presentations looking at the planning systems and master planning. Using formulas such as P* + A* + T* = environmental impact or statements such as “everyone has a role to play in delivering the new paradigm” the speakers seemed to get lost in a world of built environment expertise and technological configurations that speak of a business as usual approach.

Another ‘elephant in the room’ was the economy with questions of funding for all these schemes being greeted by smiles and nervous laughter. The Green City team at the Council stand seemed to pass on the burden of its strategy to the mythical ‘business partner’ but there was no clear evidence that anyone in the conference had any idea about how their solutions could be delivered on a scale beyond the ubiquitous experiment or case study.

Still, there was lots of ideas and inventions at the conference, clever people coming up with all manner of energy-saving and generating devices of the future. It will be interesting to see how these develop in our new economic climate.

Who owns the emissions? We do.

2010-05-25T03:17:00.000-07:00

Mary Heaney, top sustainability bod for Manchester Metropolitan University, isn't playing the game fair. At the end of an interesting and thought-provoking breakfast meeting at the CUBE, she was asked “who owns the aviation emissions of overseas students attending Manchester Metropolitan University?” Speaking for MMU she said simply “we do.” She was supposed to wiffle-waffle about off-sets this or the lack of a settled system for apportioning international aviation emissions that. Then MCFly could write a sneery snarky squib and MCFly reader(s) could be confirmed in his/her/their world-views. That's the game, or it was until this morning.

image courtesy Adrian Pope

Ms Heaney, the game-changer, was the speaker at a well-attended panel discussion on Sustainability in the Built Environment, organised by Insider Media (a source for some of MCFly's local/regional news snippets). She gave a coherent powerpoint presentation entitled by“A vision for transformation, regeneration and sustainability” about the (controversial to some) plans for expansion of MMU onto Birley Fields in Hulme.

The plans, approved last year by the City Council's Executive, are part of an overall strategy to consolidate MMU's seven campuses down to two. This will improve MMUs building usage and overall operational efficiency.

Ms Heaney alluded to previous masterplans for Hulme (the Crescents, anyone?) and admitted that residents could be justifiably cautious/suspicious. Her presentation made use of various (positive) comments that emerged from the consultation done last year. She spoke of 430 full-time equivalent jobs (with about 340 being local jobs), and an aspiration to dramatically increase local attendance.
She moved on to talk about the aspiration for “zero water, zero waste and zero carbon.” Water would be sourced from a bore, with 100% rainwater capture for flushing toilets etc. Waste would be tackled by minimisation first and aggressive recycling. MCFly may have misheard, but the phrase “48% reduction by 2020 for carbon emissions” seemed to be mooted.”The buildings would be all BREEAM 'excellent' or 'outstanding', and a low carbon energy centre looking at biomass and a power/heating approach. There is also a biodiversity plan looking at green roofs/habitat linkage.

Critics of this plan (whom MCFly will invite to comment on this blog post) will doubtless point to the loss of green space and the building of a car park.

The final point Ms Heaney made was very sound indeed- buildings can be 'green' but the outcomes 'brown' because of the way they are used. Behaviour change (education, incentives, social norms engineering) are all essential. It's almost as if folks need “Green Nudges”.

Hopefully MMU will put the powerpoint presentation online, and we can link to it.

After her presentation, she, Felicity Goodey (see disclaimer below) and Professor Andrew Thomas of CCINW fielded questions from the audience.

The first was on on which of economic, environmental and social sustainability was being paid the most attention.
Prof Thomas said definitely economic, because the building profession is dominated by engineers and quantity surveyors, and that economic sustainability can be easily measured.
Felicity Goodey chipped in agreeing with this and adding that evidence showed that social sustainability could also be measured and shown to have an economic impact. Her example was that having trees around reduced stress levels and therefore staff sickness decreased. In terms of being able to retrofit 1960s buildings, she pointed to the example of Wythenshawe Hospital, first hospital to win a Carbon Trust award, as well as dramatically reducing its heating and cooling bill.
Ms Heaney added that as well as being driven by government fiat, there were also expectations from students that the institutions they attended would behave responsibly.

As befits these events, there was a question about retrofitting. Given that 80% of the buildings we have in 2050 are already built, this is where the real savings will have to come from.
Felicity Goodey agreed, saying that to win arguments you need to have case studies to show how much money could be saved how quickly. She advocated that there should be an expectation that any publicly owned building (hospitals, police HQs etc) should be replacing windows during routine maintenance with double-glazing and thermal maintenance. She lamented that this doesn't happening. She cited the current VAT regime as a perverse incentive for knocking down buildings and replacing them with things that had the same carbon footprint, calling it “absolutely barking mad.”

Prof Thomas chipped in with the observation that who pays and who benefits is a key question. Landlords are (sometimes) paying up front, with tenants getting lower fuel bills. He advocated “pay as you save” schemes, and pointed out the challenges will only get bigger as time goes on.
Mary Heaney, who now sits on the Environment Commission, advocated looking to the Registered Social Landlord sector as 'low hanging fruit', and mentioned cladding work done on 60s buildings at MMU.

The next questioner took the retrofitting theme further. Was it possible to retrofit to zero carbon by 2050? Prof Thomas was reluctant to prophesise. From the floor (Roger Burton of JMarchitects) came the observation that doing energy generation on a per-building basis was not going to work, it would have to be done at a community level, with heat mains, recovered waste etc. He said that the city has to lead.”

Felicity Goodey added that zero carbon also involved procurement of, for example, food. She gave the example of food being brought in from South Wales by contractors when it could be sourced more locally. She also wondered aloud if too much emphasis was being put on recycling and the waste minimisation (and consumption reduction generally, if MCFly doesn't misrepresent) was where the action was at.

Alex Sol of Sheppard Robson said, while everything MMU was doing was good, wasn't it maybe fiddling around the edges, with legislation needed to force things to happen.
Prof Thomas proclaimed himself a great believer in sticks as well as carrots, but was worried the early adopters would lose their competitive advantage if everyone was having to perform at the same high level. MCFly reckons this is wrong on two levels- one the goal is to preserve a habitable biosphere, not (necessarily) current market models and two the 'early adopters' will simply push on to even more ambitious technologies/techniques.
Felicity Goodey was also not keen on legislation (though the reason she gave – globalised economy- wouldn't hold carbon if the disclaimer (see below) wasn't in play; States can – and do- impose conditions on capital flows/capitalist behaviour. Thus the spatial/sustainability fix. She advocated using audit tools, since the UK is “audit mad.”
Mary Heaney cited MMU's use of Display Energy Certificates on all its buildings, big and small, as a way of driving behaviour change (with informal competition between faculties) and speculated that if DECs were put on private buildings, this would create reputational risk/opportunity.

And the final question? MCFly's attempt to bring the love-fest down to earth, exposing the contradiction between all the good stuff aimed at making Manchester 'greener' but within the context of 'Manchester as a “world city”' and the attendant aviation emissions. And I would have gotten away with it too, if it hadn't been for those meddling kids... Now, if we can just get Manchester Airport to adopt MMU's logic...

The event was hosted by the Centre for Construction Innovation and sponsored by AECOM and Sheppard Robson. The coffee, pastries and networking were all good. MCFly will highlight future events of interest to its reader(s).

Disclaimer- Ms Goodey is MCFly's boss in real life, so OF COURSE every single word she uttered was a pearl of wisdom!

Manchester Airport invaded by activists

2010-05-24T05:45:00.001-07:00

Fresh from bringing an inflatable elephant to last Wednesday's post-election City Council meeting, activists from Manchester Climate Action and Manchester Plane Stupid have broken into the freight terminal of Manchester Airport and chained themselves to the wheel of a plane.

You can read about it here.

Protesters have cut through a perimeter fence at Manchester Airport and chained themselves to the wheels of a plane.

Members of the group Manchester Plane Stupid are demonstrating against the expansion of the World Freight Centre.

A spokesman for the airport said six people cut a hole in the fence and flights were suspended for 20 minutes following the security breach.

Police are currently working on removing the protesters, who started their demonstration at about 0700 BST.

As per the latest MCFly's calendar, the next meeting of Manchester Climate Action takes place this Wednesday, 26 May, starting at 7.30pm at the Bowling Green Pub, Grafton St.

MCFly will be there, and doubtless there will be some new faces, complete with inquisitive minds.

MCFly 049- Glebelands

2010-05-24T03:06:00.000-07:00

Glebelands city growers is a haven of green lushness hidden behind a simple walk way between two buildings. The scenery is idyllic; a market garden perched on the banks of the River Mersey, the earthy smell of freshly tilled soil and sounds of chirping birds fill the air. A gentle breeze and the flowing river all but shut out the noise of traffic from the M60, isolating the farm from the hustle and bustle of Sale South Manchester.

The land for the farm is on lease from the Trafford Metropolitan Council and the market garden is run by a friendly and dedicated four member strong team of Charlotte, Adam, Sally and Ed. They are helped by Emily, who has been volunteering on the farm for over a year. The team met through World Wide Opportunities on Organic Farms (WWOOF), a registered UK charity made up of an international network of organic farms, gardens, and small holdings which are called hosts. These hosts offer food and accommodation in exchange for practical help on their land which they farm using ecologically acceptable methods.

Glebelands is certified by the Soil Association, a membership charity that campaigns for organic food and farming. The farm operates on the principle of feeding the soil rather than the crop and has a balanced ‘ecosystem’ approach to farming without the use of fertilizers or pesticides. Rows of polytunnels, a glass house and a green house filled with ready to plant seedlings, help ensure the production of leafy crops all year round. All produce - mainly vegetables - is sold within 5 miles of the farm. Composting is done onsite with additional plant inputs sourced no further than 5 miles. The farm has just one tractor, keeping mechanisation to the minimum. Most of the work done manually, which helps to significantly reduce the farm's carbon footprint.

Although the team members do admit that it is a lot of hard work, they are also quick to add that they find it rewarding and well worth it. Innovative irrigation systems applied on the farm comprise of buried pipes under the vegetable beds with tiny holes to ensure that the soil is properly irrigated with no water wastage. This is usually not the case with traditional sprinklers due to changes in wind direction. Plans are currently under way for a sustainable irrigation system that is to be served by the River Mersey.

The farm's steadily increasing clientele include Unicorn- Manchester’s Co-operative grocery a successful whole food UK outlet named The Observer Food Monthly's 'Best Independent Shop' and Radio Four Food Programme's 'Best Local Food Retailer in 2008. Dig food box scheme a South Manchester home delivery service started in Chorlton but now moved to Altrincham. It specialises in locally sourced organic fruits and vegetables. Glebelands also supplies Organic North Wholesale, a co-operative formed by a group of organic businesses. Café Ark-Sale Water Park a vegetarian café located adjacent to the Mersey Valley visitors centre and Jam Street Café, Chorlton.

In April 2010, the Glebelands City growers’ team began work on the ‘Grow for it!’ project an educational programme for local schools, being funded by the Big Lottery Fund’s Local Food scheme. Training and volunteering opportunities do exist on the farm as well; visit their website/ for more details.

Forthcoming events include the "Open Farm Sunday" scheduled for the 13th of June 2010 and Community Volunteer Task Days that run throughout the year. There is a ‘Hoe down’ event coming up on Saturday 17th July 2010. The team hopes that community involvement would help raise the awareness of low carbon food production, which is an undeniable benefit of urban sustainable horticulture.

Membership based organisations such as the Organic Growers Alliance (OGA) provide support in the form of workshops, forums, quarterly magazine etc to organic horticulture practitioners throughout the UK. The support helps overcome challenges such as land procurement, finding the market for the produce, funding, weather, crop failure etc. These challenges notwithstanding, market gardens such as city growers serve as not only a shining example of the successful practice of urban sustainable horticulture, but also remind us of where the food we consume comes from. I agree with Ed’s words ….. ‘We have all become far too removed from how our food is produced’. As I sit down enjoying a cup of tea and biscuits with the team, I am reminded of nature’s ever-nurturing capacity.

by Lilian Ikiriko

Interested in volunteering at Glebelands City Growers? Send an email to contacts@glebelandscitygrowers.co.uk

The Green Wave

2010-05-21T16:13:00.000-07:00

Hundreds of people tonight packed the Great Hall at Manchester Town Hall, and cheered the premiere of a new film about North Manchester leading the way on all things green. The forty-minute film, “The Green Wave”, looks back from 2080 at the present day, and shows how a small group of people made a global difference. It was made by people in Charleston and Higher Blackeley, supported and guided by an innovative organisation called Reelmcr.

The new Lord Mayor of Manchester, Cllr Mark Hackett, introduced the evening. He said that, as a councillor for Charlestown for 20 years, he was delighted to see the “skills motivation and talent that we know are already there” unlocked. He was followed by Manchester-based poet Tony Walsh, who spoke of the “journey of learning and self-discovery” that the cast and crew had been on, before expertly whipping up (even more) enthusiasm for the film.

The film itself is book-ended with scenes of an elderly couple being interviewed about the year 2010. The female interviewee's father is trying, with no success, to get his friends and family to take care of resources (and save money). For MCFly, the best quality of the film was how it captured the loneliness of 'activism' - the derision and gentle/firm telling-off activists can get when they try to raise uncomfortable issues. The film also looks (in an admittedly 'short-hand' way!) at the vested interests that stand in the way (a cartoon villain from the Hexagen energy company), and the ease with which people can be distracted or corrupted from the path of green-ness. Ultimately the message is one that anyone who has been paying attention these last twenty years can agree with- we can't wait for governments and corporations, we have to act now (and bring them along with us).

After the main film, which is filled with memorable performances from young and old, professional and amateur, the audience saw an interesting “making of” documentary, which explained just how interactive and collaborative the process of making the film had been. This was intriguing, and something all involved can be proud of. After that there were a series of speeches and presentations. Deputy Leader of the Council, Jim Battle gave a speech where he used the “f” word and the “c” word – fun and commitment. He was among a large number of people who gamely gave out awards to cast and crew. The loudest applause came for Jacqui Carroll, director of Reelmcr.

MCFly caught up with Jacqui, who led a large team of dedicated and talented people in making it all come to life, and asked her what the most important outcomes of the film were. She told us “the biggest thing was that it was a celebration of community. The film- and the process of making it, taught people things we didn't know, that people had taken for granted. For example, that not switching off appliances costs lots of money. We've learnt that the oil isn't going to last forever, and that we have to do it together. No-one is going do it for us.”

The film was made with money from Manchester City Council's Carbon Innovation Fund, Enterprise Manchester and the Climate Change Local Authorities Support Programme, with many other organisations and individuals donating time, skills and facilities.

What next?
It's great to see so much enthusiasm and concern. The challenge for all involved will be to harness that energy, minimise the inevitable falling off in participation, and choose new projects that will keep people involved and enable more to use their energy and talents. Given the good will, hard work and brimming talent on display already, this is very doable.

Manchester City Council's first post-election meeting

2010-05-19T05:05:00.000-07:00

For anyone who has been observing Manchester City Council's slow slide back into 'business as usual' on climate change, it will come as no surprise that there was no mention of the subject in today's full Council meeting. The job of raising the issue of this most threatening of problems was left to Manchester Climate Action, who greeted the returning – and new – councillors with a larger-than-life inflatable elephant wearing a banner reading: "Manchester Airport – the Elephant in the Room." An amplified recording of the noise of planes taking off ensured that the windows of the Council Chamber were firmly closed.

As the first Council meeting after both local and general elections, there were Council formalities to be attended to – including the election of the new Lord Mayor and the confirmation of Leader of the Council Richard Leese back into post (despite an unusual challenge from the Liberal Democrat opposition).
Cllr Mark Hackett's acceptance speech as mayor included nostalgic references to the suffragettes and Chartists and to his own days protesting against the Vietnam War and supporting striking miners in 1964. Sadly, this radicalism wasn't replicated in his planned focus for his Lord Mayoral year. Although he did apparently consider championing the natural environment, he's actually plumped for upping the profile of volunteering, especially in sports clubs and teams. Nice, but not very earth-shaking – or -saving.
The new Executive Member for the Environment was confirmed – as per rumours - as Councillor Nigel Murphy. He will, according to the new web page listing the new Executive,

"Lead on:
* Transport Policy (including highways & parking)
* Green issues (including waste strategy & waste collection)
* Planning
* Licensing Policy"

So, no mention of climate change there either, which is mildly worrying, unless it's been given to someone else... in which case, who? Councillor N. (there are 3 other Murphys on MCC) Murphy's Assistant Executive Member is Fallowfield's David Royle.
The other nine executive members, and their responsibilities, are listed here. The other main appointment likely to be relevant to day-to-day environmental activities in the chair of the Communities & Neighbourhood committee, which remains with Cllr John Flanagan.

News flash - rumours of new Environment Executive

2010-05-17T22:35:00.000-07:00

Rumour reaches MCFly from more than one source (so it MUST be true!) that on Wednesday May 19th, at the first full Council meeting since the May 6th local elections, Cllr Nigel Murphy will be named as the Executive Member for the Environment. He will replace Richard Cowell, who lost his seat in Northenden to the Liberal Democrats, a ward in which the Green Party did not stand a candidate.

Cllr Murphy, who retained his Hulme seat in the 2010 elections, was officially Richard Cowell's deputy. However, MCFly never saw him at the meetings that Cowell attended, whether Environmental Advisory Panels, public debates, the meetings around the creation of the Climate Change Action Plan last year or the like. Cllr Murphy also did not respond to multiple requests for comment from Manchester Climate Fortnightly, both before the elections and at the count on Friday May 7th. It will be interesting to see if- assuming the rumours are true - Cllr Murphy takes a different view on communication after he rises to a position of some power in the City Council's political structures.

It appears that Cllr David Royle (Fallowfield) will be deputy Exec for the Environment.

The full council meeting takes place at 10am, the Council Chambers, 3rd level of the Town Hall Extension. It is open to the public. MCFly will be there.

FutureCity mass "debate"

2010-05-16T13:50:00.000-07:00

MCFly went along to the “City Debate” that was part of the FutureEverything festival. It was perfectly clear from the blurb that this was mostly going to be about shiny technology and weightless informational flows yadder yadder yadder. The format was also a little unusual, in that there were 17 speakers listed, each who would get approximately 90 seconds, with a couple of panels chipping in questions at some of those 17, and a couple of opened-out Q and As for hoi polloi to intervene.

For an event all about how the future is about hi-tech, there were entertaining (and instructive if we care to think about them) snafus involving dead microphones and even the simple matter of getting a 'tape' of Sir Howard Bernstein to play. Moderator Jenni Murray tried to forge on regardless, only to be “interrupted” by the absent Sir Howard on his second or third attempt.

There followed a rush of speakers. All the usual jargon and cliché got an airing- forefront of cutting edge... global... connected... game changers... challenging... hugely rewarding... going forward.. diversity... the future is speeding up... independent business... collaboration.... step changes... There was also a fair amount of vacuous boosterism, but I suppose that will come as a surprise to no-one.
The medium was the message, to quote somebody. Each speaker could only speak in banalities, unable to unpack their ideas and allow the audience to see if they made sense. There was no give or take, nobody was really able to pick up on other people's points. It all resembled a google-binge, where after 90 minutes you've been exposed to a lot of shiny ideas and words, but they're all muddled and you feel a bit queasy.

Only one speaker (asides the taped SHB) explicitly mentioned Climate Change and low carbon economies. That was Roger Milburn, Environment Commissioner and also Director of Arup. One of the provacateurs, Maarteen Hajer asked Roger Milburn to elaborate. [Hajer implied that the climate science suggests we have four decades left to do anything. I hope he's right, but MCFly's understanding of the climate science is that it is very much 'now or never' for this species]. Milburn did elaborate a bit- a low carbon economy has, in his eyes, finance mechanisms, a changed skill base, “product” and research (the Manchester Corridor, with the universities and the entrepreneurs was his example). Jenni Murray, who was chairing the meeting, invited other speakers to chip in on this question of “low carbon”. Incredibly, they didn't. It's not on their radar, they don't think it matters, they've not informed themselves; MCFly doesn't know why, but it's grotesque- how can you talk about the future of this city without grappling with the fundamental crises of peak oil and climate change?

So there was more talk, with the real standout one– grounded in social realities – saved for last. Patsy Hodson, vice principal of the Manchester Communication Academy, gave a succinct account of what the MCA will be trying to do, in an area where 41% of the people are economically inactive and 49% have no qualifications. With that, the room came to life a bit, and the Q and A that followed was a little more “real.” The 'elephant in the room' (the public sector money running out) even got a mention!

On the plus side- an innovative format that mostly worked (and given that it could have failed spectacularly, it should be chalked up as a success, even though it was the intellectual equivalent of speed-dating.

On the minus side – utterly disconnected from the real challenges that will face us.
If it's ok for the speakers to drag out hoary old images, so it is for the blogger. This event made me imagine us all as passengers in first class on the Titanic. The unsinkable ship has – thanks to the greed and hubris of its owners - hit an iceberg. In the background we could, if we chose to, see crew and other passengers talking about life rafts and so forth. Do we join that fact-based initiative? Sadly, no. We're having too much fun speculating on all the things to do and buy in New York... The stupid, it hurts...

