The Open Days provide the ideal framework for organisations – local authorities, voluntary organisations, private industry and universities; amongst others – from the East of England to showcase good practice in the field of strengthening regional competitiveness, territorial co-operation and social and economic cohesion, to share experiences with others and to impact on the political debates among EU institutions and Member States.

Sarah Murray, Team Leader in the East of England Brussels Office commented:

“The Open Days event allows us to showcase the East of England’s capacity for creating growth and jobs, implementing European Union cohesion policy and demonstrate the importance of the local level for good European governance. This year’s event is particularly important as it takes place on the eve of an intensive debate about the reform of Cohesion Policy post-2013, which will influence the level of EU structural funding available to the East of England.

Our office is working to showcase some of the best practice that is taking place in the region to demonstrate the value of European Regional Development Funding to the East of England – a relatively prosperous region in a wealthy member state – in order to secure future funding opportunities.

For example, Gareth Jones, UK CEED (UK Centre for Economic and Environmental Development), Peterborough is speaking at seminar on ‘Better cluster support services for green innovation’

A record number of partners will be leading, chairing or participating in a range of seminars over the course of the week which will keep the East of the England in the vanguard of EU policy development:

• David Morrall, Europe and International Director at the East of England Development Agency

(EEDA); is chairing a seminar on ‘Putting eco-innovation at the heart of regional economic growth’

• Dr John French, from the University of East Anglia, Norwich, will be presenting the InCrops project – a new virtual enterprise hub which stimulates commercial activity in the alternative and non-food crop sector and contributes to the low carbon economic development of the region.

• Another regional delegate is chairing a seminar entitled ‘From knowledge to growth: stimulating the green economy’

• University Campus Suffolk is leading a session entitled “Positioning for Competitiveness: The role regional universities in promoting economic growth”.

• Peterborough City Council along with IBM is leading a seminar featuring its ‘Sustainable City Visualisation project’

• Mark Mitchell, chair of COVER (Community and Voluntary Forum Eastern Region) and chief executive of Community Action Dacorum is speaking at a seminar “The European Social Fund support for administrative capacity”

• Southend on Sea Borough Council will be represented by their North West Europe BAPTS (Boosting Advanced Public Transport System) project which is delivering a seminar entitled “Think global, act local Territorial cooperation of cities for European model solutions on clean urban transport”

• Gareth Jones, UKCEED (UK Centre for Economic and Environmental Development), Peterborough is speaking at seminar on ‘Better cluster support services for green innovation’

Further details on the programme and how to participate are available via http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/conferences/od2010/index.cfm?nmenu=1&sub=100 or by contacting Paul Laffin on +32 2 289 1200 or at paul.laffin@east-of-england.eu

The EnviroCluster Retrofit Project, which is currently retrofitting a house in Bretton to cut its carbon footprint, was highly commended in the Green Builder and Designer category.

Gareth Jones, EnviroCluster Manager, said “I am delighted that the project has been given this award which is not just for UK CEED, but for the whole team of experts who make up the project consortium. Hopefully we will win more awards once the project has been completed”.

The award, which was sponsored by Eco Building Products Limited, was presented to UK CEED in July.

The stoves have been thoroughly tested through a severe winter “dzud”. A “dzud is a term used in Mongolia for an abnormally severe winter where temperatures dipped down as low as -50°C.

The monitoring results showed some impressive results with a 50% increase in fuel efficiency, and a noticeable reduction in particulate and GHG emissions.

The project team is aiming at implementing phase two of the project before the onset of winter with a trail of 200 stoves within the identified Ger districts of Ulaanbaatar.

The monitoring report was made possible through funding provided by the Waterloo Foundation.

If you have any questions please contact John Pickstone  (j.pickstone(at)ukceed.org) or call 01733 311644

It is commonly touted that we are currently consuming the resources of a planet and half. This statistic clearly requires a time component. Different resources have different valve, reserves and rates of extraction and consumption. This is most true of our most precious resource, petroleum, the lubricant of our economies.

Peak Oil could be fast approaching, if it hasn’t be already been surpassed. Lloyds of London and the Royal Institute of International Affairs have recently released their report “Sustainable Energy Security: strategic risks and opportunities for business.” Terry Macalister, writing in the Guardian, described the review as “groundbreaking because it comes from the heart of the City and contains the kind of dire warnings that are more associated with environmental groups or others accused by critics of resorting to hype.” The authoritative report stresses increasing uncertainty with energy supply, and increasing uncertainty and volatility in general.