News flash- Council releases a Carbon Reduction Plan

2010-05-14T12:10:00.000-07:00

Manchester City Council has released a "Carbon Reduction Planfor 2010/11 (Including action on the 10% in 2010 Campaign)"

It's a 24 page pdf document that can be downloaded here-

MCFly will digest and do an analysis.

News flash- Lib Dems appoint new environment spokesman

2010-05-14T11:54:00.000-07:00

OK, we here at MCFly Towers have enough of a sense of irony to realise that this newsflash isn't up there with "Kennedy Shot" or "Man walks on the fucking moon", but here goes. The Manchester Liberal Democrats have announced that Cllr Paul Ankers (Chorlton) will be the new shadow Environment Spokesperson. He takes over from Cllr Graham Shaw, who has had the role for as far back as MCFly can remember (that is, at least two years).

On Wednesday 19th, Council Leader Sir Richard Leese (yes, he's back) will unveil the new Council Executive. A new Exec Member for the Environment will be needed, since Richard Cowell lost his Northenden seat at the May 6th local elections.

Next newsflash- Council's Carbon Reduction Plan announced.

A tale of two meetings: barges and argy-bargy

2010-05-11T15:21:00.000-07:00

First off to Castle Grayskull to hear about “The Science Barge,” a floating greenhouse on the Hudson River that is the brainchild of Groundwork Hudson Valley. The two American speakers have been touring Manchester today with people from Manchester City Council. After a scene-setting presentation by a Food Futures person, Groundwork USA deputy director Curt Collier spoke at just the right length and detail about the rationale of the project. (Give it a year and the good people of Ancoats will be getting their fruit and veg from a converted coal barge parked alongside MERCi.)

Then off to the Manchester Skeptics Society, where Dr Andrew Russell gave an entertaining whizz through the standard skeptic 'arguments' (you know- natural cycles, the sun, climate gate, glacier gate etc) to a large audience (60?). Carol Batton, well-known fixture on Manchester's poetry scene heckled the third slide and then self-ejected in a robust and somewhat premature fashion. Things settled down after that, with Russell enjoying himself and not bothering to hide his disdain of zombie arguments and the zombies who try to spread them.

The Skeptics Society meets monthly, covering a bunch of topics (including an upcoming one on the 'Quacklash', of libel laws being used against journalists critiquing homeopathy etc). On tonight's showing, they seem a friendly and intelligent bunch. If you need an excuse to get drunk and argumentative, then this looks like a good place to start.
Just visited their website, and found their tagline- "a Manchester based organisation dedicated to rational thinking, non-homoeopathic drinking and the promotion of skepticism."

Thinking about transitions

2010-05-10T13:25:00.000-07:00

The Planning and Environment Research Group (PERG) for the Royal Geography Society had its annual get together last week in Birmingham. The aim was to think about issues around transitions and climate change. Somewhat surprisingly, many of the geographers present were engaged in practical projects a long way from the ivory towers of academia. The workshop covered a lot of ground, since papers were circulated beforehand. Attendees were therefore spared two days of powerpoints, which allowed for much longer discussions on the issues. Not so surprising was the constant debate about what transitions are and who they are for, with a lot of criticism on the so called ‘Dutch School’ of transitions...a discussion far from finished by this group of geographers.

Amanda Smith from Nottingham Trent University gave some feedback from her work with
the Nottingham Transitions Town group (http://www.transitionnottingham.org.uk/) and their focus on community resilience, permaculture, changing behavior and the desire to be seen as ‘apolitical’. A discussion on whether the transition town network had a cult feel with its ten steps to happiness took up some of the questioning, as did the inaction of a number of transition town groups and the often bumpy relationships with local authorities.

Harriet Bulkeley from Durham University gave an overview of initial findings from her mammoth quest to create a database of hundreds of transition experiments from cities across the globe. Harriet went on to show how the collection of over 450 of these experiments shows the diversity of different things going on and the different ways community groups and local authorities are thinking about the challenges of climate change. Manchester had a number of entries into the database which will be finished over the next year.

Sarah Hards from York University presented some of her initial research looking at people lifestyles in relation to addressing climate change and how transitions in individual lives are shaped by their location in specific times and places. Does this mean that people in Manchester are transitioning differently to people in neighbouring cities?

Other discussions included how communities are adapting in Hull to the danger of flooding and what this means to different neighbourhoods in terms of being prepared for climate change affects. A paper about public building energy systems in Burkino Faso began a fascinating debate about the responsibility of African countries to lower their carbon emissions...should they bother when people are poor and hungry? Should historical polluters such as the UK pay for these changes? and should African
cities see these as challenges or opportunities?

It was good to see much of the research supporting practical action alongside communities and local authorities showing the positive role academics can play in addressing climate change challenges.

These conversations will continue at the annual Royal Geographical Society conference in London 1st to 3rd September. You can email James Evans,(james.z.evans@manchester.ac.uk) a Manchester based geographer for more information about the work of the PERG group.

All papers are available for download on the blog http://pergtransition.wordpress.com/abstracts
"MCFly's roving reporter"

MCFly 048 - Book Review: Global Warring

2010-05-10T13:22:00.000-07:00

BOOK REVIEW: Global Warring: How Environmental, Economic, and Political Crises Will Redraw the World Map by Cleo Paskal Palgrave Macmillan £20

Cleo Paskal has written an interesting if uneven book that contains enough startling information and tricky questions to keep most people interested. The opening sections – on the US and When Paskal tries to be Elizabeth Kolbert (The New Yorker journo who wrote the best book MCFly has read on climate change so far- “Field Notes from a Catastrophe”) the results aren't pretty.

Side-stepping the he said she said minutiae of climate science, she focuses on rising sea levels, rising storm surges, melting glaciers and changing precipitation (rain, snow) patterns and how they will play out around the world. She looks at the Arctic and the opening of the Northwest Passage, China vs India and their mutual need, and closes with an extended look at the much-neglected Pacific. Throughout she has compelling stats, concepts and anecdotes.

Occasionally the prose is breathless to the point of purpleness (e.g. page 62 “the thawing Arctic, where the shimmering mirage of untold riches is leading to decisions that may dangerously undermine North American and European security”) the clumsy 'nationalistic capitalism' where neo-mercantilism would have been more historically informed, and digresses into the history of the Suez and Panama canals. There's a lack of 'further reading' or further doing. It's not clear what she hopes people will do with the information she has gathered. Other reviewers compare it unfavourably to Gwynne Dyer's “Climate Wars”, but if you're looking for a well-informed 'Green Confucian' overview that doesn't think “the world” consists of the US-Europe and China alone, then you could do worse than this. £20 is a bit steep, so wait for the paperback, it should be along soon enough.

MCFly 048 - MCFly in abusive email allegation shocker

2010-05-10T13:21:00.001-07:00

MCFly was at the local election count on Friday afternoon at Castle Grayskull (aka Manchester Town Hall). We tried to get a statement from Nigel Murphy, who retained his Hulme seat despite a spirited and clean challenge by the Green Party. Cllr Murphy, Richard Cowell's deputy, had not responded to multiple emails inviting him to answer the same questions we posed to the Greens, the Lib Dems and to Richard Cowell himself. Cllr Murphy told us somewhat abruptly “I'll call you later.” [We're still waiting by the phone like a lovelorn teenager]. His fellow Hulme councillor, Cllr Mary Murphy, then helpfully interjected that she'd “seen [MCFly's] abusive email.” Well, we've checked our correspondence to Nigel Murphy- three unanswered emails. We've posted them at www.manchesterclimatefortnightly.info/murphyslore.html for the world to judge.

If Cllr Murphy (either of them) would like to point out the abusive bit, we will gladly apologise. If there is nothing abusive then we are certain that Cllr Mary Murphy will - despite what some might predict - publicly retract her allegation and apologise for it

MCFly 047 - Peat, leave it as the ground

2010-05-10T13:20:00.000-07:00

In MCFly 47 we wrote of a direct action to prevent peat being dug up. (See 'For Peat's Sake). Since then we've received a facebook message from a campaigning group. From it we learnt that Salford City Council is demanding a change in planning policy to ban future peat extraction on Chat Moss. The call comes in response to a consultation by the Greater Manchester Minerals Planning Committee - set up by the 10 councils in the city region to develop a statutory plan. The 10 councils are required by law to produce a plan to lay down rules for deciding planning applications from those who want to extract sand, gravel and other minerals including peat.

In a letter to the Committee, the Council says: "Salford's view is that the Minerals Plan should contain a clear policy statement that no further peat extraction should be permitted including time extensions to existing permission."

Salford's planning lead member Cllr Derek Antrobus said: "Curbing climate change is a central aim of the planning system and peat bogland is an important carbon sink. The Government has announced the phasing out of peat for gardening so there can be no justification for its continued exploitation." Salford has already proposed a policy in its own key planning document- the Core Strategy – to restore and enhance peat bogland on Chat Moss and prohibit future peat extraction. But this has still to go to a public inquiry.

Four historic permissions exist for peat extractions on Chat Moss from a period when planning rules were more relaxed. Salford faces a battle with Peel Holdings who have also responded to the consultation. They argue that there is no justification for a ban.

MCFly 048 - Richard Cowell, Exec Member for Enviroment

2010-05-10T13:19:00.000-07:00

Richard Cowell, who has lost his Council seat by a margin of only 25 votes, is owed a debt of thanks by Manchester environmentalists (and also 'normal people'). He became Executive Member for the Environment in May 2008, at a crucial time. Climate Change was not supposed to be his baby, but for whatever reason, his deputy did not -despite initial expectations - take on the role. Cllr Cowell responded to the “Call to Real Action” report positively, and set up an “Environmental Advisory Panel” to be a 'critical friend.' He was a tireless ambassador for the Climate Change Action Plan that emerged last year.

Did MCFly always agree with him? No, of course not. The EAP (MCFly's editor sits on it) has suffered logistical problems, and is too much the fig leaf/rubber stamp to be effective. And the last 6 months have shown the Council returning to its bad old ways of low momentum, low transparency and low ambition. The incipient networks built last summer have been ignored, not nurtured. How much of the blame for this can be laid at Richard Cowell's doorstep is moot. The fact remains that whoever becomes Executive Member for the Environment would do well to replicate his willingness and ability to learn, listen, engage and champion community initiatives.

MCFly 048 - Getting REEL

2010-05-10T13:18:00.000-07:00

On Friday May 21st there will be a red carpet reception at Manchester Town Hall for the cast and crew of a new Mancunian film about climate change. As we reported on in MCFly 44, Reelmcr have been working with residents in Higher Blackley and Charleston. The film has been funded by The Carbon Innovation Fund, CLASP, NWDDA and Northwards Housing. It is set in the future looking back to Blackley 2010 and how the GREEN WAVE movement and a child's film changed the world. The film script was written by local writer Richard Davis in collaboration with the film's participants, who are aged between two months, (baby Leo born during the project) to 87 years old.

MCFly will be at the premiere (no pap shots please) and will interview those who made it happen.

MCFly 048 - Status Quo Anxiety

2010-05-10T13:16:00.000-07:00

Sometimes it's a case of “the less things change, the more they stay the same.” The political make-up of Manchester City Council (MCC) remains unchanged after the May 6th local elections, with Labour on 62, the Liberal Democrats on 33 and the Conservatives with 1.

The Greens failed to win their target seat (this would have taken them from 0% to 1% of the 96 seat chamber.) The Conservatives languish in richly-deserved irrelevance; pulling out of the debate on “Is Manchester City Council taking the right action on climate change” at the last minute tells you all you need to know about how much respect they have for local democracy, and how much concern they have for the key issue of the 21st century.

Meanwhile the Liberal Democrats will be telling themselves that they've done well by taking Chorlton from Labour and bagging the scalp of Richard Cowell, who was the Executive Member for the Environment. But climate change was not a priority in their manifesto, perhaps because they did not perceive it as ballot box boffo. And they are right- it isn't a vote winner. The people of Manchester seem unaware of the need to cut emissions, and the need to adapt/create resilience. It is this status quo - far more than any political deadlock – that we will look back on with dismay a decade from now.

Given the mistrust the public has for politicians, the political parties cannot create the space for bold action. That's down to 'civil society'. Currently the self-proclaimed climate campaigning groups – Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, Call to Real Action, Manchester Climate Action – are not doing a very good job of pressuring the Council and creating a groundswell of people for future pressure. Will that change, or will we have, a year from now, the status quo? For anyone who cares about the future, there's plenty to be anxious about.

Election results for Manchester City Council

2010-05-07T10:25:00.000-07:00

Hulme
The Green Party failed in their effort to regain the Hulme ward seat that they lost in 2008. The sitting Labour councillor, Nigel Murphy, retained his seat comfortably.
Labour 2445, Lib Dems 1229, Greens 1172, Conservative 490

Northenden
The Liberal Democrat candidate, Mary di Mauro, has - after a recount - unseated Cllr Richard Cowell, who was the Executive Member for the Environment, by a narrow margin of 25 votes (2503 to 2478)

Overall, the make up of seats on Manchester City Council - Labour 62, Lib Dem 33, Conservative 1 - is unchanged, with the Lib Dems losing two wards to Labour (Rusholme and Gorton South) and gaining two others from Labour (the aforementioned Northenden and Chorlton).

Further analysis in MCFly 48, out this Sunday evening.

For raw numbers (and the other 9 AGMA authorities), the Stockport Express has the raw numbers...

"Hungry City" author at Urban Thinking Forum

2010-05-06T15:13:00.000-07:00

Carolyn Steel, author of “Hungry City,” tonight gave a broad and deep overview of how food shapes us and our cities, at the first “Urban Thinking Forum”. An audience of around 60 were treated to an historical and geographical tour of the world, focusing on how we got into our current mess and how we might, via “sitopia” get out of it.

Kerenza McClarnan, who has set up the Urban Thinking Forum a project within "Buddleia", briefly introduced the event. Andy Spracklen, whose “Ning” restaurant provided some of the food (with salad coming from Glebelands) gave a brief account of Steel's varied work. Steel, started and finished her talk with an aerial image of Shanghai, all glass and steel and nights at light. She warned us never to think of cities without also seeing her next slide- of a row of giant combine harvesters on the Alto Plano of Brazil, harvesting the food to feed those cities.

She looked at how we construct our visions of the city and of rural idylls in paintings, pointing out that “natural” places like Yosemite in America had actually been altered and maintained for thousands of years before Teddy Roosevelt turned it into a “national park” and shifted the locals off. Staying in America, she showed photos of the industrial meat production of Cincinnati (aka Porkopolis).

This segued into a discussion of the positive correlation between increased urbanisation and meat consumption..

Steel then laid out the meat (sorry!) of her talk, under the themes of 'how we got here' and 'what to do about it'

With great humour, fluidity and erudition, she galloped through the birth of civilisation (without mentioning the linguistic link between culture and cultus (plant growing) and the Fertile Crescent, the importance of sea transport (especially in feeding Rome).
She drew an intriguing analogy between the various edicts to deflate the cost of maritime transport then and the current tax-free status of aviation fuel.

She gave a quick spin around the theories of Johann von Thunen(1826, the Isolated State), and showed how this 'ideal type' of how and where a city would get its food is borne out, with maps of London (essentially you've got a ring of market gardens providing perishables, then a band of 20 miles of grain growing until transport becomes too expensive, at which time- animals get walked in, the fattened up on grain leftovers).

Did you know that “shambles” is the medieval word for 'slaughterhouse'? MCFly certainly didn't...

All this changed, Steel says, “almost overnight” (she had the good grace to apologise for the cliche, while defending it) with the coming of the railways, which allow essentially instantaneous transport of goods, especially animals. She zipped ahead to the 1950s and the vast tracts of suburbia, all of it dependent on the great car culture.

She said some choice things about supermarkets as urban developers, sitting on land until the local city council lets them build a giganto-market in exchange for a couple of 'affordable flats'. Barnbury in Oxfordshire is a Tesco town- 6 of 'em and nothing else...

On what to do, Steel was possibly less sure, partly because she is – as she re-iterated in her Q and A session answers – not so fond of big overarching ideas which don't work.

She pointed out that as long as there have been cities, people have worried about their sustainability. She looked at Thomas More's Utopia with its deliberate ambiguity on whether it was “good place” or “no place”, Ebenezer Howard's Garden Cities, and said some suitably rude things about Frank Lloyd Wright.

She spoke of her neologism “sitopia”- from sitos, the Greek for food and topia for 'place. From there she looked at Dutch polders, Vertical Farms (they don't work, she said, to some consternation from architecture students in the room) and then onto Dongtan, the much fabled 'eco-city in China

MCFly was about to intervene by quoting from Cleo Paskal's “Global Warring'-

“Unfortunately, the location the Chinese government has chosen for this low-carbon vision of the future was a low-lying alluvial island off the coast of Shanghai, one of the areas almost certain to be hit by rising sea levels and storm surges. It's not building utopia, it's building Atlantis. This is a classic case of focusing on our impact on the environment while ignoring a changing environment's impact on us, giving rise to potentially disastrous consequences.”
page 176

In the end it wasn't necessary- Steel pointed out that it hadn't left the drawing board and wouldn't.
She cited the “Growing Power” program in Milwaukee and the recent “Requiem for Detroit” film. She gave a shout out to permaculture and her penultimate slide was of Lorenzetti's Allegory of Good Governance.

All the questions came from men, and were of varying quality. Steel used each as an opportunity to expand on previous points, including explaining that squeamishness was not an option before railways externalised animals and their ways from cities, that Escher drawings where what you draw out depends on your presuppositions, on the turn around in HMG thinking on food security after the 2008 price spikes.

All in all, a tour-de-force. What was lacking? Well, more time of course. A focus on the practicalities of implementing solutions (this was more an event for those who don't yet have an overview that satisfies them, rather than those who have clocked all this and are busy creating facts on the ground).
A few of my favourite concepts- Permanent Global Summertime etc

Further readingsuggested by MCFly
Why look at animals by John Berger
Much depends on Dinner by Margaret Visser
The Oil we eat: following the food chain back to Iraq by Ricahrd Manning
Ecology of Eden by Evan Eisenberg
Zdt by the late great Julian Rathbone
What a Carve Up by Jonathan Coe
Community Technology by Karl Hess

Further reading suggested by Steel
Family Meals (NYT thing)
Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan
All Manners of Food by Stephen Mennell
Paradox of Plenty by Harvey Levenstein

Songs
Billy Bragg “The World Turned Upside Down”
Leonard Cohen”The Future”
TV Smith “Free World”

MCFly 47 - Janet Clowes on Manchester Airport

2010-04-28T22:21:00.001-07:00

Shortly after MCFly 46 hit the inboxes, an eakle-eyed reader spotted that we mis-attributed a quote to Janet Clowes, Conservative candidate for Wythenshawe and Sale East. We contacted her, offering to run what she actually thinks. Here it is:

"The comment by Marie Raynor (Local Candidate for Brooklands; Manchester Ward) was made last autumn in response to specific plans being suggested for the development of an additional freight depot on the Manchester Airport site (related to the Hasty Lane site), rather than any long-term strategies being proposed by any interested parties.
"In relation to your article, there is no doubt that Manchester Airport is vitally important to the prosperity of the North-West - and especially Wythenshawe & Sale East. Over 19,000 people are employed directly on-site and a far larger number are indirectly dependent on the airport. It seems unlikely that an airport operator would try to force through controversial
plans for expansion if it meant risking their franchise when it comes to an end. Manchester Airport's second runway application went through all the normal planning process and received strong support from the community at that time.
"However expansion of regional airports can only be encouraged where there is community support. Regional airports have the potential to reduce transit flights by increasing "point to point" services as well as reducing congestion around London's airports.
"Manchester Airport is owned by the ten local authorities with Manchester City Council owning 55% and the other authorities 5% each. As a result local councillors effectively have the final say over Manchester expansion and they are accountable to the local electorate."

MCFly 47 - Hustings Report

2010-04-28T22:19:00.001-07:00

April 20 debate "Is the Council taking the right action on Climate Change?"
A varied audience of about 30 gathered to hear the wisdom of Richard Cowell (Labour), Gayle O'Donovan (Greens) and Graham Shaw (Lib Dems). The place of the missing Conservative candidate was taken by a helium balloon (blue, of course). None of the candidates seemed put off by the relatively small size of audience and started off proceedings each with a five minute speech on the subject 'Is Manchester City Council taking the right action on Climate Change?' Graham seemed to not be able to make up his mind about whether the Manchester CCAP was a good thing but was convinced that the issue of the footprint of flights from the airport should have been included. Gayle almost damned the Council process (towards the CCAP) with faint praise, lambasted them for expanding the airport and then talked about green jobs. Cllr Cowell took a while to find his stride, but gave an account of how the CCAP had been arrived at and defended the Council's record on jobs. The event then moved on to written questions from the audience - which were of a pretty high standard. Many questions asked about improving the lot of cyclists and asking what the Council had 'actually done'.
The main points of friction were, unsurprisingly, the airport, where Cowell gave a spirited rendition of the jobs vs environment coda of Council policy, and over the Green Party's record when they had a Councillor. The event the chair had to call a halt to that latter line of discussion before if got too personal.
In summary, Lib Dems vague, Greens spirited, Lab defensive and spirited, and Conservatives silent.
Sir Fred Spong

MCFly 47 - Upcoming Events

2010-04-28T22:16:00.000-07:00

Far too often climate events don't take participants further than they would have got in half an hour on the tinterwebs. Everyone stays in their comfort zones within the smugosphere. Three meetings are coming up in the next few weeks MCFly reckons will NOT be like that...

Thurs May 6, 6-8pm
Carolyn Steel, London-based Architect and author of "the Hungry City", will introduce her visionary approach to food production and the future of urban planning. Every day cities require enough food to be produced, transported, bought, sold and cooked, to provide millions of meals for its inhabitants. Carolyn will discuss how, without a reliable food supply, even the most modern city would collapse quickly.
Cube Gallery, 113-115 Portland St
Tickets £15/£10 www.cube.org.uk

Sat May 22, 9.30 to 2.30pm
Introduction to Ecoteams
"Step into Summer with a resolution to join EcoTeams - a community initiative for the environment, led by you."
Free, Friends Meeting House, 6 Mount St. Book via www.ecoteams.org.uk/events
See also; www.globalactionplan.org.uk

& Tuesday July 20, 6- 8pm "Climate Change and Planning, How to affect positive change through the Planning System"
Free, Friends Meeting House, 6 Mount St
www.cn4m.net/node/3359

MCFly 47 - New co-editor sought

2010-04-28T22:15:00.000-07:00

And reporters. And distribution volunteers. And proof readers...
After a year and a half of dedicated and very unpaid effort, Arwa Aburawa, MCFly co-editor, is moving on. That's a 50% reduction in the MCFly editorial team right there.... So if you are interested in learning the ropes, keeping MCFly coming out like clockwork, please get in touch. And we always need writers (for local stories only) and proof-readers, post-mortemers and distributors. editor@manchesterclimatefortnighly.info

MCFly 47 - For Peat's Sake

2010-04-28T22:13:00.000-07:00

On Thursday April 15 activists from from the non-violent direct action groups Earth First and Manchester Climate Action stopped the extraction of peat from Chat Moss, in Salford. They chained themselves to machinery, thus preventing diggers and lorries from removing peat from the site until they were cut away by Greater Manchester police. Two people were arrested.
In their press release EF/MCA state that "peat bogs have recently become the focus of international attention because they act as huge ‘carbon sponges’: as peat is formed it locks away carbon that has been absorbed by plants as they grow, thereby helping to reduce the carbon in the atmosphere and slow global warming. The draining and extraction of this unique habitat causes the release of thousands of years worth of stored carbon. Globally, peat bogs cover just 3% of the world’s surface but store twice as much carbon as all the world’s forests combined.
"The greatest threat to peat bogs is from peat extraction for use in horticulture. An area the size of 250 Trafalgar Squares is dug up every year for the UK horticultural industry, with 70% of this demand coming from amateur gardeners. This is despite the fact that there are a wide variety of good quality peat-free commercial composts, meaning that there is no need for the UK to consume any peat at all. The Royal Botanic Gardens at Kew, for instance, has been peat-free since 1992."
Local campaigner Mary Chapel, said: “We are stopping the destruction of Chat Moss bog to protect this site for the benefit of present and future generations. Peat bogs harbour a wide variety of birds, plants and animals that can be found nowhere else.... there are countless alternatives to peat for use in compost, as well as more sustainable jobs in those industries.”
There is a support demonstration for the two people who were arrested, on Tues May 10 at 9.30am, at the Salford Magistrate's Court.

Put nature on the rack and make her scream for us

2010-04-24T16:00:00.001-07:00

"Manchester Salon" is linked to the fruit-cake libertarians at the "Destitute of Ideas" in ways that I'm too indolent to investigate. On Wednesday 21st they held a "post-Copenhagen" event at Blackwell's bookshop. All the suggested reading was from the Times Online and "spiked magazine", the drearily foam-speckled rantosphere that disses all things environmental as enemies of progress. The Times stuff was about "Glaciergate"- a pseudo-controversy if ever there were one. Nonetheless, neither speaker came out swinging with "it's all a hoax." In some ways that would be better; by appearing to be 'reasonable', these guys are part of the 'let's do very little' movement that is making people massively underestimate the urgency with which we need to act.

So, there were two speakers- one a political scientist, the other a transport wonk. The organisers of the event didn't provide anything from a proper working climate scientist to compensate for this oversight. A short piece by Kevin Anderson would have added a bit of reality, for example.

Indirjeet Palmer admitted that he hasn't ever talked to non-academic audience (Manchester University obviously doesn't reward its employees for engaging with taxpayers). Having lowered expectations by saying that what he knew of climate change could be written on a postage stamp, he didn't embarrass himself too much. Sure, he misnamed an outfit that's been around for 22 years as “Intergovernmental Conference on Climate Change” (It's IPCC, and the P stands for Panel), claimed that there was no consensus on climate change, and calling Todd Stern Todd Steinberg, but those weren't the bits that bothered me.

Oddly for an expert on US power he claimed that the US was reactive to the world in the early 20th century. This will come as a surprise to the natives of Hawaii (1893), the people of Cuba who were busy liberating themselves from the Spanish until Uncle Sam stepped in to "help" them (1898), the Philippines (1898 too) and the “Panamanians” (1903- the isthmus was stolen from Colombia, a country created, so a canal could get built).

And for someone who says he doesn't know anything about climate change, he seemed somewhat over-confident in his proclamation that there was “clearly a degree of exaggeration on climate change, or at least its impacts.”
Of course, any investigation that clears the CRU (like the Royal Society one, or the parliamentary one) are obviously a whitewash.

In a nutshell- over-ran on his four relatively anodyne points, so we never got to hear his conclusion.

Keith McCabe, a transport wonk for various groups, gave an hilariously inaccurate account of the run-up to and consequences of Copenhagen. He claimed there was no guarantee that the Americans would be there- Obama was (from memory) the second world leader to confirm he would go after Gordon Brown, in early November.
He assumed the Copenhagen Accord has legal status (it doesn't). He stated that Obama set up the Major Economies Forum (he modified something inherited from Bush, who had been trying to set up a spoiler group against the UNFCCC); Bush had form on this.

He seems to have forgotten about the World Trade Organisation, which is able to enforce treaty's against the US.

For McCabe, the key question is “how to expand the world economy and come up with technologies that allows decreasing emissions.” Loadsamoney, was his suggestion.
Well, a) there are other pressing enivironmental problems besides climate change htat are going to hit us if/as we keep a-colonising and strip-mining the planet
and b) there is a SPEED and DEPTH needed for emissions cuts that goes far beyond “x per cent by 2050”. A reading of Anderson and Bows would clarify this, but undercut the technophilia.

In a nutshell, it was the Lomborg fallacy (though he was never mentioned by name) - “there's a problem, but nothing we can't throw a load of money at to solve.” Vorsprung durch Teknik or Katastrophe durch Teknik? Time will tell...

The key problems with all this technophilia is that it assumes the technologies will come on line, be taken up very quickly, that there will be no blow-back, no Jevon's Paradox. A cursory reading of the literature around Science and Technology Studies would decrease hubris around this... Take the Whale and the Reactor, it's an easy read...

The q and a was the standard mix of people talking past each other.
One questioner was at least honest enough to state how the volcano made him feel un-nerved (see also Gideon Rachman in the FT) by Mother Nature constraining humanity's room to maneouvre.
Neither speaker took up an invitation to address the work by Kevin Anderson that looks at the numbers around our emissions pathways and the reductions required to keep atmospheric Carbon Dioxide concentrations down to a level that will avoid dangerous climate change, concluding that economic growth and a habitable planet are incompatible.

And one of the last contributions gives this blog its title. The suggestion came from the audience that we "put nature on the rack and make it scream for us." Er, isn't that we've been doing all along? There's a limit to how long you can play that game. All our culture tells us of stories warning against hubris and greed- whether it's Icarus or the clown who killed the goose that laid the golden egg.

It's the Thelma and Louise fallacy. As the two cops discuss-
Max: You know, the one thing I can't figure out are these girls real smart or real real lucky?
Hal Slocumb: Don't matter. Brains'll only get you so far and luck always runs out.

Some people (men mostly) hate the idea that there are limits to their brain and luck (they don't see it as luck). They tend to gravitate- for obvious reasons- to a 19th century American love of technology and taylorism avant la lettre. That worked then, because we weren't at the limits. We are now. Time to grow up. Or else it is, in the words of Roy Batty "time to die."

Rochdale's Environmental Sustainability Forum launches

2010-04-21T14:34:00.000-07:00

If the passing Ospreys sighted in Rochdale recently happened to be soaring across from the town hall clock spire above the Esplanade to Touchstones last Monday evening they would have been aerial spectators to what was almost certainly the largest Environmental Meeting to be held in our town for a number of years.

An assembled audience of some fifty people participated in the first of a series of meetings under the umbrella of the newly launched Environmental Sustainability Action Forum ~ a green offshoot of Rochdale’s very own Cooperative Social Enterprise & aspiring Environmental Centre Earth Café.

It was a lively, enthusiastic & diverse audience which included Rochdale’s Liberal Democrat MP Paul Rowen, Samir Chaterjee, Rochdale Green Party, Rochdale Labour Party activists whose candidate Simon Danczuck has called for the concept to be supported as a positive non-political venture for Rochdale’s town centre regeneration~ all took time out from their busy election schedules to attend at intervals during the evening.

Church Groups, Community Centres, Rochdale Fair Trade Foundation, Save Spodden Valley Campaign, Rochdale World Development Movement, Rochdale Rotary Club, local pensioners rubbed shoulders with veteran peace campaigners and Environmental Officers from RMBC shared sandwiches with former tree house dwellers from Newbury By Pass Campaign and Greenpeace to name but a few from a truly eclectic mix of Rochdale.

As well as a good mix of eco-activists from Rochdale & Milnrow Friends of the Earth, greens and local folk keen to show support. There was a noticeable buzz of positive energy about the event to the extent the meeting overran by fifteen minutes & this reporter got the singular impression that many of the audience would have quite cheerfully discussed the need to address Rochdale’s Environmental problems well into the small hours.

Earth Cafe Founder Helen McCarthy Chaired the evening speaking passionately of the need to engage the community in local community & environmental initiatives. Earth Café is a home grown vision of an environmental Cooperative Social Enterprise committed to promoting Environmental Sustainability & Environmental Awareness in Rochdale Borough.

Helen pointed out that this was to be the first the first of a series of meetings under the umbrella of the Environmental Sustainability Action Forum as a prelude to hosting in the near future a one day Environmental Conference on the theme of Sustainability & Climate Change & the local response to growing Environmental concerns within Rochdale. With further meetings to continue with the engagement of the community as a whole and what changes are needed and what is important to them.

"Earth Café aims to try and articulate & advocate for the local community giving a voice to the community’s vision of what “Sustainability” means to them. From energy saving, recycling & renewables to local initiatives such as Transition Towns, green shoots are springing up all over the country as local pressure is being put on Councils to respond to the real challenges posed by Climate Change. Positive action is happening on landfill, CO2, renewables & sustainability. Earth Café through the
Environmental Sustainability Action Forum is determined to see Rochdale people equipped with the knowledge, campaigning skills, information & opportunity in order to participate pro actively in this challenge ahead.”

“We can all make what initially may seem to be small changes to our lives to make our Borough sustainable, greener and a more pleasant place to live, love the place you live and help to make a difference by starting at home”, Helen added.

Earth Café is a newly emergent cooperative social enterprise in Rochdale. The Team at Earth Café want to make an environmental difference to Rochdale, to make it a much more sustainable place to live.

"Together, we could make Rochdale Borough a centre for excellence about green issues in the North of England. We are the greenest in terms of scenery & green belt yet amongst the worst in greater Manchester for achieving our environmental targets. We aim to try and change that ~ tonight is the first step in the journey”, added Helen.

Ben McCarron of Manchester Friends of the Earth painted a necessarily bleak picture of what may be in store with Peak Oil .The pesticides & fertilizers and plastics dependent on oil would also go along with our love affair with the car, meaning starvation & mass migration of millions of Climate refugees could well become widespread long before the sea levels rise.
Pointing out that the recent volcano eruption & the grounding of all flights from British Airports is in its unexpected & unplanned nature exactly the same type of events we can expect to encounter in the future in terms of climate change.
But there are positive solutions if people begin to live more sustainably & adopt more environmentally friendly lifestyles, Ben argued that:

“We need to embed resilience into Rochdale’s economy & infrastructure so that when the effects of Climate Change do become apparent that we do not have to begin from scratch. We need to be making plans as individuals & collectively to ensure we have alternative which work already in place.
Friends of the Earth & Transition Towns are advocating people begin to make these changes now rather than later on in a crisis situation.”

Executive Director of Merci, Caroline Downey*, herself another Rochdale resident gave an illustrated talk on how Bridge 5 Mill, once a derelict silk mill was reclaimed by a handful of committed individuals & transformed into the Greenest Building in Manchester.

Also of her belief that Rochdale could follow Merci's lead with plans in the pipeline for a possible Nature Reserve Centre in Healey Dell & indeed the cross-pollination of ideas at the meeting the idea of Rochdale being put on the Environmental map does not seem as remote or impossible as it might first appear.

Particularly when Karen Hayday gave a well received motivational speech on the activities of Hourglass Environmental Ltd to set up community allotments, Wildflower Meadows, Butterfly Bar and Wild Walk & Wetland Planting at the Valley Road Community Leisure Gardens & Food Growing Projects at Kitkholt & Falinge. To enable people to grow their own food & reclaim derelict or neglected community land on the Estates of the town.

"In July 2009 Hourglasses Growth Project won the North West in Bloom Grow Your Own Award being singled out for its horticultural excellence, and its ability to involve, support & develop beneficiaries within a top quality local food project. We are currently based at the Kellet Street site where we provide opportunities, experience and informal training for local residents to enable them to use their skills to improve the environment in their immediate locality through growing a wide range of plants and vegetables both in the countryside and on the streets and on balconies”, said Karen to a round of applause and cheers for her well-loved project and dedication.

With the remainder of the meeting being dedicated to Ketso Feedback Workshops asking people to imagine what they would like in a perfect world to happen by 2020 to make Rochdale more sustainable & Environmentally aware.

From the Sustainable Change Facilitators who gave their time completely free of charge to the feedback results from the four group workshops and the feedback questionnaires from the assembled audience it looks like Rochdale Council should have no problem whatsoever getting opinions or feedback on the Environment from the people of Rochdale at future events.

"It is often said that a journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step......tonight's meeting was in fact a great leap forward into the future.....we have seen tonight the response of ordinary Rochdale people, who, when asked to attend a Public Meeting on the Environment, participate in workshops & share their concerns & worries for their local environment have done so positively, enthusiastically & proactively."

Andrew Wastling

Crains makes a tit of itself

2010-04-18T15:15:00.000-07:00

Crain's Manchester Business is a valuable resource for finding out what's going on in the world of (Greater) Manchester business. Wide coverage, pungent analysis. One thing we've noticed here at MCFly Towers is that they don't seem to cover climate change very much. But given the quality of the following editorial, by Steve Brauner, maybe we should be grateful?

March 8, 2010 An economic climate
Population, not pollution, is chief threat to future

By Steve Brauner, Editor
1)After a winter cold enough to freeze the brass neck off an East Anglian professor, it is no wonder that global warming, as it used to be called, no longer strikes terror into the heart of those with time to waste on having their opinions surveyed by pollsters.

Which part of GLOBAL warming are you having problems with?
The satellite data (and nobody disputes this, btw) shows that January was- globally- the warmest since satellite records began.
Personally I blame the idea that you can discern global trends from what's happening in a few islands off the coast of Europe on Doctor Who- where the aliens who invaded always focussed on south-east England.
It was the fourth warmest January on record

And if you take just the satellite readings, it was the warmest

Last week, the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) released its monthly “State of the Climate Global Analysis” for January.
We see blowout warming in the satellite temperature record, which is so beloved of the anti-science crowd since they think — incorrectly — it doesn’t show warming. Note that in UAH, we crushed the previous record.
In NOAA’s own surface dataset, January is slightly less record-shattering:
The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for January 2010 was 0.60°C (1.08°F) above the 20th century average of 12.0°C (53.6°F). This is the fourth warmest January on record.

2) Thanks to the Northwest Climate Change Partnership, we learn that just over two out of five businesses think climate change will affect them.
3) I take this to mean that very nearly three out of five businesses think it will have no impact whatsoever.

Or they might think that it will have big impacts elsewhere, or elsewhen- i.e. Not a short term problem they want to do a lot about now? The argument is spurious, anyway, since there are plenty of examples of people within a sector not spotting problems ahead. Economic meltdown of 2008, anyone??

4) This impression is reinforced by another finding in the “Perceptions of Climate Change within the Northwest 2009” report: that 67 per cent of businesses “do not currently look for advice on the issue”.

5) Mind you, considering how much advice we are given on the subject whether we want it or not, why would anybody have to go looking?

6) I recently had the misfortune to stay in a holiday apartment where BBC Worldwide was the only English-speaking television channel.

7) Its news coverage consists almost entirely of handwringing about climate change, usually by people filing reports from exotic locations at the licence fee payers' expense.

That's an exaggeration, I am sure. Poor show. “Hand-wringing.” Nothing like emotive language to keep an argument rational and clear-sighted, eh?

8) Strange, isn't it, that the search for stories about climate change takes television news crews to Nepal and the Amazon and not the banks of the River Irwell?

As I am sure you are aware, Steve, the earliest evidence of climate change that has pictures (the great beast television only feeds on pictures, not words) is in the tropics and the poles. There IS work being done on the challenges we face in Manchester. It's called the Ecocities Project. It's being funded by the Bruntwood property group. Maybe you've heard of them?

9) One of the reports I recall watching was about the melting glaciers in the Himalayas — based on a now discredited claim in a United Nations report.

Sigh. You are repeating a canard. The people at “Real Climate” (as in, real climatologists, who know what they are talking about) have this summary

Himalayan glaciers: In a regional chapter on Asia in Volume 2, written by authors from the region, it was erroneously stated that 80% of Himalayan glacier area would very likely be gone by 2035. This is of course not the proper IPCC projection of future glacier decline, which is found in Volume 1 of the report. There we find a 45-page, perfectly valid chapter on glaciers, snow and ice (Chapter 4), with the authors including leading glacier experts (such as our colleague Georg Kaser from Austria, who first discovered the Himalaya error in the WG2 report). There are also several pages on future glacier decline in Chapter 10 (“Global Climate Projections”), where the proper projections are used e.g. to estimate future sea level rise. So the problem here is not that the IPCC’s glacier experts made an incorrect prediction. The problem is that a WG2 chapter, instead of relying on the proper IPCC projections from their WG1 colleagues, cited an unreliable outside source in one place. Fixing this error involves deleting two sentences on page 493 of the WG2 report.

10) Before the eco-warriors get on the warpath, I should say that I do regard the degradation of our environment as a serious matter, but suspect that it can only be remedied if the number of humans on the planet stops increasing.
So, you're trying to claim high-moral ground/deflect from your ignorance by talking about an unrelated issue.

On Population, check out the Yale 360 piece by Fred Pearce, who has been writing on climate change for the New Scientist for two decades.
“Consumption Dwarfs Population as Main Environmental Threat” It's overconsumption, not population growth, that is the fundamental problem: By almost any measure, a small portion of the world's people — those in the affluent, developed world — use up most of the Earth's resources and produce most of its greenhouse gas emissions.

Given that 1 westerner is worth about 80 Bengalis, maybe we should start with some population restraint here?

11) Set against the ticking time bomb of population growth and the implications it has for the world's finite resources, arguing about whether human activity causes climate change seems rather pointless.

Finally, you say something sensible. Arguing about climate change is pointless. Preparing for its impacts- social, environmental, and ECONOMIC is something we are all going to have to do, whether we like it or not.

To do that, we need accurate information and sensible analysis. Editorials like this are frankly an embarrassment. Greater Manchester's capitalists are ill-served by such tripe. You wouldn't see the Financial Times running such puerile and baseless sneers as an editorial.

The Unreality Principle

2010-04-18T13:26:00.000-07:00

Went to two meetings on Tuesday 13th. The first, by a local activist was small but perfectly formed and contained useful information. The second was a big ol' thing organised by Manchester University and with a “star” intellectual. It was dia-fucking-bolical.

Andrew Leask, of Trafford Eco-house and Transition Hale/Altrincham gave a talk about “Aquaponics and Manchester's Food Security” at the latest Manchester Green Drinks.
Here are some of the stats I scribbled down-

3% of our food is locally grown in Greater Manchester
9 days of food in the supermarkets
12% is the Council's guesstimated ceiling of the amount of food that could be grown locally
80% of the UK population lives in cities.

Cited by Leask from the Ecologist;
600,000 of the UK population working in agriculture, with 60,000 new farmers required in the next 10 years. Or 1,000,000 small holders. According to Richard Heinberg, you'd need 12,000,000 people working in oil free agriculture in the UK
There's 200,000 allotments in the UK, with 100,000 people on the waiting list. There were 1,500,000 allotments at the end of world war two, growing 50% of the UK's fruit and veg. Of course, we had fewer people then, and more land available for growing.