To expand on the point of the different resources, the Guardian has reported that the production of phosphorus, an essential ingredient in modern agriculture, could soon be coming to a head. The metals Indium and Gallium are frequently referred to as ‘threatened’. Ethan Gutmann in his ARS Technica blog takes the interesting stance these metals are scarce, but not about to run out. “It’s possible that we can find replacements or change our technology altogether…of course, that is not to say that we can replace any material we want.” Metals have the potential to be recycled in a closed loop system, as opposed to our current open loop, were estimates put the recycling rate of metals at 10 – 15%. With oil, on the other hand, once it’s used, it’s gone.

Rather than peak supply, economists are increasingly concerned about surging demand and the knock on effect on price. Current demand is estimated by the International Energy Agency at 83.8 million barrels per day. In 2014 it is, perhaps conservatively, predicted at 89.0 million barrels. Prices are estimated at $48.5 and $61.2 per barrel respectively. The Sustainable Energy Security report sees 2015 as a tipping point. Currently the Middle East, including Sudan are pivotal zones, able to export to both western and eastern markets, however from 2015, Asia-Pacific nations will need to import more than the Middle East can export. In 2007 Daniel Howard, in the Independent hypothesised,

“In recent years the once-considerable gap between demand and supply has narrowed. Last year that gap all but disappeared. The consequences of a shortfall would be immense. If consumption begins to exceed production by even the smallest amount, the price of oil could soar above $100 a barrel. A global recession would follow.”

As the price of oil increases, the demand for coal is increasing. The Sustainable Energy Security report explains there is a “clash between policies to keep the cost of energy down and reduce dependence on foreign imports by using cheap domestic resources, and policies to mitigate climate change.

The production of oil fields can be modelled using a Bell Shape curve. This entails a sharp rate of decline following the peak plateau. Countries and companies are notoriously reticent about their oil reserves. Often the decline of production is hushed. Britain’s decline was successfully kept quiet for two years following its peak in 1999.

The imminence of peak oil is not shared by all. John Hofmeister, President of Royal Dutch Shell, points to unconventional sources, such as the Canadian tar sands, a natural mixture of sands, water and oil, estimated at around 100 million barrels, or oil shale in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming. Dr Christoph Rühl, Chief Economist at BP, said, “Peak oil has been predicted for 150 years. It has never happened, and it will stay this way.”

Sarah Mukherjee, explaining an UK Energy Research Centre report for the BBC website, said

“As this report points out, the debate about peak oil is a polarised one. On one side, there are those who say that global supplies have already reached their zenith, and we are unprepared for the crisis that will hit world economies in the years to come. On the other, there are oil companies and many energy analysts who dismiss the notion that supplies are running out. The report’s authors admit it is hard to tell who is right, as the world lacks a reliable gauge with which to measure oil depletion.”

Website Links: guardian.co.uk/Terry_Macalister; chathamhouse.org.uk/sustainable_energy_security; guardian.co.uk/peak_phosphate; arstechnica.com/Ethan_Gutmann; internationalenergyagency.org/oil_market_research; wikipedia.org/peak_oil and bbc.co.uk/Sarah_Mukherjee

There are some nice graphs and interesting podcasts here: energystandard.com and another interesting article: independent.co.uk/Steve_Connor

Eminent business leaders, experts and policy makers are herding for the Global Business of Biodiversity Symposium in London today. The conference is a stepping stone for The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) project, which is releasing an interim report. The latest report will focus on the pivotal roll business and enterprise have to play in how natural capital is managed, safeguarded and invested in.

As a call to arms, principal author of the report, Pavan Sukhdev, launched a blistering broadside on the soulless corporation. Quoted in yesterday’s Guardian, Sukhdev warned “it’s up to society and its leaders and thinkers to design the checks and balances that are needed to ensure that the corporation does not simply become cancerous, and that’s something that sometimes we do and sometimes we really don’t.”

David Pepper in his book Modern Environmentalism, claims 1992 EC regulation to direct companies to make regular cradle-to-grave evaluations of their environmental impacts for public scrutiny, was “so watered down as to be almost useless” as a result of lobbying by business and industry.

Building on Sukhdev’s comments, multinational companies can have a beneficial as well as detrimental impact to the environment. Richard Black, for the BBC website, cites the mining conglomerate Rio Tinto as an example of a ‘smart company’.

“Rio Tinto has been criticised on environmental and human rights grounds (like others in the field). In 2004, the company adopted a “Net Positive Impact” (NPI) commitment on biodiversity. This sees it working with environment organisations to protect important areas from direct mining impacts and putting funds into conservation to ‘offset’ damage caused.”

Unilever, BT, Morrisons and Rolls-Royce recently topped an ENDS index of energy efficiency and carbon reduction. This is an area where smaller enterprises could make a constructive payback. Not all green credential should be believed. The Guardian has recently divulged that toiletries and cleaning solutions labelled as ‘eco’ products lacked evidence for their claims. Off course, to buy green, we should consume less.