He then launched into an interesting account of using fish, water, bacteria in a (relatively) 'closed loop' to produce yummy protein. (Protein, as Marvin Harris points out in his wonderful book 'Cannibals and Kings', makes the world go round).

So, by the time I'd necked a second pint (thanks Chris!) and staggered up to the Fiends Meeting House, Will Hutton (for it is he) was mid-flow. Oh dear.

Facile boosterism for the north west, breathless talk of 'commercial space travel by 2150, jargon around 'agglomeration'. [What's the matter with David Harvey's Spatial Fix? Oh, right, liberals didn't think of it- Not Invented Here Syndrome and all. Sigh.]

Hutton. Just. Would. Not. Shut. Up. He overran his time dramatically, (asking for “permission” to do so) spouting ever banaller banalities and observer, sorry, 'absurder' absurdities. Apparently we're all going to retire later. That's fine if you're a white collar worker (as everyone in the room was. Significantly more males than females too). But what if you're a knackered manual worker? Sigh.

In the q and a, which had to be squeezed because of his needless and self-indulgent over-run, he was explicitly asked about the possible teensy-weensy contradictions between continued economic growth and a habitable planet. He first admitted that the atmospheric concentration of C02 was climbing every year, and then raffled (that is, rambled and waffled simultaneously) about clean coal, more efficient use of water and how we can't tell India and China to stop developing (er, does that mean you support contraction and convergence? If so, say so.)

And that was it. For one of the foremost progressive public intellectuals in this country (we are in deeper trouble than I thought) to give such an ill-informed answer about the real challenges that face us was unsurprising, but shocking all the same

He then, mercifully, buggered off back to London. Don't let the train doors hit your arse on the way out.

After a brief tea break, we were supposed to hear four talks, each of 5 to 10 minutes, framed as a letter to the new Prime Minister on the “main challenges” around Economy, Environment, Housing and I can't quite remember what.

We got to hear a bit about General Purpose Technologies.

Then Professor Alan Harding did a mini-Hutton. Five assertions and five challenges. David Harvey's spatial fix and Aidan While's sustainability fix still ignored. Sigh.
Asked about a steady-state economy (see Tim Jackson etc) Prof Harding at least had the good manners to admit that he didn't see what such a thing would look like. That's OK, neither can I, but the difference is I can see that we need it. The business as usual approach of extracting copious raw materials from t'planet and expecting it to absorb the waste is not going to work anymore.

Again, if our public intellectuals can't see the dangers, explain the dangers and suggest some ways forward, then what are they for??

Next up came Caroline Downey, director of MERCi.

She, surprisingly, took some pot shots at other people in the room, and at the NWDA for its faith in nuclear power and GDP (that was me applauding, Caroline). She gave a shout out to the Mersey Bioregion group and new economics foundation.
A good trick she had, too. Asked us to close our eyes and imagine a sustainable city. Most everyone's included water and wildlife, which Research Shows is what makes us happy.

She gave a shout out to the “Third Sector” (though I believe the politically correct terminology is first sector” At least according to that nice young and trustworthy Dave Cameron) and gave some examples of making the bioregion more resilient and self-sufficient with vertical gardens and increased access to green space.

She, in her letter, thanked the incoming PM for the Environment Bill that mimics Ecuador's bill on the right of nature to persist.

She also congratulated the PM on the Energy Descent planning that was taking place

Asked the standard (and entirely justifiable) question of How to Pay for it all, she said scrap trident, tax the rich and pull out of Afghanistan. She was less successful on the question of what MERCi has done lately for the deprived wards around it, but then that IS a tricky question!

By this stage, your intrepid reporter had had quite enough, and cycled home, missing the transport and housing sessions.

MCFly 46- "Aerial Dogfight"

2010-04-13T23:22:00.001-07:00

Council Leader Sir Richard Leese has refused to rule out a third runway at Manchester Airport. Green Party activists wrote an open letter (see MCFly 44) that included a specific question: "When the current agreement not to construct a new runway expires will the Council be applying for planning permission to build a third runway?" In his Friday April 9 reply, Leese wrote "the Manchester Airport Master Plan sets out plans for the airport business developing over a 25-year period to 2030. This plan makes it clear that the second runway will be adequate to meet the forecast demand to 2030. The figures you refer to are from the Committee on Climate Change and were based on modelling conducted by a consultancy working on behalf of the CCC. It was not a prediction. It looked at range of scenarios for emissions and was not an official forecast of demand or based on any airport specific plan."

MCFly hired linguistics experts from Chomsky Associates to examine this text. They state that the word 'yes' or 'no' is nowhere to be found.

Meanwhile the Liberal Democrats manifesto (see story at foot of page 1) states that Labour "took 18 months to come up with a strategy, and then let down the City by excluding aviation and Manchester Airport, owned by the Council, from the Climate Change Action Plan. Some 85% of the Airport’s CO2 emissions come from flights. The Airport cannot be given a free pass." That's the extent of their comment, with nothing concrete about ruling out a third runway, or about freezing expansion at the airport.

The Greens, who won't be running Manchester anytime soon, have "No expansion of the Airport" on their policy page. Marie Raynor, Chairman of Wythenshawe & Sale East Conservatives wrote last year "any further expansion of the Airport is, in our view, unwarranted, given its current size." [see correction at foot of this entry]. At time of going to press, it's unclear if this represents her view, or if official Manchester Conservative policy is to call for a freeze on Airport expansion. MCFly will pursue the story.

The open letter, the response and MCFly's analysis can be seen at www.manchesterclimatefortnightly.info/airportletter.html

The MCFly Says: Richard Leese believes "air travel is a vital part of people’s lives and crucial to becoming a truly competitive world city." This world city guff is inspired by American urban theorist Richard Florida (see his book "Cities and the Creative Class.") But climate change is going to come at us. Chunks of Florida- both the ideology and the place - are going to be flattened by hurricanes and underwater in a decade or three. Building hostages to fortune now, as oil peaks, is myopic. Our children will curse us.

CORRECTION: In the print version of MCFly 46, we wrongly attributed the Conservative's quote to Janet Clowes,the Conservative candidate for the parliamentary seat of Wythenshawe and Sale East. Thanks to the diligent reader who pointed this out.

MCFly 045- Marc Roberts Cartoons

2010-03-28T13:33:00.000-07:00

Marc Roberts has been cartooning for MCFly since its very first issue. He now has a spiffing website at www.marcrobertscartoons.com (thanks to Artists Project Earth and Graeme Sherriff). There are almost 500 cartoons on the site, many of which are about climate change. They can be searched via various themes. Volunteers are needed to type up the speech boxes for added accessibility for visually impaired people. Fast and accurate tpyists, please email editor@manchesterclimatefortnightly.info

MCFly 045- Carbon cutting in South Central Manchester

2010-03-28T13:32:00.000-07:00

Sat March 27: An exciting new low-carbon social enterprise has been launched in Moss Side with food, music and practical advice for saving money and carbon. Founded by local residents, the Carbon Co-op aims to bring together friends, neighbours and communities in a bulk-buying co-operative, purchasing low carbon technologies such as energy monitors and solar panels.
Saturday's launch, staged in the community garden on Ossory Street off Great Western Street, featured food, music, a bicycle repair drop in, low carbon energy give-aways and children's activities. The aim of the project is to provide simple advice to reduce household energy bills and cut carbon emissions and the co-op aims to overcome the catch 22 situation that low carbon technologies are too expensive to become mainstream but won't fall in price until demand picks up.
The launch featured a Moss Side edition of the Carbon Co-op Manual which can be downloaded from here: http://www.carbon.coop/manual.pdf featuring practical energy advice and money off offers on low carbon products.
Carbon Co-op are working closely with Great Western Street Residents Association and chose the area because of the the strong community links and contacts that exist locally.
Other key partners include Kindling Trust, authors of the Carbon Co-op Manual, designers Because Studio, URBED, Energy Saving Trust and NESTA's Big Green Challenge team.
For more information contact: Jonathan Atkinson, Carbon Co-op project manager
0782 861 7933, info@carbon.coop www.carbon.coop

MCFly 045- Competition commission

2010-03-28T13:31:00.000-07:00

COPArt is "an exciting opportunity for young artists to get their work exhibited in galleries all over the country, including Manchester Town Hall, Bristol View Gallery and London Village Underground." Artists are asked to upload images or clips they have created which contain their message about climate change; however this is not limiting the themes or topics to melting ice caps.... This does not need to be an enormous project which takes up weeks of your time, all art is viewed with equal weighting and there are three categories of art which could be submitted:
1.Minute Piece: Anything you see which strikes you as being relevant to climate change or the deterioration of the environment, from something taken on a phone camera to lomography.
2.Hour Piece: Something you’ve sketched or painted.
3.Large scale project: Something you spend a few weeks on developing.
A key element to COPArt is to empower young artists, if your work is selected for the shortlist it will get nationwide exhibition space and be used in various public forums. The winning entry will be used on Climate Squad’s promotional materials, gaining invaluable exposure, so please get involved and show us your art! The closing date is May 28; visit www.cop-art.org.uk to submit.

MCFly 045- Earth Hour: Can't Manchester City Council even get the empty gestures right?

2010-03-28T13:30:00.000-07:00

Last year Manchester City Council made a right horlicks of participating in "Earth Hour," the WWF organised empty-gesture around energy reduction. The MEN (March 30 2009) quoted City centre spokesman Coun Pat Karney as saying: "Poor marks for Manchester, we have let the side down. Most of us were probably more preoccupied with putting the clocks forward that with Earth Hour, which saw many other city centres across the world dramatically plunged into darkness.
"It's a possibility that it wasn't well enough publicised in the city. I only started reading about it about a day or two before it was happening and I'm sure the majority of people had no idea it was happening. We can only apologise to the rest of the world and make sure we make a better effort next year."
The Call to Real Action report suggested making it a monthly event- "Manchester Hour". The Council ignored this (and a host of other practical suggestions). And for 2010? Well, excluding an email sent on Friday 26th from Manchester is My Planet (will someone please explain why these wastes of carbon and money still exist?) what publicity was there? Manchester was 76th out of 108 counties for participation! "A better effort next year"? Maybe next year, eh? Not like it's an emergency or anything...

MCFly 045- The Council Gritter

2010-03-28T13:29:00.000-07:00

No further news from Manchester City Council about how much money it is planning to allocate to climate change in the coming year(s).

But at least it's leading the way in transparency by posting the minutes of the Environmental Strategy Programme Board promptly. Any day now they'll put the minutes from November 2009 onwards on their website, oh yes.

MCFly seems to have missed the press release where Manchester City Council admitted that it didn't get the half a million quid it wanted from the Department of Energy and Climate Change to create a Low Carbon Community Hub in South Manchester.

And that its farcical "Manchester Prize", one of the so-called 'Catalytic Actions' from the 2009 "Call to Action" report is, well, not doing very well at all. MCFly is secretly relieved that -and we quote- "some further work has been undertaken to explore the options for creating a Manchester Prize, [that's bureacratese for 'we have moved the folder from one filing cabinet to another'] but these ideas have not yet been considered or developed due to other priorities."

Is this where we hoped we'd be in November 2009? What. Happened. To. The. Momentum?

MCFly 045- Do the right thing?

2010-03-28T13:26:00.000-07:00

On Tuesday April 20, four candidates for local council seats will take part in a public debate entitled "Is Manchester City Council taking the right action on climate change?" Up for discussion will be aviation (of course; Manchester City Council owns 55% of the Airport), the Manchester Climate Change Action Plan (www.manchester.climate.com), adaptation, engagement and a host of other tricky topics.
Each speaker will be given 5 minutes to make their opening remarks. The moderator of the debate will then pose different questions to each of the four, before an "open floor" for questions from the audience.
The four are Cllr Richard Cowell, Executive Member for the Environment, who faces a tough battle to retain his Northenden seat; Gayle O'Donovan, who is trying to win Hulme for the Greens; Cllr Graham Shaw, Liberal Democrat representing Didsbury West, and the only one of the four not facing an election this year, and Yan Zhang, standing for the Conservatives in the City Centre. (It will be interesting to see if she casts doubt on the need for action in the same way the Conservative candidate for the parliamentary seat of Withington did at a recent hustings...)
The debate will take place at the Friends Meeting House, 6 Mount St, central Manchester (behind the Central Library). It's free, and starts at 7.30pm sharp
http://www.manchesterclimateforum.org.uk/april20th.html
MEANWHILE: MCFly wants YOUR answers to the question. "Is Manchester City Council taking the right action on Climate Change?" Keep it brief (less than 600 words), reasoned and printable. We will post the more thought-provoking ones on our website (with your name unless you specify anonymity- that means you Richard Sharland!)

SEE ALSO: Council Gritter (MCFLy 45 page 2) "Earth Hour- Can't Manchester City Council even get the empty gestures right?"

Environment Commission marches on...

2010-03-25T15:33:00.000-07:00

On the 18 March, the AGMA-level Environment commission met up to discuss various issues such as the progress of their programme and the Low Carbon Economic Area (LCEA) delivery plan.

Led by Keith Davidson, the LCEA for the Built Environment 5-year delivery plan is due to be completed by the end of May. It aims are- in basic terms- to capture the economic benefits of retrofitting; whilst actively becoming a green economy and creating green jobs.

Concerns were raised about securing (private) investment over the five years although it was reported that the programme was already attracting interest and there was a GM bid for EU funding from the ERDF. Issues were also raised by the value of retrofitting buildings when there were various free scheme linked to the Decent Homes standard. The response was that they were aiming for a 'Decent Homes plus' standard which would take retrofitting much further- especially with the European funding- and save six million tonnes of C02.

Even so the biggest stumbling block remains that the commissioners currently have no power and no funding, and the New Economy Commission seems to be taking the lead. If there is no agreement from AGMA for setup costs, and if they don't get money, what happens next? The programme did not come with any money at all and it will be a challenge to convince the local authorities to give up some of their budget for the region-wide plans. Furthermore, whilst the plans were very much pitched as economic plans the need to bring 'people along' and change people's attitudes were raised.

Looking more widely at the Environment Commissions programmes, one commissioner raised the need to be very clear about numbers, aims as it would be very hard to make any difficult decisions without this. It was raised that the programme was still just a strategy and needed to be a lot clearer, especially at this stage. The commissioner noted that at the moment, there is a greater risk of failing than success as plans were still very loose and if need they are serious about getting investment then they need to be clearer about the benefits to do so. It was suggested that they form various programme sessions to give them more focus and to give the EC updates every other meeting.

With regards to measures and data for the EC, it was noted that Manchester commercial center emissions per GDP were quite efficient whilst domestic emissions per capita were higher than would be expected. Whilst low C02 emissions in commercial sector does show the strength of Manchester as a low carbon economy, it was noted that this didn't mean that they shouldn't continue to reduce commercial emissions whilst highlighting areas of commercial excellence.

Arwa Aburawa,
Freelance Journalist and MCFly co-editor

Dirty Oil

2010-03-15T23:58:00.000-07:00

There's a new film about the damage caused by getting oil out of tar sands in Canada.
It's a short, well-made documentary called "Dirty Oil", and it was shown free at the Odeon cinema last night, the latest in a series of campaigning documentaries hosted by the Co-operative Bank.

The film, narrated by Neve Campbell (her off 'Scream'), covers the downside of the immensely profitable business of squeezing oil out of land that used to be covered in arboreal forests (destruction of habitats, poisoned ground water, particulates in the air, more cancers downstream, the usual horrorshow but now with added takes-us-right-to-an-atmosphere-so-laden-with-carbon-that-we-will-fry-ourselves.)
It doesn't outstay its welcome, it doesn't insult its audience's intelligence, and it has at least a few 'positives' for you to take away. It's a far, far better effort than "the Age of Stupid."

This was the UK launch, and it was held in 25 cinemas across the UK. There was a live video link up before and after, to the Barbican in London, where the director and one of the people in the film did a good Q and A afterwards.

The Co-op did a good thing here. This was a friendly and largely efficient operation (couple of technical glitches, but there always are...). Only one criticism, one MCFly makes all the time; events like this are great opportunities to build loose links between people who might have a lot in common/to offer each other, but never meet because of classic English reserve. So if, as one of the interviewees in the movie says, "saving civilisation is not a spectator sport", why not break through the 'everyone in rows looking forward', by having the specetators turn for a couple of minutes and talk to the person behind them? Just sayin'...

Copenhagen Accord-ing to Gort

2010-03-05T09:22:00.000-08:00

Prolific Manchester-based cartoonist Marc Roberts has produced a cartoon guide to the recent "Copenhagen Accord".

I'm biased (because I scripted the first draft), but I think it's bloody brilliant.

Be v. interested to know what other people think...

Climate Disaster to hit Women Hardest

2010-03-04T14:32:00.000-08:00

On Wednesday 17th March there's a Manchester Climate Forum called "Worse for Women" on the subject of Gender and Climate Change. It starts at 7.30pm, at the Friends Meeting House, 6 Mount St. All are welcome.

Up for discussion are questions such as:

What are the ways in which women are affected differently (and more) by climate change around the world?
What needs to be done about that?
What are the reasons behind the persistent and sometimes huge gender imbalance in audiences at any meeting with a title including "Climate Change" in Manchester?
What needs to be done about that?

On the same subject, there's a 65 page report just out from the rather wonderful Women's Environmental Network on the very subject:

Women’s Environmental Network (WEN) will today launch an extensive report in the House of Commons documenting how catastrophe related to climate change will have a much greater impact on women, including in the UK if the Government fails to address gender inequality.
The report, entitled ‘Engendering Change’, points out that because of ongoing gender inequality; different social roles; and simple biology, women are more likely to die in extreme weather conditions; suffer from increased workload; and be subject to abuse, including sexual violence, in resource conflicts exacerbated by climate change.

MCFly 43 - Scott Avenue allotments

2010-02-28T22:50:00.000-08:00

Great Scott!

Scott Avenue Allotment in Chorlton has fifty individual plots, including a new ‘Grow For It’ community plot. There are basic facilities on site: a portaloo, garage, and decrepit shed, which functions as the site’s only indoor social space.

Two students from the Manchester School of Architecture have helped to run two workshops with the plot-holders and steering group. Everyone was encouraged to air their views on what the new space should offer, how it could look, and who it would engage with. It was unanimously agreed that the new build would not only act as a social hub for all users of the allotment, but as a facilitator for greater engagement with the local community.

If you live nearby, why not get down and dirty on the community plot every Saturday from 11am, or Sunday from 2pm? Or, if you prefer a cleaner option, email grow_for_it@yahoogroups.co.uk or call Loucas on 07973139068 with any questions, advice, comments or funding leads.

MCFly 43 - Kicking against the Carbon

2010-02-28T22:48:00.000-08:00

In October, thirty Mancunians will travel to Bangladesh for a a ten day fact-finding and solidarity-building tour, that includes playing two football matches. On their return, they will become “climate warriors”, spreading word of their experiences at schools, youth centres and other venues and building longer-term links between Manchester and the communities they visited. The climate warriors will “build awareness from this experience and implement change in their own lives as well as advocate for behavioural change in the communities they live in.”

The project, organised by “Response Worldwide” and Manchester Athletic Football Club, is the brainchild of two local councillors- Rosa Battle (Bradford ward) and Luthfur Rahman (Longsight ward)

Twenty of those on the tour will be young adults who will play two football matches with young Bengalis, to “build friendships and develop long term sustainable links.” The other ten will be from “various Manchester based organisations”, almost certainly including Manchester City Council, Manchester University and the like.

Fundraising will take place through the year (a grant bid has been submitted to Department for International Development, which supports several projects in Bangladesh), but more will be raised through meals, football competitions, sponsorship from local businesses etc.)

It's not yet clear if a full carbon budget to account for the aviation emissions involved in the return flights has been developed, but 3000 trees are to be planted. MCFly will be covering the story as it develops. For further information contact cllr.l.rahman@manchester.gov.uk

The wisdom of Toronto

2010-02-27T10:45:00.000-08:00

On Wednesday 24^th, three council officers from Toronto delivered a presentation about how their city has been tackling climate change to a large but homogenous group of Mancunians. Held at the Civil Justice Centre, the presentation covered Toronto's long history of involvement in climate change, its current plans and future hopes. Of special note was its community engagement programme www.livegreentoronto.ca, its target to reduce emissions by 80% by 2050 from a 1990 baseline [Manchester is using an easier 2005 baseline] and the fact that it gets a 'scorecard' from environmental groups every year.

The presentation was followed by a lengthy Q and A session. Disappointingly, even when explicitly invited to reflect on the challenges and obstacles faced, the presenter chose to ignore the question, perhaps thinking that this would detract from the everything-is-sweetness-and-light image given thus far.

There was an interesting mix of council bods (including head of Capital Projects, John Lorimer) there, but the gender ratio was appalling (at least 3:1), most everyone was 40 plus and in a suit. The other political parties were conspicuous in their absence. This may be a result of how the event was advertised and who received invites- it appears that not even everyone involved in the writing of the “Manchester Climate Change Action Plan” received an invite, let alone those beyond the pale.

All in all a good event. Nice to see the Royal Bank of Scotland (owned in effect by you and me) entering into the spirit by having all its lights blazing in its empty building as we left.

MCFly meets Miliband!

2010-02-25T14:59:00.000-08:00

MCFly has tonight interviewed Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change Ed Miliband, who is in Manchester to launch a “smart metering” scheme. The brief interview (full transcript below) touched on the rise in climate denialism, nuclear options, financing and “what if the Tories get in”. We hope to follow it up with a longer (and trickier for him!) interview in the coming weeks...

How do you think that, besides statements from the Secretary of State, we can counter the counter the backsliding on public acceptance of the need to aggressively tackle climate change?

I think there are two things we need to do. First of all we need to sort out any problems or mistakes that there were. So whether that's to do with the IPCC or the UEA. I think the IPCC is going to look into its procedures, [with] the UEA there's an enquiry going on. You need to clear those things up. But then at the same time you need to say to people at the same time “look, whatever errors there are in the IPCC, or whatever allegations there are about the UEA doesn't undermine the overall climate science.”

We need to say it, I think scientists need to be more active in saying it it The NGOs obviously do say it. I think business needs to say it. I actually think Richard Lambert from the CBI said it well. He said “I'm not a scientist, I don't know much about science but I know a lot about risk.” I think that's a very good way of putting it. So I think we need to get out there and say the real picture to people.”

On Nuclear “Given the experience the Finns are having with one of the new 'easy to install' nuclear power plants we've been considering, and the still unresolved question of a safe, secure and long lasting storage solution for radioactive waste, is the much lauded push on new nuclear build really an answer to climate change?....”

I don't think any one single thing is an answer, but I think it [nuclear] is part of the answer. The Finnish situation is different from ours, we're precisely going through the so-called generic design assessment so we avoid the problems the Finns have seen. I understand the concerns that people have about nuclear but I actually think if they long hard look at the overwhelming threat that climate change poses I think you come to the conclusion, -or at least I've come to the conclusion- that nuclear is part the answer. Now that doesn't mean to say we shouldn't push on renewables which is very very important, but we also need nuclear in my opinion.

[MCFly is reminded of Chris Davies, Lib Dem MEP, saying as much about nuclear at the recent NWDA shindig that we eviscerated here.]

How do we realistically finance the tough measures a city like Manchester needs to take to h it our carbon targets- do we need a reformed or reinvigorated government bond regime?

I think there are all kinds of issues we should look at. I think what is clear is that we need the right system of incentives in place and we try and do that through our various obligations. I think we need a good/better system of financing. I will have more to say next week about fiancing for home energy efficiency and the way local authorities can be involved in that- they do have a central role to play in relation to climate change. I think the financing is difficult in the coming years but - you'd expect me to say this- but I think we need to do all we can to protect the money we've [spent- inaudible?] on climate change and low carbon.

Say we wake up on May 7 or whenever the election is- with a Conservative Government. What would you hope that climate concerned people did in that situation?

Nice try, but I'm afraid I'm not going to fall for it. Look, this election is winnable for the Labour Party. I think it's very important that we have a Labour Government, including on the issue of climate change. I don't think that the Tories are fully committed to important aspects of this agenda, including on renewables. Because when you hear what they say about on-shore wind, which I think is a part of the answer, along with off-shore wind, I think it should worry us. When Kenneth Clarke, the shadow business secretary, says we shouldn't have any on-shore turbines at all, that is really worrying. And so, the problem with the Tory Party is they see green as a piece of spin. It isn't a piece of spin, it should be about substance. So I am going to do all I can to re-elect a Labour Government.

worse for women: gender and climate change

2010-02-25T09:57:00.000-08:00

What are the ways in which women are affected differently (and more) by climate change around the world? What needs to be done about that?
What are the reasons behind the persistent and sometimes huge gender imbalance in audiences at any meeting labelled "Climate Change" in Manchester? What needs to be done about that?

These are just some of the questions that will be tackled at the next Manchester Climate Forum, on Wednesday 17th March. The event takes place at the Friends Meeting House, (6 Mount St, behind the Central Library), at 7.30pm sharp (come earlier for mingling and networking).

And in answer to the question submitted- yes, men are welcome- sorry for not making that clear.

To kick off the discussion, here's a reprint of an article written for "Only Planet", the 2008 book about Manchester and Climate Change.

Invisible Power

It's always hard to talk about the gender, race and class dynamics in activism without descending into massive generalisations. Every person has a whole range of cross-cutting identities as well as their own integral personal traits and characteristics, and there will always be individuals who buck every one of the trends I'm about to describe.

Despite this, there are some general issues with how power dynamics within groups and movements can be talked about in terms of these issues. The area I'm most familiar with from personal experience and study is gender, but many of these points are about the way that power imbalances work and discriminate more generally, so some of them will be applicable to other marginalised groups too.

Most of these 'characteristics' of men and women are largely, if not all, socially constructed. Men and women aren't 'naturally' made one way or the other, society constructs us in these ways through the millions of ways we're unconsciously taught to behave from babyhood onwards. You only have to look at the massive diversity of what is seen as 'male' or 'female' behaviour in societies around the world to realise that there's nothing intrinsic about gendered behaviour.

Some schools of eco-feminist thought would disagree with this, arguing that there are natural, intrinsic links between women, nurturing and nature; I would argue that this position, as well as countered by so many examples from around the world, opens us up to other arguments about the fundamental nature of women – that they are less intelligent, inferior and made only for 'women's' duties such as childbearing or homemaking. However, some deep ecology and eco-feminism books do have useful things to say about the way in which women are differentially impacted on by environmental change and crisis.

So, having said this, what are the kind of gender dynamics that might affect the extent to which women get involved in certain types of causes and campaigning?

Firstly, there are the power dynamics in how people behave – at meetings, in demonstrations, when planning activities and actions. It's a generalisation, but women are still often brought up to be quieter, less argumentative and less assertive than men. In meetings and discussions – especially ones which are not well facilitated and where people aren't given space and confidence to talk – this can easily translate into women not having the confidence to raise their voices in the din, to put up their hand or to challenge views they don't agree with.

Studies on workplaces have shown that men and often far more confident in their knowledge and right to express opinions and assert facts, even over and above the expertise of women who might be far better informed or qualified. This isn't just off-putting for women, but disadvantages the entire group or movement, which may well be missing out on valuable knowledge and experience just because less well-informed men have more confidence about talking publicly and asserting their own ideas. And in many cases it can be easily rectified, by making sure that facilitators in meetings and campaign planners are aware of the need to do things like use go-rounds that include everyone rather than free-for-all discussions, to ask direct questions to individuals rather than always picking the first people to raise their hands, and if necessary to use anonymising tools such as slips of paper instead of insisting that everyone has to put their point publicly.

As well as the amount that women speak and participate (or are put off doing so), these issues of confidence and assertiveness can often influence the roles and jobs that the genders take on, with men assuming that they have the right and abilities to put themselves forward for public or leadership roles, while women enter equally important but less acknowledged and respected support positions. And in movements where direct action is frequently used, it's important to be aware of how much this valuable tactic can often overlap with macho behaviour and prioritisation of physical strength which can again discriminate against some women.

Secondly, there is the issue of when and where meetings take place. Most large public meetings happen in the evenings so that working people can access them, which is fair enough – but which can discriminate against people- most often women- who have to use paid childcare in the evenings but would be able to meet while their children are at schools or nurseries. Late night meetings, especially in winter, can be threatening for women subjected to socially inculcated fear of being out on their own after dark and when there is poor public transport (even if statistics show that we're in much more danger from the men in our family than from shadowy murderers and rapists on the streets).

Using rooms in pubs can also exclude women, especially those from non-drinking cultures and religions. The tendency for the 'real' decision-making and bond-forging to go on in the pub after a meeting is also a big source of discrimination, especially against those who need to use paid childcare or have early starts for work, or who can't afford to get involved in a culture of buying rounds and hanging out regularly after meetings.

Simple ways to address some of these issues are

to ensure that meetings are run efficiently and on time, so that if people need to keep babysitting costs down they can get home quickly and predict how long might be needed.
using sub-groups to plan specific tasks can sometimes make meeting times more flexible and allow people to get together during the daytime or at weekends. Or are there venues which might even offer creche facilities?
and make sure that if important decisions and plans are made, it's done in a transparent way and in proper meetings, not over beers afterwards.

Thirdly, and depressingly enough in the 21st century, there are still some heavily gendered roles that women are expected to fall into, or which they find themselves entering by default – perhaps because they can. Cooking, cleaning up after meetings, helping other people's projects to happen rather than advancing their own. It's useful for groups to consider doing gender audits, looking at which roles and activities are being done by whom, and finding out if there are unmet ambitions and training needs amongst members. This can benefit the entire membership and help to retain members and volunteers who feel valued and respected.

Useful resources

For puncturing macho egos: any of the cartoon books of Jackie Fleming

For a detailed look at how informal power structures affect women: Beyond Hierarchy: Gender, Sexuality, and the Social Economy – Sarah Oerton (Taylor & Francis)

For discussions of how women experience environmental change:

Women and the Environment: A Reader - Sally Sontheimer (Monthly Review Press)
or any of the writings of Vandana Shiva

MCFly 042- Bury Good News

2010-02-14T16:07:00.000-08:00

ATTENTION BURY RESIDENTS!

A small group of "concerned citizens" who live in Bury have met to see how constructive pressure can be put on Bury Council. Here's a portion of their report sent to MCFly.

"One thing we looked at was the statement from Bury Council that appeared in MCFly 36. We thought at the time this showed a very unambitious Council making a big noise about very small achievements in reducing energy use in its own buildings. An energy management consultant suggests to us that, even on its own terms, the statement was inadequate. National Indicator 186 also requires it to ‘provide vision and leadership to local communities’ so as to reduce emissions throughout the local authority area. Their statement makes no reference to that and they don’t appear to have signed up to it. We hope to encourage them to do better on that.

"We also found that their website still displays a 2003 policy on climate change with targets that don’t extend beyond 2010. When we pointed that out they agreed it needed replacing and promised their Climate Change sub-committee would be working on that over the next few months. We will be doing our best to make sure that happens – and that a more ambitious and effective policy emerges from it.

We next meet on Weds March 24 at 7.30pm at St Joseph’s Parish Centre, 132 Walmersley Road, Bury BL9 6DX. Any interested Bury residents are very welcome. For more info contact Dominic McCann (zapaman@hotmail.co.uk) or George Heron (george@heronbg.info).

MCFly 042- Learning from Toronto

2010-02-14T16:06:00.000-08:00

On Feb 24/25, council officers from Toronto come to Manchester to share their knowledge and expertise of retrofitting buildings. The story of Toronto's engagement with a whole range of climate change issues is so compelling that Manchester City Council are inviting interested people to attend an open early evening presentation session on Weds 24th from 5.30 to 8pm at the Manchester Civil Justice Centre, 1 Bridge Street West. For a ticket, email n.jones2@manchester.gov.uk

MCFly 042- Cycle to Victory!

2010-02-14T16:05:00.000-08:00

At a packed meeting on Friday 12 February, the Greater Manchester “Integrated” Transport Authority (GMITA) agreed to look again – and more carefully- at finding ways to allow cyclists to take their bikes on trams. Further, the GMITA also agreed to ensure that the bureaucrats who serve them will in future “undertake full consultation with representatives of the Cycling Organisations and the 10 District Councils.”

In MCFly 35 (“On your bike”) we reported that despite a 2002 promise to ensure bikes could be taken on trams, the Capital Projects committee of GMITA had nixxed the idea, without even reading the relevant report on the subject, which was not released until after the vote was taken.. Campaigners swung into action, with MCFly readers and others writing to GMITA Chair, Councillor Keith Whitmore to request he look again at the issue. They were told that that couldn't happen. But things changed on Friday 12th. The morning saw an imaginative stunt by campaigners, who took ironing boards and deckchairs on board a Metrolink tram to prove their point, before attending the GMITA meeting.

Two resolutions were passed unanimously. One, from the chair of the Capital Projects committee that had made the initial decision on a 7 to 5 vote, “set up a small working group of two Conservative Members, two Liberal Democrat Members and two Labour Members which will also call on advice from Greater Manchester Cycle Campaign and the Love Your Bike campaign and the ten district councils and local transport user groups to discuss the contents of the Mott Macdonald report and examine any safe ways in which cycles can be carried on trams and [then] report back to the Policy and Resources Committee of the Authority in due course.”

The other resolution instructed bureaucrats to look at what can be learnt from European

Light Rail systems, and to estimate costings for converting existing trams and to produce “a plan for the experimental introduction of off peak bicycle carriage”

This victory for common sense, won by dedication, tactical frivolity and intelligence, has opened up space for proper discussion of the issues. Fights like this, against bureaucratic insolence and political inertia, will have to be won many times over if we are to make low-carbon choices the easiest ones for Mancunians.

Not Worth Da Attention- NWDA Climate Conference

2010-02-14T15:48:00.000-08:00

At the North West Development Agency's third annual Climate Change Conference, one speaker painted a picture of the post-Copenhagen negotiators as dazed and confused soldiers, decimated by machine guns, stumbling around the battlefield rallying to this standard, and that bugle call, lost and despairing. Whisper it, but that same metaphor applied to the serried ranks of men in suits who made up the most part of the audience. The thing about the international negotiators, is at least they KNOW where they are at.

No such public insight at the North West Development Agency, which can, with a straight face, create glossy booklets and videos about a Climate Change Action Plan (“Risible to the Challenge”) that stretches two whole... years... into the future. Seriously; Two. Years. Why. Did. They. Bother?

The conference opened with ex -Peel senior management figure Robert Hough (and current Chairman of the NWDA) making the usual noises that get made at these events; “we led Industrial Revolution, lead as low carbon leader, opportunities, commercial and economic prospects, nuclear sector, tough targets, 'the plan is working' (no evidence that MCFly heard for this assertion, btw), interruption of supply chains, clean and secure energy, lead by example”. He also gave a shout out to MCFly's favourite off-setters, “Foundation”. [Chair of the meeting Kevin Boucquet gave the latter body the backhandedest of compliments in saying that they run a 'horrendously complex carbon exchange' when mentioning they will be offsetting people's travel to and from the conference.]

Chris Davies, Liberal Democrat Member of the European Parliament and all round climate expert (shepherding Carbon Capture and Storage through to pilot project stage) was the man with the metaphor mentioned in the opening paragraph. He gave a clear exposition of the UNFCCC's history, and said “by any standards, Copenhagen was a failure. No targets, no timetable, no framework that could be improved.” He emphasised how sidelined the EU- who fancied themselves as leaders on this topic- were by the Copenhagen Accord, how having European leaders turning up had lead to grandstanding and disunity.

His prescription was more of the same- onward to Mexico with raised ambitions for Jo'burg in 2011. He advocated addressing climate denial, (come on Weds 17^th then!), keeping the Kyoto Protocol for another five years, carbon capture and storage, nuclear etc.

We then had two “practical” presentations, Matthew Wright of United Utilities talking about the challenges of providing a solid presentation on what his company can and will be doing on adaptation and mitigation, with an intriguing final thought on how decentralised water provision will be by 2050.

Richard Ellis, Group Head of CSR for Alliance Boots, conscious of the over-run on time, said he'd 'whip through' quickly, but then, erm, didn't. His explanation of why Boots did what it did (commercial imperatives, building trust with consumers etc) was robust and interesting. He at least had the guts to say that a 30% cut by 2020 was doable but that an 80% carbon dioxide reduction by 2050 was- with current intellectual tools- not.

We went to the first break 25 minutes over time, (i.e. after 90 minutes instead of the scheduled 65.) It makes you wonder- if they can't even bring their own event, with 4 speakers, in on time, what hope have they for the slightly more complex task of, erm, decarbonising the North West's economy and creating proper resilience against a backdrop of less money and more stressors.

After the break we heard from the CEO of the Energy Savings Trust. Far be it from me to tell people several pay brackets higher up the greasy pole than me how to do their jobs, but surely the behaviour change model the EST uses could be a bit more sophisticated than “it all starts with the individual”. Erm, social learning? Erm, behavioural economics? Sociology has come on a bit since Hobbes, Locke and Roussow, youkneau.

Next came the Renewables Development Manager for Centrica (think British Gas, only that's not all they do) talking about the challenges of off-shore and the need for financial incentives for companies to invest.

Ed Crooks, Energy Editor of the pink 'un had the last slot, and used it to talk about how the finance follows the politics and the politics follows (ideally) the science.

He looked at the recent controversies around the science (the hacked emails, the IPCC process).
He related that he'd spent an evening recently with “a senior female climate expert” [BL?] swapping war stories. She said that what she hated was people telling her what Copenhagen meant. “If they think they know, they don't get it”. Crooks thinks that the Copenhagen Accord, if implemented, would be important.
On finance, he had little good news. Energy bills will have to go up (more on this later). He cited the example of the Spanish cutting their solar subsidy at the end of 2009 and causing havoc in that industry

The question and answer session let in a little much-needed light and the usual heat. The first question, around fuel poverty, was only semi-answered with the EST guy pointing out that the government no longer boasts about how many people it has lifted out of fuel poverty, since so many have sunk back into it.

The next question was perhaps the most interesting. Since Crooks had said energy bills would have to rise, would utility companies accept that profits would need to go down? This actually got a bit of a clap/loud murmur of approval from the audience. Crooks and other panellists disagreed: for there to be the necessary investment in 'green energy' then energy company profits would have to increase radically. That will be an interesting sell to consumers.

There were other questions, but if you're that interested you can always watch the video. The final question was on peak oil. Ed Crooks was of the opinion that it couldn't run out fast enough, since with prices going through the roof, we would be forced to look at alternatives. Mark Atherton, standing in for Robert Hough, defended the conference/Action Plan saying it was looking at things they could control. This, I think, was missing the point somewhat! I suspect the NWDA doesn't want to plan around Peak Oil because it would be too disruptive and scare away inward investors.

The conference was ably chaired by Kevin Bocquet (whose 16 year old daughter is right- flying to France on holiday is “killing the planet”, regardless of the smug laughter from the audience).

Ultimately though, you don't go to these things for any examination of the difficulties, the failures, the contradictions. These bodies, wedded to a version of growth through ever more international trade, are not able to challenge their own pre-suppositions. Thus there was no mention of aviation and the expanding of the region's airports, nothing about the need for localised food production, nothing about peak oil, virtually nothing on behavior change, nothing on the model of growth itself. But accusing the conference of being intellectually vacuous and smug is a bit like complaining about the lack of car chases in Proust. It's a fundamental misunderstanding of what's on offer. These jamborees are for patting selves on the back, creating a rhetorical defence for if/when the incoming Tory regime swings an axe (that may not happen, it seems), and swapping a few business cards. That was what was done, that is how it is.

Watching the World go bye-bye

2010-02-04T14:15:00.000-08:00

I really really wanted to like it. I wanted to come away from the content of a lecture/presentation inspired and upbeat. I wanted... well, you can't always get what you want.

The venue, while out of the way, was great- a church built in 174something. The hosting organisation, the Greater Manchester Centre for Voluntary Organisation, did a sterling job of making everyone feel welcome. The introductory comments by Caroline Downey of Bridge 5 Mill were brief and to the point.

The speaker came from the WorldWatch Institute, a Washington-based thinktank that used to give me food for thought back in the day.

And, well, you can see what's left. The speech. Not the speaker, who was an obviously intelligent, well-informed, diligent and sincere man. But my gaia, his speech was a looong hour of my life, which I will never get back.

He was here to talk about the State of the World report for 2010, entitled “Transforming Cultures: From Consumerism to Sustainability.”

You can understand why Richard Sharland, Head of Environmental Strategy at the City Council was there- after all, culture shift is the joint headline action for the Climate Change Action Plan.

Culture, he said, “is the sum of all social processes that make the artificial or human-constructed seem natural” (from Welsch and Vivanco). To illustrate this point he had served up roast grasshoppers at the Washington DC launch. Custom(s) prevented that here, which is a pity, because that at least would have been a new taste, a new sensation...

He then spent the next hour (I kid you not) telling us what anybody turning up to a seminar called “From Consumerism to Sustainability” almost certainly already knows, if they've seen Morgan Spurlock's Supersize Me, or read anything by Naomi Klein or... well, you get the picture.

He looked at the “six key institutions for changing cultures - education, business, government, the media, social movements and traditions.” and gave 'examples' of how work was being done in each. That's fine as far as it goes (not far) but few of the examples were new, or problematised, or inspiring. At no point did he go into detail on the obstacles, the push backs, the psychological, social and economic forces arrayed against change, that enforce homeostasis.

He didn't deploy potentially interesting ideas- meme warfare, impossible hamsters, reclaiming the streets, culture jamming etc etc.

And the Q and A was dishwater dull. Long answers given to short questions, fundamentals ducked or at best weaved (economics, agency, urgency). But at least we got to find out what some individuals were doing. It might have been well to start with that- a quick shout out asking people to describe in one or at most two sentences what they were doing.

Since we were told that the talk is “evolving,” here's the selection pressure of robust practical constructive criticism.

find out what people already know (need only have taken a minute or two longer)
start from that, not preaching to the converted for an hour
spice up the slide show, with better pictures and better quotes
be much much more concise in content and punchier in delivery
keep it to at most a third of the time (“brief comments” doesn't mean the best part of an hour!)
find out what people are DOING. It helps them, it helps you get material/examples for the next talk, the next book
Be much briefer in answers to questions from the floor, enabling more people to make their points.
Most of all, don't treat any audience – any audience, let alone a highly intelligent and motivated one- like sheep for an hour.

It's such a pity- for once the gender mix was approaching 50/50, (as opposed to the usual 2-to-4 to one male to female ratio. There was even a decent number of People of Colour in the room, which is virtually unheard of. We were even sat at round tables, perfect for mingling. But we weren't helped/forced over the first hurdle, of classic “English” reserve.

In other news: Princes Charles was at the Museum of Science and Industry today, sharing a platform Richard Leese, who spoke of the Climate Change Action Plan/ “Manchester. A Certain Future.” According to HRH something is going to be STARTing in September.

Environment Commission- The Joy of Six

2010-01-24T23:03:00.000-08:00

MCFly was at the 6th meeting of the AGMA- level Environment Commission and can happily report that things finally seem to be heading in the right direction. It seems the recent selection of Greater Manchester as the Local Carbon Economic Area (LCEA) for the Built Environment has provided a bit of focus, if not (yet) any money. There were around 18 people at the meeting with apologies from Angie Robinson of the GM Chamber of Commerce and local authority councillors James Wibberly (Trafford), Catherine Piddington (Tameside) and David Molyneux (Wigan).

On the agenda was the LCEA and it was announced that the delivery plan for the Built Environment will be brought to the Environment Commission (EC) at the next meeting in March. The delivery plan is expected to be announced by April 2010 and £30,000 has been secured from the NWDA to help produce the joint delivery plan. It will consist of around 15 plans focusing on areas such as buildings, energy supply, innovation and supply chains.

Concerns were raised about the potential tension between cutting carbon and economic-driven programmes as the LCEA was run by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS)and not the Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC). Another commissioner, however, saw this is as a real opportunity to 'sell the environmental message' and also help ease the burden of those who have committed to cutting their carbon.

The LCEA designation was also hoped to bring in more resources for the little-mentioned Climate Change Agency which is supposed to carry out the EC's workstreams. With regards to the workstreams, they are slowing gaining more focus and are now being narrowed down to “headline actions”.
Manchester Airport is leading on the Transport workstream with a focus on changing behaviours and was keen to hold back on setting targets just yet.
Lynda Shillaw of the Co-op added that flexible working hours and better use of technology was key to encouraging people to use public transport or limiting travel where possible. MCFly cannot confirm rumours that there will be a fund for innovation in transport.

The Energy workstream was 'asked' by the government to come up with a clear Manchester Energy Plan which would inform investment, infrastructure and demand management. Bid has been put in for money and certain commissioners mentioned that this was a real opportunity for city region benefits as well as further gov-supported projects.

The issue of measuring the performance, which is another workstream, was discussed with possibility of a small team setting up various metrics to help set targets and measure success.
ertain commissioners felt that it was best to focus on what measures needed to be reported, whilst another suggested it was best to focus on simple measure – such as energy, water, waste- which were easy to understand and also more suited to clear messages.

The Sustainable Consumption Institute (yes, the Tesco-funded one) at the University of Manchester
was also suggested as good place to start as they have carried out significant research around the topic.

Another important workstream is engaging the stakeholder and a new Policy and Programme Manager - Phil Budds - has been tasked with creating a cross-authorities dialogue and better web presence. Shillaw, who is leading on the Sustainable production and consumption workstream, also offered stakeholder strategies developed by the Co-op to help.

The Commission has the view- not unreasonably- that the LCEA designation is a real opportunity not just for Greater Manchester's low carbon economy to flourish but also for the EC to prove itself. So far, the EC seems to have recognized this and are attempting to make the most of this window of opportunity to secure resources so that they can finally start taking action.

Arwa Aburawa, Freelance Journalis
(with minor alterations by Marc Hudson- blame him for inaccuracies and sarcasm)

A tale of two meetings

2010-01-24T12:23:00.000-08:00

Saturday 23rd offered Mancunians two interesting opportunities to learn about Climate Change and “What is to be done?”

The first was organised by Green Left and Socialist Resistance. It was a one-day conference entitled "Climate and Capitalism." MCFly's co-editor was only there for the opening and closing sessions (though we heard good things about the workshops) so comments will limited to those.

The meeting opened with an introduction by Gayle O'Donovan, who will be the Green Party's candidate both for Hulme (local elections) and Manchester Central (General election). She was followed by comments by Joel Kovel of the US Green Party and Terry Conway of Socialist Resistance [This is a correction of earlier inaccuracies; thanks due to "mjt"]. The latter's contributions, which seemed fairly uncontroversial to MCFly insofar as they went, provoked consternation among some that she was – through pointing out that women generally have a smaller carbon footprint than men – advocating individualist approaches to climate change mitigation. An aside here In all the years (too too many) that the current writer has attended meetings hosted by leftist parties, any hint that there might be any complicity of the working classes in benefitting from the exploitation of the “third world” or the planet's ecosystems [which Conway was not doing] is met with a vigorous and shall we say “determined” response.
Your correspondent raised the point that of the seventy or so people in the room, at most 25 were women, and pretty much everyone was white, and (he suspected) pretty much everyone had a university degree or was studying for one. Hastening NOT to blame the organisers, and pointing out this is pretty standard for any meeting labelled 'climate', he pointed out that there were more factors than just gender at play. Many of the other contributions in this initial session were focussed on who is who and where in the hierarchy of oppression. Some suggested reading on this would be the short and punchy essay “No-one ever is to blame”, which looks at our tendency to Blame Somebody Else for all the world's sins.

The other meeting was essentially a Labour Party shindig at Holy Innocents Church in Fallowfield (of course, when it comes to climate change, despite what some at Climate and Capitalism meeting, none of us is wholly innocent).
Veteran MP Gerald Kaufman (standing again this yearin Gorton), Councillor Mike Amesbury (Exec Member for Culture and Leisure) and Mike Franks of SERA were invited to talk on “After Copenhagen: saving the planet”.
There were about 20 or so in the audience, including other councillors, more men than women and a distinctly older demographic than the “Climate and Capitalism” meeting.
Mike Franks spoke first, on a broad variety of topics, including local renewable energy and also Victoria Baths. Cllr Mike Amesbury followed, extolling the ambitious targets set out in the “Manchester. A Certain Future” document, and conceding that there had been “justifiably a lot of criticism” of the Council's Call to Action document of January 2009. He pointed to Labour's investments in social housing and plans for retrofit and refurbishment, and the green-ness of the Council's libraries (a subject MCFly will tackle him on soon-ish).
He also spoke of the “15,000 green jobs” being created through the city region, a topic several in the audience tried to pin him down on later.
Finally Gerald Kaufman spoke at perhaps greater length than was strictly needed about the various achievements of the Labour Government since 1997 on the issues of environment (while always highlighting that the record was imperfect and there was no room for complacency). Interestingly, he also touched on inter-species justice, not something members of parliament usually speak to (given that the monkeys and bugs can't vote).

Questions from the floor came around the notorious TIF (see MCFly 1 etc), the green jobs (one audience member was justifiably confused as to how employing people in cemeteries was in any way 'green') and the poor performance of the government and council in assisting companies that wanted to have green roofs.

Thanks to good chairing from theHoly Innocents vicar we finished on time, with all who wanted to speak having spoken... It was an interesting event, and certainly the sort of thing that should be continued.

Back to the Climate and Capitalism meeting, I arrived after the final plenary speakers had given what I'm told were inspiring speeches. Unfortunately, the Q and A was anything but inspiring. I have lost count of the number of times good days have been spoilt by overlong and unfocussed Q&As where people (well, mostly men) with limitless needs for attention, approbation, controversy and more attention hold forth at horrible length with unstructured comments, deliberately(?) arcane questions (a form of dick-swinging; you rarely see it from women) and self-serving announcements. Not all of the contributions were like that, not even a majority, but enough of them were to needlessly deflate what seemed to have been a high-energy day. I do not understand why any organiser would plump for such a masochistic and self-defeating structure, except out of unconsidered habit. But there you are.

Both meetings could have benefitted enormously from a couple of simple techniques- give everyone (who is willing) a name badge and another sticker for them to say what they're particularly interested in or are campaigning on, or where they live.

Also, even in a tiered lecture theatre (as the Climate and Capitalism event's opening session was) it is possible to ask people to turn to the person behind them (they probably know the person they are sat next to) and have a chat for a couple of minutes about what they're doing/what they're expecting from the day.

These simple techniques help break down the invisible barriers to mingling (British reservedness) and can help nurture a wider set of loose ties between interested people from different social circles. If these things aren't done, there tends to be a significant clustering into groups (cliques!) of people who know each other well.

Climate Forum Jan 20 report

2010-01-24T11:51:00.000-08:00

On Wednesday night a small number of people from a diverse range of groups gathered at the latest “Manchester Climate Forum” to talk about the outcomes of the Copenhagen Climate Summit and its implications for Manchester, and also about “what makes a good group”.

On Copenhagen- the actual accord is only 3 pages long (see here). It turns out that the “targets” that countries were supposed to sign up to by January 31st are now “soft.” Oh dear.

There was discussion around what consequences- if any- the failure of the Copenhagen meeting had for Manchester and 'activism'. There was discussion over what could and should be done by NGOs in the run up to the Mexico City meeting of November 2010.

Secondly, the meeting broke into pairs and threes to write up thoughts on the qualities of “good” groups and “bad” groups and ways that people could be retained within groups (with the proviso that merely retaining people does not necessarily make a group “good”!). You can read these in a separate blog post on the “Time to GLOW” website – comments very welcome!

This was followed by announcements of upcoming events (see MCFly calendar for those and other events)

The next Manchester Climate Forums are on Weds 17 February, Weds 17 March and Tuesday 20 April (a pre-election debate between Councillors and candidates). All meetings are at the Friends Meeting House, 6 Mount St, Central Manchester (behind the Central Library). Mingling and writing-on-flipcharts and other icebreakers from 7pm, for a 7.30pm sharp start.

MCFly 040- After Copenhagen

2010-01-17T15:26:00.000-08:00

After the disappointment of the last international negotiations on climate change, come find out what happened and what it means for Manchester at the next Manchester Climate Forum on Weds 20 January, from 7pm, at the Friends Meeting House.
http://www.manchesterclimateforum.org.uk
For details of two other Copenhagen meetings, see calendar on page 4. They're on Saturday Jan 23 and Tuesday Jan 26. Of course, taking local action is the key thing!

MCFly 040- They talk the talk, but what about tramming the bike?

2010-01-17T15:25:00.000-08:00

On Friday Jan 15 the Greater Manchester "Integrated" Transport Authority met to decide whether to allow bikes on trams. "Love your Bike" campaign and Greater Manchester Cycling Campaign had hoped for at least a relaxation of the current total ban: a compromise solution of off-peak travel would have at least shown willing towards, um, integrated transport and encouraging people to make smart (low carbon) choices. It wasn't to be. Four Liberal Democrats- including David Sandiford (Didsbury East)- voted for the status quo, as did three Conservatives. The five Labour councillors argued against the ban and voted for a deferment and then voted against.#For more info: Guardian Fri 15, Peter Walker
http://sharpedgetrip.blogspot.com
And watch this space...

MCFly 040- Looking for a competent quango? Trust me, save your energy...

2010-01-17T15:23:00.000-08:00

Entertaining* blog post on the utter uselessness of the Energy Saving Trust in implementing the boiler scrappage scheme. The EST is "a clunking bureaucracy which isn't apparently up to anything more complex than sending out a few leaflets about changing your lightbulbs." And continues in this vein... http://thethreeleggedcat.blogspot.com
*(disclaimer; it's written by Mrs MCFly)

MCFly 040- delivery delivery delivery

2010-01-17T15:21:00.000-08:00

Last year was about planning and promising. This year, in the words of a very senior official from Manchester City Council, is, well, read the headline. For a quick overview of important issues and dates between now and issue 66 of MCFly, read on....
Manchester
At the end of January, the Council is going to say how it will meet its "10:10" obligations. The Council's budget gets set in February/March. How much will they be spending on climate change? Watch this space. On May 6th council elections take place. Labour's dominance (they have two thirds of the council seats) may get chipped away, but they will still be in control, albeit perhaps without some high- profile politicians. [MCFly will cover two wards- Northenden and Hulme]
Meanwhile, the Council is hoping that organisations big and small, public and private, will be endorsing the Action Plan and writing their own delivery plans. To help this along, templates are being produced. A 12 member Steering Group (see page 2) will have been formed and prod the Council towards the production of a Delivery Plan, to be presented (it's hoped) to the Council's Executive in September. Then, late in the year, there'll be the first "stakeholder" conference, with between 100 and 200 representatives of stakeholders meeting to monitor progress so far.
What will success look like? MCFly's answer would be - a huge response (including criticism of the existing plans inadequacies and suggestions for plugging gaps around food, aviation, and peak oil) from individuals and groups throughout the city, and the vigorous implementation of some bold high profile moves. Failure looks like "no bikes on trams", and an expanding airport and more talk about boldness but no actual boldness..
Greater Manchester
The Association of Greater Manchester Authorities has won City Region status, which is essential for dealing with energy, transport and so forth. There are seven "Commissions" of politicians and bureaucrats/business people. The Environment Commission will be trying to carve out a role, using Greater Manchester's Low Carbon Economic Area for the Built Environment status. Expect some changes to the make-up of AGMA (and the Commissions) after the May 6th elections...
North West
MCFly will be at the (re)launch of the North West Climate Change Action Plan on Friday February 12th (at the Midland Hotel) as part of our "canape won't pay" policy. But the real question troubling assorted bureaucrats and quangocrats won't be the survival of the planet but the survival of the North West Development Agency. The Tories have been making finger-across-the-throat gestures towards the regional development agencies, but it's unclear what business wants, and whether that will carry the day...
National
If the Tories get in, they won't be repealing the Climate Change Act anytime soon, but the future of the Department of Energy and Climate Change is less certain. There is probably enough business interest in the money making opportunities in a "Low Carbon Transition" to keep the 2020 plans on track, but there are worrying numbers of denialists and delayers in Tory ranks, all the way up the hierarchy.
International
Legitimacy versus effectiveness questions will be asked longer and louder. The UNFCCC caravan heads back home to Bonn and then on to Mexico City in November. Will there be a legally binding treaty by the end of the year? It's pretty unlikely, and. much depends on the progress of Climate Change/Energy legislation through the United States Congress. But even, then a politically acceptable deal is likely to be scientifically inadequate, an adequate deal unacceptable...
And on the subject of 'delivery delivery delivery'- MCFly sends congratulations to Leo. And Emma- we always knew you had it in you!

Next MCFly, Weds 20 Jan meeting...

2010-01-13T15:28:00.000-08:00

The next full MCFly will be published on Sunday 17th January. It will contain the usual mix of news, analysis, gossip, "humour" and a useful calendar of upcoming climate events.

One such event is on Weds 20th January, hosted by MCFly's sister/parent organisation "Manchester Climate Forum". It's at the Friends Meeting House, 6 Mount St, from 7 to 9pm

As the blurb says-

We will
a) look at what emerged from Copenhagen (the "Copenhagen Accord") and what it means for Manchester and the world, outlining the future of the international negotiations
b) discuss what makes a "good" group that takes action on climate change
and social justice issues
c) look at what various groups are doing in Manchester over the coming year.

This is NOT a meeting where you will sit in rows listening to too many
speakers drone on for too long before a boring Q and A session. This is about you finding out what you want, making connections with other people who are doing things or wanting to.
Bring your ideas, your friends and a quid to help us cover room hire.

MCFly interview: Sharland on Copenhagen

2009-12-20T11:31:00.000-08:00

Hi all,

well, Copenhagen is done and dusted (at last). You can see various updates and analysis at www.climateslamdown.wordpress.com I'd particularly recommend MCFly cartoonist Marc Roberts' "The Great Climate Let-Down" He posts regularly also at www.throbgoblins.blogspot.com

Richard Sharland, the City Council's head of Environmental Strategy attended a portion of the Copenhagen talks, alongside Council Leader Richard Leese. MCFly sent him a few email questions, and he kindly replied. Here goes:

What were you hoping for from your time at Copenhagen?
I was hoping to see ideas, plans and challenges shared by cities around the world and for us, Manchester, to play a truly tiny part in an event that would swing the complex supertanker of global human society onto a more positive course for the future. The first of these hopes was fulfilled, exceeded even: the second was not, the supertanker has altered course slightly, but only.

What happened: Is there anything that you didn't get that you wanted to get?
Yes, we didn't get that inter-governmental result and that is seriously disappointing.

Did you get anything you weren't expecting. (the serendipity question)
Yes, I did get something I wasn't really expecting: to meet personally so many leaders of cities who were wholly committed to tackling this agenda substantially, who were keen to exchange ideas and information, who understood the need for mitigation, adaptation and opportunity and who are committed to action and cultural change regardless of what did or did not happen at COP15. And there was something else: none of the cities we encountered have written a stakeholder plan like we have, and it aroused a fair bit of interest!

Do you think the "nation-state" outcome, such as it is, makes the work of cities like Manchester easier or harder?
The lack of a real outcome at COP15 makes our job undoubtedly harder, but we live in a country that has legislated for climate change and legislated boldly. The lack of a real outcome will make it much much harder for many in cities elsewhere in the world.

In some ways, Copenhagen has been a great disappointment, a grey cloud, rather than the beginning of a bright future: but every cloud has a silver lining and the positive drive and teamwork of the leaders of cities should be celebrated and supported as a great force for change. They will al have been inspired by each other and each others support and will be stronger as a result......and so, for those of us old enough to remember the song it is "Hi Ho, Silver Lining" now.

And Manchester will be bidding to host COP18, right?
COP18 is a way away........I am thinking this: when we are a year or two further down the track and Manchester - A Certain Future is accompanied by the sign-up of a raft of Manchester organisations large and small and we have some Delivery Plans with detailed targets and costs and time-lines in place, we will be in a strong position to consider what kind of global conference we'd like to host.

Greater Manchester, Low Carbon Area for Built Environment

2009-12-10T13:41:00.000-08:00

This has been in the (ho-ho) pipeline for a while. Now maybe the Manchester Climate Change Agency could get on and, you know, be an agent of change?

Manchester city region confirmed as low carbon area
By Simon Binns
Greater Manchester has been designated the UK's first Low Carbon Economic Area (LCEA) for the Built Environment by the government....

Richard Leese at the GMex

2009-12-08T18:59:00.000-08:00

Richard Leese, Leader of Manchester City Council, was at the Copenhagen Rally to launch Manchester's Climate Action Plan “Manchester. A Certain Future.” As well as telling Ed Miliband, Minister for the Department of Energy and Climate Change that we need a deal at Copenhagen, he was keen to talk about the commitment Manchester City Council was making to deal with climate change. The 41% C02 reduction target by 2020 was reiterated as well as the belief that Manchester needs to move towards low carbon for the health of the economy and not to the detriment of it.

Leese was also open about the fact that the council still has no idea how they are going to meet those targets, or where they were going to get money to finance their actions but insisted that they were committed to finding the resources and meeting their ambitious targets. Whilst the council leader highlighted behavioural change as the biggest aim of the plan, he maintained that the Climate Change Plan must demonstrate that tackling climate change will not lower people's quality of life but improve it. MCC's climate change plan was hailed as the 'fantastic' outcome of a collective effort but as we all know delivering and implementing the plan is real measure of its success.

The beginning of the end?

2009-12-08T15:48:00.000-08:00

Ed Miliband, your government's climate change top bod, couldn't resist the Churchill allusion. Asked by the chair of tonight's huge public meeting for an inspirational summing up about Copenhagen (which happens to be the subject of a pretty cool cartoon by Marc Roberts), he reached for the “it's not the end, it's not even the beginning of the end, but it is the end of the beginning" line. And, through more gritted teeth (note to subs: do flies have teeth?) MCFly says he might be right...

The meeting took place at GMEx (or “Mancheste Central” for anyone not up with the very latest rebrand). It was confirmed less than two weeks ago, so a turnout of 5 to 600 or so (the biggest ever event on climate change in Manchester?) is a pretty good effort.
After useful “fluffing” by the ubiquitous Phil Korbel, we had the main event. Joining Ed “I like MCFly” Miliband were Mike Childs (campaigns lead for Friends of the Earth), Len Wardle of Co-op and Richard Leese, Council Leader and frequent target of MCFly snarks and questions. It was chaired by John Harris of the Guardian, who has been Ed's shadow of late.

Of especial interest to MCFly readers will be Richard Leese's launch of the “Manchester. A Certain Future” action plan. He started by telling his Labour Party colleague Ed “don't come back without a deal”.
He then said what he's said before, but bears repeating: The writing of the Action Plan (which is for the City, not just the Council) was a collective effort. It's been endorsed by the City Council, and the hope is by a lot more organisations and bodies in the coming year. (Most of the Council's greenatariat were in the audience) Behaviour change is vital, above and beyond the ambitious 41% target for reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 2020. But There'll be a separate blog post about this by MCFly's other editor, so, onwards to the “main event” (not to disparage the FOE and Co-op, who will be dealt with in a later blog post!).

Miliband was usefully brief, as usual. He looked at why the Copenhagen deal was needed. The science was indeed urgent (he'd been got to by Professor Kevin Anderson before the meeting), but also the world focussed in a way it had never been before. This he credited to the campaigners in the global movement. His fear had been that Copenhagen would pass without notice, but not any more. We were, he said, not where we need to be, and may not be by the end of the conference, but we would be closer.
He agreed with Mike Childs on the need for “maximum ambition” and laid out the government's 34% by 2020, 40% as part of a high ambition deal (NB this is not about embedded carbon; the UK has exported its emissions, as Dieter Helm makes clear in his Tanner lecture)
He puffed Gordon Brown as the guy who first put numbers on adaptation funding.
He emphasised that Copenhagen was not the end, or even the beginning of the end, and that what we've learned from other movements is the need to carry on. We need to “realise it's a long hard road and the people have to keep on it” (Chomsky, btw, says ditto. In the West people ask him what to do, expecting a magic bullet. In the rest of the world, they tell him all the things they're doing.)

The question and answer session was, even to this hardened activist, a little drawn out, and predictably threw up more heat than light. Not the chair's fault, or the panellists (mostly), but perhaps a lack of imagination in the questions, many of which could have been dealt with via a google search or visit to various government websites. That said, questions on engagement are always worth asking...

To this Q and A MCFly will return- our OCD was such that we took copious notes, but it's late and some of us have day jobs to go to, so time to triage.. Suffice to say Ed and Richard, politicians both, were scrupulous in answering all questions put to them (so people like us can't accuse 'em of ducking!) Leese was careful to say -in response to a pre-meeting snark- that there will be lots of opportunities for dialogue and discussion in the coming years. Can't wait...

Props to:
Manchester Friends of the Earth and also the Department of Energy and Climate Change for putting it on in short time frame.
Ed Miliband for not talking out the clock and calling it like he sees it, and doing less ducking and weaving than you'd expect
More than half a thousand or so Mancunians for coming out and sitting still for a loooong meeting of middle-aged middle-class white men (this is not how a social movement should look, says one middle-aged middle-class white male)

Maybe next time we could have the chair encourage people to talk to the person behind them for a bit (it works, even in a tiered lecture theatre) to create some weak ties. Maybe even name badges? It all helps with the coercive mingling that should be a sine qua non of these events, and might even move things towards the elusive “two thumbs up” rating. Much else to say, some of it worth reading, but a Climate Slamdown day summary has yet to be written, and proof-read...

The legendary Unicorn

2009-12-02T13:22:00.000-08:00

Tonight, about 70 people got to talk to the people who put some of the food on their plate. At the Manchester institution that is Unicorn Grocery) 7 or 8 local and not quite so local (e.g. Kent) producers gave brief talks about what they do and why they do it. This was followed by an all-too-brief presentation about the Permaculture Institute of El Salvador, one of the projects that Unicorn supports from its 4% fund. Frankly, you can't have too much permaculture.
This was followed by a chance to graze on samples of the food we'd been told about, and to quaff mulled wine. You could even redeem your two quid ticket against purchases. Result!
Unicorn should seriously consider making this a quarterly event- there is obviously a great hunger (hoho) to put faces to the names to the labels of the good produce on their shelves. In addition, direct links between producers and consumers are going to be what the future looks like (if we have one).

MCFly 038- A different league

2009-12-01T15:01:00.000-08:00

Forum for the Future is a charity that does an annual league table of Britain's 20 'greenest' cities. Last year (see MCFly 12) Manchester fell from 12th to 15th. This year, it's 14th (but there's a twist). Perhaps MCFly should be buzzing round this story like a fly round... well, either we're getting soft in our old age (and bribed by the free sandwiches the Council doles out), or else it's simply not that big a deal any more. We asked for a statement from the Council, and got the following from Cllr Richard Cowell:
“This year the Sustainable Cities index represents Greater Manchester as opposed to Manchester in 2008 so the 2008 comparison with 2009 cannot be made. Sadly, due to timing of the Forum's work the ambitious City of Manchester Climate Change Action Plan taken to City Council Executive in November wasn't included in the Forum's deliberations but will feature in next year's. Manchester will continue to work with other Greater Manchester Councils through AGMA, the Environment Commission and other channels to put sustainability right at the heart of how the City Region functions.” You. Had. Better!

MCFly 038- Future Imperfect...

2009-12-01T15:00:00.003-08:00

Like the times, the Climate Change Action Plan (“Manchester. A Certain Future”) will be changing. This is not a scoop or an exclusive:- Manchester City Council has said all along that a document put together between July and September, a document that deals with a fast-changing target like climate change, a document for a city not just a Council, was going to need further work. That 'iterative process' will keep us all busy next year.
Approved without demur by the 10 member Executive of the Council on November 18, the 64 page plan has two headline goals- "to reduce the city of Manchester’s emissions of CO2 by 41% by 2020, from 2005 levels" and "to engage all individuals, neighbourhoods and organisations in Manchester in a process of cultural change that embeds ‘low carbon thinking’ into the lifestyles and operations of the city."
MCFly asked various political parties what they thought of the Plan. On the airport: the Liberal Democrats said “There is no logical reason why a Council should own an airport, but as we do own one, we should use our influence to set a target to reduce CO2 emissions.” The Greens said “the council should retain its stake but use it to reduce the airport's true carbon footprint - i.e. the flights. They should not sell it off to the private sector.”
MCFly asked "what's missing?" The Lib Dems are worried about the lack of short term targets, and how this strategy fits in with our commitments to the 10/10 agenda, and are "also worried that there are no annual targets so we can see how we are progressing to the 2020 targets. There is little to explain how we are going to lever in the £1million matched funding.” The Greens said “major deficiencies are the lack of detail as to how the 41% will actually be reached, and the absence of any plan for beyond 2010. The vision could and should be much better. On transport for instance (beyond a nod to video-conferencing) there is no recognition of the need to move away from the commuter model and the recognition that public transport also has a carbon cost. It is somehow expected to co-exist with the Council's other plans for continuous economic growth, and with planning decisions such as the destruction of Hasty Lane, which was taken just one day after the action plan's approval. This completely undermines confidence in both the process and the plan itself."
On what's praiseworthy (this doesn't come naturally to opposition parties!) the Lib Dems were “comfortable with most of the detail in the Action Plan, and the model for engagement has been good (although it shouldn't have taken 20 months).” The Greens said “the Council are being genuinely ambitious with it, particularly when compared with the other Greater Manchester boroughs. As well as a proposed 41% cut in the City's carbon footprint by 2020, there is a 'commitment to create a Total Carbon Footprint framework' by 2013 [and] numerous good ideas ranging from the large-scale insulation of housing to increasing local food production. The use of Manchester citizens to help draw up the plan instead of the previous use of remote consultants is also to be welcomed."
Call to Real Action, the grassroots group that inspired/cajoled the Council into adopting a more participatory method of drafting the Action Plan, are releasing their response on Monday 30 November. It will be available at www.calltorealaction.wordpress.com
At time of going to press, the Conservatives, the Socialist Worker's Party and Friends of the Earth had not replied. When they do, we will let you know.
For more info www.manchesterclimatefortnightly.info/futureimperfect.html

MCFly 38- Calendar of next couple of weeks

2009-11-27T18:15:00.000-08:00

Tues 1 Countdown to 2010 (Codex Alimentarus Meeting) 7pm, Friends Meeting House

Weds 2, 7.30 to 9.30pm Unicorn “Meet the producers” evening
Unicorn Grocery 89 Albany Road Chorlton

Thurs 3, 1pm IMPROVING SUSTAINABILITY SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE IN THE WORKPLACE Dr Joanne Tippett, School of Environment and Development, Room G33 Humanities Bridgeford Street, The University of Manchester
Thurs 3 7.30pm Manchester Climate Action meeting,
@ The Bowling Green Pub, Grafton Street, M13 6NZ

Fri 4 Friends of the Earth AGM (see page 3)
Sat 5 "The Wave" demonstration in London
Mon 7 6.30pm- 9pm Rocket Stove making Madlab , 36-40 Edge Street
Organised by the Manchester Permaculture Network www.en4m.org.uk/?q=node/1575
Tues 8- Ed Miliband in Manchester- see page 1
Weds 9 7.30pm
Is there still a case against Nuclear Power? Nuclear New Build - Dangers and Uncertainties.Sean Morris - Nuclear Free Local Authorities national officer SERA meeting, Manchester Town Hall, Albert Square
Thurs 10 7.30pm Manchester Climate Action meeting, @ The Bowling Green Pub, Grafton Street, M13 6NZ

Tues 15 7:00 till 9:30 Manchester Gardening and Permaculture Society (GAPS) showing of"We Feed the World" a recent documentary that takes an impartial and frank look at many of the major issues surrounding modern food production today. This is in support of the "international agriculture action day"happening at the UN COP-15 summit in Copenhagen on the same day. This will be followed by open discussion about the film and action we can take in Manchester. Manchester University Students union Meeting Room 2, (All welcome!)

16 Dec 7.30pm MCFly Xmas drinks at Odder Bar, Oxford Rd (opposite BBC)

MCFly 38- Local Digest

2009-11-27T17:14:00.000-08:00

Nov 17 Envirolink Northwest has provided funding to Tameside-based PVC Recycling Ltd so it can keep developing machinery that can process post-consumer waste and turn PVCu waste into pellets that can become fencing, gate posts and windows.

Nov 19 Viridor Laing (Greater Manchester) Ltd and the Greater Manchester Waste Disposal Authority (GMWDA) open the Waithlands Resource Recovery Centre in Rochdale. It will treat kerbside collected garden and kitchen waste within an enclosed building, to create a compost material for use in horticulture and agriculture.

Nov 20 North west bus maker Optare has signed a deal with a technology firm to use a dual-fuel conversion system, which enables engines to run on a mixture of diesel and bio-methane gas, This leads to reduced fuel cost and considerably lower noise and emission levels.

Nov 23 Manchester City Council's planning committee controversially approves plans to create a new cargo hangar at Manchester Airport World Freight Terminal . Two cottages on Hasty Lane, Ringway will be demolished to make way for a new 200,000 sq ft depot

Nov 23 Manchester-based developer Sky Properties plans to build the Green Lane Eco Park on disused industrial land off Green Lane in Salford. The new facility would, if approved by Salford City Council, treat and manage about 240,000 tonnes of local business waste each year through a Materials Recovery Facility (MRF), an Anaerobic Digestion (AD) plant and a Gasification plant.
The plans are firstly going out to public consultation with residents and organisations in the area around Green Lane. A three-day public consultation event will then happen at Monton House Hotel in Monton on December 3, 5 and 6.

Nov 23 The partnership between Kro and Foundation is launched (see MCFly 35, 36 and 37) Customers will be asked to donate 1 per cent of food bills to the the offset fund and Kro will itself commit 1 per cent of each buffet order received.

MCFly 38- Scary Science

2009-11-27T15:22:00.001-08:00

Climate Progress reports
Fast on the heels of the hottest June to September on record*, NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies reports that last month was tied for the second hottest September on record (after 2005).

Unlike NOAA, which announced its October global analysis with a major State of the Climate monthly update, NASA just quietly updates its data set . So you have to do a little math to see that for the June through October period, 2009 now tops both 1998 (easily) and 2005 (just barely, hence the asterisk).

For NOAA, it was the sixth warmest October on record, and the fifth-warmest January-through-October period.

Nov 22 The Guardian reports that the world's largest ice sheet has started to melt along its coastal fringes, raising fears that global sea levels will rise faster than scientists expected. The East Antarctic ice sheet, which makes up three-quarters of the continent's 14,000 sq km, is losing around 57bn tonnes of ice a year into surrounding waters, according to a satellite survey of the region. Scientists had thought the ice sheet was reasonably stable, but measurements taken from Nasa's gravity recovery and climate experiment (Grace) show that it started to lose ice steadily from 2006.

The Independent reports, on 25 Nov that
"The planet could warm by seven degrees Celsius (10. 8 degrees Fahrenheit) this century, a figure that lies at the farthest range of expert predictions made only two years ago, scientists said on Tuesday. The study is the biggest overview on global warming since the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released a landmark report in 2007. Several authors of the new paper were part of that Nobel-winning group.
Entitled the "Copenhagen Diagnosis," the 64-page summary is pitched at the December 7-18 UN conference in Denmark tasked with forging a planet-wide deal to curb greenhouse-gas emissions. "This is a final scientific call for climate negotiators from 192 countries who must embark on the climate protection train in Copenhagen," said Hans Schellnhuber, director of Germany's Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), which oversaw the paper.
"They need to know the stark truth about global warming and the unprecedented risks involved," he said in a statement. The authors say the document "serves as an interim scientific evaluation" of climate change, between the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report published in 2007 and its next big handbook, due in 2013.

CRUde Awakening

2009-11-27T14:43:00.000-08:00

Thousands of emails from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia have been hacked. The 'skeptic/denialist blogosphere is exultant, thinking they've found a smoking gun of the multigenerational conspiracy of grant-hungry scientists in collusion with capitalists, poltiicans, the illuminati and... oh, MCFly despairs. Homo sapiens??
Anyway, George Monbiot has tried to create a firebreak, and threw in some heavy-handed satire. George Marshall has a piece on scientists not getting what damage the scandal might actually will do.

Here are a few other links
Real Climate

Climate Progress

Reuters had a good cartoon (see above)

There's an open letter by Dr Judith Curry, a hurricane specialist, that's worth a look too. And here is a link to a paper (I've not read) of hers that calls for greater transparency

But the best response by far has been from the Daily Mash... " CLIMATE CHANGE EMAILS STOP GLACIERS FROM MELTING"

After the Wave, the Eddie...

2009-11-26T04:49:00.000-08:00

Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change Ed Miliband will take part in a public rally in Manchester on the 8th December at Manchester Central. This event is jointly hosted by DECC and Friends of the Earth Manchester and it will be Ed Miliband’s last event before he travels to Copenhagen, and an opportunity for participants to take part in a Q & A discussion.

The Leader of Manchester City Council has been invited to attend and will use this opportunity to launch the city's stakeholder climate change action plan, Manchester: A Certain Future.

This event will take place:

Tuesday 8 December,

Doors at 5PM for a start at 6:30PM

The Exchange Auditorium, Manchester Central (ex G-Mex)

If you wish to attend, please email RSVP@decc.gsi.gov.uk, with Manchester, 8 December in the subject line. Please make sure to include your name and names of people who wish to attend with you if relevant. You will receive a confirmation by email that your tickets have been booked.

Copenhagen and the Climate Slamdown.

2009-11-25T10:22:00.000-08:00

Click here for a magnificent climate cartoon about Copenhagen by Manchester-based cartoonist Marc Roberts. It's in the latest New Internationalist.

MCFly has run a column for the past 20 or so issues (I may over-estimate) called "Coping With Copenhagen" (Copenhagen, in case you don't know, is ground zero for the Climate Change negotiations at which whirled leaders will be trying to hash out a successor global deal to the Kyoto Protocol, the only international and legally binding climate deal this species has thus far managed to create.)

Basically, we could easily have filled the newsletter with boring details about these negotiations, over which we have virtually no influence. But that info is easy to come by, and MANCHESTER Climate Fortnightly is just that. So we created this website.

And Marc Roberts (he of the cool icons and spot cartoons) agreed to have his arm twisted to do an extended wrestling-match metaphor of the whole sorry process.

On www.climateslamdown.wordpress.com you will be able to read the daily updates that we do about (but not "from" - we have not the time, money or inclination to go) how the negotiations pan out.

Please do tell us what you think!

Matters coming to a head...

2009-11-19T13:03:00.001-08:00

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?

2009-11-19T11:49:00.001-08:00

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

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

2009-11-17T05:29:00.001-08:00

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....

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

2009-11-16T14:59:00.000-08:00

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

MCFly 037- Executive Decision

2009-11-15T14:53:00.000-08:00

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

2009-11-15T08:48:00.001-08:00

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/

Scrutiny and Overflight, sorry, oversight

2009-11-11T21:47:00.000-08:00

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/

Does every little help? Mainstreaming consumer behaviour

2009-11-10T15:28:00.000-08:00

Last Thursday the University of Manchester's “Sustainable Consumption Institute” (no laughing at the back there!) held the latest of its seminars. It was given by Simon Retallack, of the left-ish leaning Institute of Public Policy Research. They've been doing research about consumer attitudes to climate change. The seminar was based around a report they've just done called “Consumer Power: How can lower-carbon behaviour be mainstreamed.”

He started by pointing out that individual energy use and transport account for 44% of the UK carbon dioxide emissions, and that beyond the “environmentally-inclined”, many people don't take action. He said that mainstream consumers either haven't been taught about the issue and/or haven't responded, but that uptake beyond the converted was vital.

He made the uncontroversial but often neglected point that knowing and segmenting the audience is a precondition of success- you can't just aim at “the public at large”.

But dividing by income/profession will only get you so far, and so he introduced the idea of dividing people by different values.

Based on Albert Maslow's “hierarchy of needs” the Cultural Dynamics Strategy has three broad motivational groups

Pioneers - directed by 'inner needs' These are the 'natural activists' and are roughly 40% of the population.
Prospectors - driven by esteem and are outer-directed (your fashion victims and conspicuous consumers). About 30% of the population
Finally, settlers are driven by 'sustenance', dislike threats and are driven by comfort.

Complicated enough? Not really. Each of these groups can be further divided into four subgroups. But let's not go there, at least, too much.

Retallack laid out the results of some focus groups/guided discussions and interviews with people within the prospector group. (Their psychological rewards come from the esteem of others, status, fashion, success.)

The research looked at their opinions under "on the move"- energy efficient cars, UK holidays and trains and "home"- energy monitors, heating controls and solar panels.

The participants were aware of climate change and its impacts, and partly positive about “doing their bit”. They would go so far as admit to a dislike of “waste” but also said they had “climate fatigue.” they thought it depressing, boring, faddy, gimmicky.
They were sceptical about both government and business motives
Oh, and the obnoxious selfish ignorant little planet-killers really really didn't like being made to feel guilty about their “lifestyle choices”

Retallack made the point, that maybe some of us (author included) need tattooed on the inside of our eyelids- Guilt Is Not Effective.

On a related point, these prospectors did not like the environmental campaigners. The word smug came up rather a lot...

Saving money was not automatically a motivator for all these guys- it could be seen as penny pinching/being an old biddy.

Recommendations from the work came under two headings-

Communications

Don't focus on climate change “it's one of those things you think about for a few minutes, then get depressed and move on to the next”
Emphasise saving money (especially at present)
Be aware of the 'rebound effect' (people use money saved on energy bills to book a flight/buy a car)
Use the right language- “carbon pollution” or “waste” instead of co2, emissions.
Satirise high carbon behaviours and leave room for self-expression
Make low carbon desirable and fun
Being in control matters (e.g. Solar panels help protect from rising energy bills)
Avoid guilt and the environmental label
Use messengers that 'keep it real' (B and C list celebs work better, people can relate to them. Bono and Madonna are not the way to go)

Policy

Strong government policy essential

Avoid sending mixed signals (like, er, third runways, which were spontaneously mentioned by focus groupies)
Send the right price signals (taxes as carrots and sticks), but make sure changes are introduced transparently. Hypothecation (ring-fencing money raised to solve a specific problem) is needed, no matter how much HM Treasury doesn't like it.
Make the right things affordable. Subsidies, discount on stamp duty, on bill repayment etc
Make low-carbon services visible (demonstration homes in each locality)
Make it desirable

Retallack handled the Q and A well, giving brief but detailed answers and not droning on endlessly.

All in all, a useful hour was had by all. The next Sustainable Consumption Institute lecture is on Thursday 19^th November from 1pm to 2pm. Humanities Building, Bridgford St (near the Blackwell's in the University Precinct). Dr Sally Randles of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research will be talking, hopefully about her fascinating work around aviation and why we fly.

About these seminars: They're free, they're friendly and I'm not just saying that cos Tesco bunged me a hundred quid (cos sadly, they didn't).

About the huge multinational that sponsors the Sustainable Consumption Institute: They want to build a Tesco in Stretford so big you could see it from Jupiter with the naked eye. These guys want stop it.

Other sources of info:

Disclaimer- this blog was typed up 5 days after the event, and my scribbled notes have become even more illegible with the passing of time. I may have gotten some of it wrong...

Breaking News- Climate Change Action Plan released

2009-11-10T12:55:00.001-08:00

The climate change action plan for Manchester, which MCFly has been reporting on all year, is now available for all to see. It has been released ahead of next Wednesday's Executive Meeting, at which it will be formally accepted.

The link above points to a 77 page pdf. The first 11 pages are a summary of the implications for the Council, written in Councilese. They matter, but what matters the most is the Plan itself. It's been named "Manchester- A Certain Future. Our co2llective action on climate change" It is 64 pages long, and contains a foreword by Sir Richard Leese (Council Leader) and five chapter headings, around "Living, Working, Moving, Growing and Adapting."

We quote from page 5

Our plan has two headline objectives:

1: To reduce the city of Manchester’s emissions of CO2 by 41% by 2020, from 2005 levels. This equates to a reduction from current levels of 3.2 million tonnes per annum to less than two million; it also equates to a reduction in per capita emissions from 7.3 tonnes to 4.3 tonnes per head.
Manchester’s emissions of CO2 derive mostly from our use of fossil fuels and are directly related to the use of buildings, products, transport and industrial activities. We can lower these emissions by reducing our demand and use of energy; altering the technologies used for energy generation; and changing the sources of the fuels we use from fossil fuels to renewables. Our plan sets out ways of adopting and applying these three approaches across different sectors and scales.

2: To engage all individuals, neighbourhoods and organisations in Manchester in a process of cultural change that embeds ‘low carbon thinking’ into the lifestyles and operations of the city.

To create a ‘low carbon culture’ we need to build a common understanding of the causes and implications of climate change, and to develop programmes of ‘carbon literacy’ and ‘carbon accounting’ so that new culture can become part of the daily lives of all individuals and organisations. Every one of the actions in our plan will contribute in some way to the development of ‘carbon literacy’ in the city. However, achieving a new low carbon culture – where thinking about counting carbon is embedded and routine – can only be delivered as a
result of all the actions together, in an overall co-ordinated manner. Enabling a low carbon culture in the city will be particularly important if the challenge of meeting even more demanding carbon reduction targets between 2020 and 2050 is to be met.

Actions to meet these targets are set out under five chapter headings – Living, Working, Moving, Growing and Adapting. Each chapter makes it clear what Manchester is going to do to meet the challenges posed by climate change, along with the changes we need to make as individuals, communities and businesses.

The editors of Manchester Climate Fortnightly would urge all Mancunians who care about their future to read the document carefully and actively. We need to come up with better ideas, tough questions and suggestions for improvement. The next two years are crucial for Manchester's future. We would urge Mancunians to get involved in making this Action Plan a reality.

MCFly 36- Fat lot of good

2009-11-03T00:20:00.000-08:00

In November 2008, Manchester NHS unveiled a document called "Improving Health in Manchester: Commissioning Strategic Plan 2009-2014" Amongst many concerns, the strategy focusses on reducing the levels of obesity in the Manchester population. It wanted to tackle childhood obesity by promoting healthy lifestyles for families with young children.

The strategy highlights the clear cost benefits from people becoming active and states that the "cost saving for each person becoming active is £370 per annum" and this was "a prudent estimate as it excludes savings generated from other areas such as patients that stop smoking" [Page 68]

Supporting and encouraging children and adults to cycle to school or work is a great way for people to include exercise in their everyday routines. So it is very disappointing to see that this strategic plan for "Improving Health in Manchester" doesn't seem to include the words bicycle, cycling or cyclist and the word "cycle" is only mentioned in relation to the "commissioning cycle" or "disease cycle".

The foreword to the plan ends with a claim that this "plan explains how we intend to address these issues over the next five years. Manchester’s journey to a happier, healthier and wealthier city is well under way and we are proud to be playing our part – we hope you will be too."

It's a shame that Manchester NHS's vision would appear not to see people making this journey by bicycle.

MCFly 36- A Growing Problem

2009-11-02T23:31:00.000-08:00

Earlier this year, the Sustainable Development Commission (the independent watchdog on, well, Sustainable Development) released a report called “Prosperity without Growth.” It dared to suggest that endless economic growth might not be good for either humanity or the planet. It made a bit of a splash and here, rushed into print to keep the momentum going, is the full-length book of the same name, authored by Tim Jackson. (Earthscan, 2009, 264 pages)

It's relatively easy reading, if you're familiar with the academic style of writing. If you are not, you may find it a bit dry. Jackson's intended audience is, I think, the policy makers and the people who influence them. That's fair enough, but this is NOT the popular book that is going to have people emailing and facebooking about the perils of economic growth and the need for a rethink. Maybe that book can't be written?

Roughly speaking, the first half lays out the problems and points out that increased efficiency isn't going to mean less impact on the earth. The second half talks of the solutions, e.g. chapters entitled “the transition to a sustainable economy” and “a lasting prosperity.” Therein lies the all-too-typical problem of books of this nature: so much time is spent laying out the problem, that there is little space left for “solutions,” which tend to be a bit of a rushed shopping list. This book is much less guilty than some other recent efforts (e.g. All Consuming), and perhaps Jackson is keeping more specific recommendations in reserve for a sequel. Or perhaps he wanted to avoid the danger of being too prescriptive, of building castles in the air without proper foundations.

This book will NOT give you an overview of current thinking about the dilemmas of economics and environment. With a couple of exceptions (some brief mentions of Mishan and Daly) Jackson, in this book, ignores the existing body of work. He especially ignores the efforts of eco-Marxists/eco-feministslike Ted Benton, Joel Kovel, John Bellamy Foster, and James O'Connor, Ariel Salleh and so forth, presumably because he doesn't want to taint his brand and offer critics an easy excuse to ignore him. That's an understandable tactic, but it means there are a whole host of concepts- commodity fetishism, false needs, the treadmill of production, the metabolic rift, that don't get a look in.

Reading the book, with its complaints of over-consumption, you could be forgiven for thinking this isn't being pushed by a multi-billion pound advertising industry. Popular books like No Logo, Fast Food Nation and the like do not get a look in, which is a pity, since they are the kind of reference point that many readers will be aware of.

I suspect Jackson is hoping to do for 'steady-state economics' what Lord Stern did for climate change economics, but I don't think it will work. I don't think he has quite the same social capital as the former World Bank chief economist and senior Veep, aka Baron Stern of Brentford, and the argument is a harder sell than Stern's- it's a much more difficult thing for people to get their heads around. Jackson surely knows this latter point, but also underplays the vested interests- both psychological and societal between us and the acts needed to save ourselves via his prescriptions.

This book, which should be compulsory reading for the top bods of the City Council and Regional Development Agency, will confirm the already-converted in their views, offer a few ideas to those curious about our species' fate, but do little or nothing for those who simply don't care or those blind pro-growthers out there.

Environment Commission meeting #5

2009-11-02T15:05:00.001-08:00

Public Health Warning: These are not anything approaching official minutes, and aren't pretending to be.

The latest Environment Commission meeting (see here and here and here and here for previous reports) took place today in at Manchester University, in a converted church. (No jokes about “not having a prayer”, please, that would be childish). It was preceeded by a "policy exchange", but we can't report that because MCFly's invite went missing - presumably lost in a pile of undelivered mail.

Attendance was fairly good, with a few notable absences (apologies given)- such as Angie Robinson of the Chamber of Commerce (interviewed by MCFly here) and Andy Cliffe of Manchester Airport Group (ooh, the story we want to tell you about THEM, but it's embargoed). The University is still tussling over who will sit on the Commission, but the Health Commission is keen to send someone.

The chair of the Commission, Cllr Dave Goddard was unavoidably detained elsewhere (not due to congestion, we hope) so Cllr Neil Swannick chaired. Last time MCFly this 6'4” gent in action, he was mildly discombobulated by a heckler. That was Thursday last at the Town Hall, and the heckler was a scurrying mouse, not a rat (that would have been too appropriate).

Mike Reardon gave some verbal reports-
the City Region process continues apace, with High Level meetings About to Take Place.
“Roadshows” about the Environment Commission have taken place in 4 of the 10 AGMA councils. They're not just about flying the EC flag, but teasing out local expertise and figuring out how to “cascade” it (MCFly's word, not theirs- we've been infected by our Bull's Hit Bingo game).
6 more Local Authorities, and the Passenger Transport Executive and the Waste Disposal Agency remain to be visited by the Roadshow Warriors.
The EC's communications bod, Janine Watson, gave a brief overview of what's going on. Principally, using Copenhagen as a “hook” (possibly dangerous- if it goes as badly as some are suggesting). The EC now has a page on the revamped AGMA website
It will have specific images and mugshots of Commissioners and further information shortly. Maybe even some “Big Messages” too.

Then Cllr Mark Alcock and David Hytch gave a quick summary of their fact-finding trip to Milan, which has implemented an “ecopass” system to improve air quality in the city centre. Classic carrot and stick, with 'clean vehicles' getting in for free and a sliding scale for the dirty to dirtiest vehicles.

This was followed by discussion of commissioner's roles, and who was going to take on what, in either a leading or supporting capacity. It was agreed (MCFly thinks) that different commissioners would operate differently, and there was no one size fits all. There was general agreement that taking on too much and then having to drop it was a Very Bad Idea. At the same time, there was concern about whether the Commission had a feel for the specifics of environmental problems in the conurbation (asthma hotspots, water quality, waste etc), and that a specific Business workstream might be in order.

The question of staffing levels came up. At present Sarah Davies and Mike Reardon are full time, with various other bits of staffing too. There were many applications for the Policy and Programme Manager job, with interviews happening in the next few weeks. There are also various offers of funding- some firm, some not - on the table for various projects.
This was followed by a presentation about “A Greater Manchester Environment, Planning and Housing Research Resource” (headline- people being poached from various AGMA places for work on climate resilience, understanding opportunities for carbon reduction etc
Apparently (you read it here first) Greater Manchester is to be used as a 'test-bed' for work on climate adaptation/resilience and the roles and responsibilities and private sector 'buy-in' around this.

Then there was a waste discussion, but MCFly reporters are only human (at best), and frankly, our attention had wandered a bit... One very good point was made though, by a Commissioner, that there seemed to be insufficient focus on waste reduction before we got to re-use, recycling etc.

Finally: Following the release of the government's “low carbon transition plan” over the summer “Low Carbon Economic Areas” seem to be the flavour of the month, though Mike Reardon warned that there was no pot of gold over that particular rainbow. As reported in a previous MCFly (34? Lost count), the Northwest is angling at being the LCEA for the built environment.
High level meetings are taking place and More Information Will be Forthcoming Shortly.

On a related note, it seems that the Climate Change Agency might morph a bit to fit that particular funding framework- time will tell.

In any other business, the major point was the 10:10 campaign. Manchester City Council has signed up (go Team Manchester!!) with Stockport, Oldham and Bury making moves. It was agreed that the Environment Commission would recommend to AGMA exec that all the LAs sign up...

The EC next meets in January, and by then MCFly hopes to have pinned down a lot more about some of the outstanding issues, who is responsible for what, hopes and expectations for 2010 etc.

Searching for Sustainable Urbanism in Manchester

2009-11-02T11:32:00.000-08:00

In the spring of this year, my partner and I moved to Manchester from the US and immediately, our carbon footprint decreased by half. No, I haven’t done the calculations to prove this, this is merely an estimate based on the average carbon footprint for each country (American residents emit about 19 metric tons annually versus 9.4 metric tons for British residents).

It’s easy to see how this happened. We ditched our single-family, detached house in the US for a high-rise flat in the Manchester city centre. Our automobile trips to work, the grocery store, and the movies have been replaced with lots of walking and the occasional bus or train ride. And we simply buy less because everything costs more in the UK. In short, we haven’t done anything extraordinary; we just conformed to the built-in systems and customs of our newly-adopted country (and to be honest, resistance would be futile).

This is great news for us as newcomers, a sort of passive environmentalism that allows us to reduce our contribution to climate change without making any drastic changes to our lives (well, except for moving to a new country, of course). If only this approach would apply to everyone. But it seems unlikely that we will all move to another country to reduce our carbon footprints. Anyone up for Somalia? Burundi? Afghanistan?

Beyond the built-in conditions that involuntarily reduce our carbon footprints, I’m interested in the opportunities and challenges that Greater Manchester presents for carbon mitigation and adaptation. Urban areas were once seen as being in opposition to nature, with their high concentrations of people and pollution along with a marked lack of greenery and undisturbed land. But the environmental perspective on cities has changed in the few decades and now, urban living is understood as the key to a greener, zero-carbon future. Cities offer a number of ecological and social benefits: high-density housing, close proximity to work and services, sharing of infrastructure services, and convenient mass transit options.

So what is Manchester doing to work towards this new idea of green urbanism? I’ve done some exploring in the city centre to find inspirational examples and frankly, I haven’t found too much to write home about. Despite its name, the Green Quarter is one of the most disappointing redevelopment projects. Tall residential towers make for an efficient city but one that lacks character and charm.
Spinningfields, Castlefield, and the Salford Quays are all well-known regeneration projects but they are also rather sterile from my perspective. And I’m patiently awaiting the completion of New East Manchester and the Oxford Road Quarter. In all of these developments, the bones are there for a greener, more livable city but the flesh has yet to grow (perhaps this will happen in time).

This leads me to ask a significant question about the future of the city: how does urban development happen in Manchester? How does change come about? From what I gather, the Manchester City Council practices a form of urban development that is largely closed off to public input and participation. Instead, commercial developers hold meetings with municipal officials behind closed doors, some secret criteria are applied by the powers that be and the development request is either granted or denied. There is no master plan for realizing a sustainable, livable, and resilient city, and residents are treated as passive receivers rather than integral participants in new urban futures. Is this the best route for realizing a sustainable city?

Should we trust in our City Council to “do the right thing” when it comes to climate change and sustainable urban development? Is this how great cities come into being?

Perhaps I’m looking in the wrong places and I have yet to find the community of artists, designers, private property owners, and residents who are collaborating with the City Council to make Manchester more livable and green. For me, the Northern Quarter is the only place in the city centre that feels real, that exudes cultural and material qualities that are unique to the city. The rest of Manchester feels like a city-in-the-making, or a city that is gradually shedding its reputation as the first industrial city but is unsure of what it will become.

I’m not arguing that the entire City Centre or Greater Manchester should be like the Northern Quarter. And I’m not arguing that there isn’t a place for High Street commercialism, international business activity, and modernist buildings made of glass and steel. But it seems to me that we desperately need a city centre that has a variety of different places that people can call home, work, and everything in between in order to transform Manchester into a sustainable metropolis. And to make this a reality, we need an active citizenry that is involved in the shaping of the city, both materially and culturally.

I can imagine a very different Manchester fifty years from now. It is diverse, dense, active, alive, and a highly desirable place to live. Many of the historic warehouse buildings have been converted into residential and commercial space while infill activities have taken advantage of the vast amount of undeveloped property through the city. New buildings, parks, and public spaces have brought the city to life. And it is notably quieter and cleaner in Manchester, as the streets are dominated by people rather than single-occupant vehicles and carbon-belching buses.

My vision of Manchester’s future isn’t a utopian dream by any stretch, it’s quickly happening in many cities around the globe. And it is happening through innovative partnerships between public and private individuals and organizations that share the same goal: to create more livable and greener cities. The challenge is to adopt these ideas to the Mancunian context and in the process, create a city that reflects both the local history and people. It is only then that Manchester will have the potential to be considered a world-class city.

MCFly 36- Bury Council statement

2009-11-01T23:18:00.001-08:00

A MCFly reader received this email from Bury Council, which we publish un-edited.

Like Harrogate, Bury Council is very serious about reducing carbon emissions and in May 2009 we were accepted onto the Carbon Trust’s Local Authority Carbon Management Plan.
Over a ten months period we will now work closely with the Carbon Trust within their tried and tested framework to produce an Action Plan and to integrate carbon management firmly into the processes and procedures of the council.

We have set ourselves an aspirational target of a 35% reduction in our carbon emissions in the next 5 years and our plan will set out the measures that will be taken towards this target and will progress carbon reduction at the council into the future. The idea of setting such a demanding target is that this will push us to identify as many carbon saving actions as we can and to continue to look for opportunities as we progress.

The Carbon Trust have a wealth of experience and expertise in relation to carbon reduction and under the Carbon Management Programme they will provide technical and change management support and guidance to help us to realise practical carbon emissions savings. The main focus is to reduce emissions under the council’s control such as buildings, street lighting, and business transport.

So far we have established our 2008/09 baseline which basically describes where our carbon emissions come from. We now know that most of our emissions come from our buildings and that just under half of the buildings emissions come from our schools.

We are now in the processs of identifying the actions for our Action Plan. These will include actions that are already being implemented and proposed alongside new projects from a wide area of the council operation including : - energy efficiency of our buildings, energy efficiency of our schools, streetlighting, transport measures, awareness raising campaigns, procurement and wider opportunities for combined heat and power and district heating.

We will have our Action Plan completed by April 2010 and then from then we will continue to implement the measure identified and carefully monitor progress.

The Government have recently introduced National Indicator 185 which requires the council to report on percentage carbon dioxide reductions from its own operations each year. Bury Council have designated this indicator in our Local Area Agreement which means that if we don't reduce our carbon emissions we recieve less money in our performance reward grant

Chris Horth
Unit Manager - Environment

Bull's Hit Bingo and sanity maintenance

2009-11-01T12:35:00.000-08:00

The last couple of weeks Team MCFly has inflicted several dreadful meetings on itself, in the name of schmoozing and snout-in-troughing. It's not the rigid and unimaginative non-participatory style that irks the most. No, it's the blizzard of bu... zzwords. That's what we will call them.

So, to save our own sanity, we've come up (with a little help from our friends, especially Master Cartoonist Marc Roberts) with "Bull's Hit Bingo" cards.

As the blurb here says

These "bingo" cards are for anyone who has ever sat in a meeting where the speakers are just spouting all the right words, (engagement, empowerment, grassroots etc) but it's obvious that their brain and the audience's ears are running on auto-pilot. These cards are for anyone who has ever wanted to stand up and say "bull's hit" but never had the bottle. Now you have the perfect excuse; if you flourish the completed bingo card, the speaker is sure to see the funny side of it, oh yes. "Inspired" by our hair-pulling, toe-curling and teeth-grinding at the meetings of various public bodies that really ought to know better, these cards are an essential component in the cognitive toolkit of carbon-based life-forms engaged in collective intellectual interaction going forwards."

You can

see the complete list of words here,
download the ten cards (as a pdf document) here
make your own via this page here
and read a few brief articles here

Of crow bars and foundations

2009-11-01T12:19:00.000-08:00

[This is an expanded version of MCFly 36's lead story, entitled "Getting facts out of these guys? You need a crow bar."]

They don't want you to know. They don't want us to tell you. Who? What? Well, the popular chain of bars under the "Kro" logo is going to be launching a “partnership” with Foundation (see box below) to promote climate awareness and action among Manchester's drinking classes.

But since these sorts of partnerships always run the risk of “greenwash”, MCFly wanted to get a comment, any comment, out of both Kro and Foundation about what the deal actually entails. As we wrote in the last MCFly-

“at time of going to press, we are unable to say whether there are ANY firm commitments from Kro to do anything to prove they are walking the talk. If they don't voluntarily and rapidly get shot of their wretched patio heaters [see bottom of this blog post] that are directly heating the planet, they will be a laughing stock, they will make Foundation a laughing stock and they will create cynicism and contempt for the very "eco-branding" that they want to promote.”

Since then MCFly has been trying in vain to get answers. We've emailed and phoned repeatedly. At time of going to press, we have had no reply from either organisation. A search of both their websites, on October 31^st, gives no mention of the proposed partnership, so it may have been put on hold while the two organisations decide what to do.

Background
On October 13 Foundation announced on their twitter account “We're looking forward to the launch of the Kro Bar and Foundation partnership, starting the 1st November. More details to follow.”

MCFly was told that there would be an opportunity for Kro patrons to support Foundation's work (perhaps by voluntarily donating money during transactions) and that Foundation's profile would also be raised. Given that the Copenhagen Climate talks loom large, and Kro is a Danish-themed chain, it must have seemed like a no-brainer.

Foundation
Foundation is the newly-created Climate Fund for the North West, and“gathers up donations from people and businesses and uses them to support individual carbon reduction projects across the Northwest.”

Hved er Kro?
Kro is a (deservedly) popular chain of cafe bars around Manchester (see www.kro.co.uk). The first one was set up opposite the Manchester University Student's Union in 1999, and the business has won a string of awards, and expanded rapidly. It is run by Mark Ruby, whose family is Danish.

Here's where YOU come in, gentle readers. We hope you'll have more luck than we have had.

Write to email/phone Kro and Foundation and tell them you want answers All the usual things- be polite but persistent etc. Think about taking your custom elsewhere until you get a sensible reply.

Kro HQ
Manchester Science Park,
61 Pencroft Way, Manchester
M15 6AY
Tel:0161 232 9796
Fax: 0161 273 7550
Email: oldabbey@kro.co.uk

Foundation
c/o Groundwork
First Floor, Fourways House
57 Hilton Street
Manchester
M1 2EJ
0161 237 3200
Foundation Chief Officer
mark.turner@climatefund.org.uk

Patio Heaters
Wyevale, Britain's biggest garden centre chain, stopped selling patio heaters two and a half years ago, due to climate change concerns.

Fiona Hall - a Liberal Democrat MEP – wrote a report that called for a ban on outdoor heaters. This call was has been backed by the European Parliament.
But Fiona Hall told the BBC that figures she had seen showed that if a car was run for a year it would emit three tonnes of carbon dioxide, while the figure for an outdoor heater would be four tonnes.

From Euro MPs back patio heaters ban BBC website 31 Jan 2008