Ultimately, perhaps the corporation is not sustainable. David Pepper gives a Marxist critique,

“There is the contradiction of overproduction. Capital accumulation depends on selling goods and services in the marketplace for profit, that is, the surplus over what it costs to produce them. A principal item of cost is labour. It follows, therefore, that the labour force, by definition, cannot afford to buy all the things that it produces, since it is not paid the full market value. Hence there are too ‘too many’ goods and services for the immediate market, so there must be a constant effort to bring more people into the market by geographical expansion…when profits are made they must be reinvested in more production to keep the process going.”

So where does shortfall of capital come from? Clearly, there are other fundamental forces; there are no geographical areas where capitalism has not reached, even by their barter the peripheral are part of the system. Certainly, the capitalist system needs continual expansion. But progress does not have to leave the by-product of environmental degradation. Rather, the reform of our auditory system, as recommended by TEEB report, may be one of our best ways of going forward.

Website Links: guardian.co.uk/soulless_corporations; bbc.co.uk/business_profit_from_nature; guardian.co.uk/ENDS_carbon_index; guardian.co.uk/green_products_no_evidence and guardian.co.uk/accounting_business_environmental_impact

The Integrated Appraisal Toolkit, launched at the Council’s Sustainable Development Member Officer Working Group on Thursday 13^th May, is designed to help staff and members of the public assess proposals, such as policies, strategies, projects and other initiatives, against key sustainable development criteria – integrating environmental, social and economic objectives into one process.

The toolkit summarises policy and performance information specific to Perth and Kinross over the following 11 key subject areas: Built Environment, Climate Change, Community, Consumption & Production, Culture & Recreation, Economy, Equality & Diversity, Health and Well-being, Lifelong Learning, Natural Environment and Transport & Connectivity.

This information can then be applied by the user to answer a series of questions, based on the Council’s Principles for Sustainable Development, to help decide whether their proposal is contributing towards achieving sustainable development. Each question is assessed using a scoring system based on the perceived impact of the proposal by the user. When all 11 theme questions have been considered, an overall sustainability assessment (the final report) of the proposal is produced using a traffic light system.

This highlights areas in which the user may be able to improve the proposal, for example by challenging conflicting responses, overcoming adverse effects or harnessing economic, social or environmental opportunities that were not originally anticipated at the outset of the proposal.

The online nature of the toolkit means that proposals can be assessed and modified by several team members simultaneously from a number of locations, promoting and enhancing partnership working at all levels throughout Perth and Kinross.

UK CEED has developed a number of online toolkits which assist local authorities, regional development agencies, businesses and individuals to make more informed decisions about sustainability.

To find out more about UK CEED’s Integrated Appraisal Toolkits please call John Pickstone or Sarah Weaving on 01733 311644.

- ENDS –

About UK CEED

A charitable foundation established in 1984 by leading figures from the business, government and scientific communities. The centre aims to demonstrate benefits to business and the economy of good environmental practice. This is achieved through research, promotion of good practice, provision of policy advice to government and business, demonstration projects and engagement activities.

About Perth and Kinross

Situated in the heart of Scotland, Perth and Kinross is renowned for its outstanding quality of life, exhilarating scenery, rich heritage, the hospitality and creativity of its people, which makes it a fantastic place to live, work and visit.

Perth & Kinross Council is a large, diverse organisation which works for the benefit of all the citizens and communities of the area. The Council delivers or facilitates a wide range of services which impact on almost every aspect of people’s lives, at every stage of their lives, including education, roads, housing, care for vulnerable people, parks, street cleansing, economic development and refuse collection.

The Committee on Climate Change relayed their annual report to Parliament. Between 2008 and 2009 UK greenhouse gas emissions have fallen by 8.6%. In contrast, CO2 emissions fell by only 0.6% annually in the preceding period, relative to the 2-3% annual cuts required in the period to 2020 to meet carbon budgets. Hence, the UK budget has been met, by a whisker, the carbon budgets, chiefly as a result of the recession and other exogenous factors such as fuel price rise. 

The “underlying progress, which we assess by looking at the impact of specific policy measures, was limited relative to that needed to put the UK on the path towards the 2050 target, implying that a step change in the pace of emissions reduction is still required.”

The CCC “raise the issue of whether the second and third budgets should be tightened in the face of the easier short term challenge.”

The committee highlighted a number of policy recommendations which have the potential to drive a step change. These include:

• Electricity generation, where the market needs to be reformed to take account of strategic priorities, with new ‘carrots and sticks’ persuading generators to adopt low-carbon technologies, including an early demonstration of carbon capture from gas fired generation in addition to coal, and a minimum price on carbon.
• A greater push towards home insulation, addressing all the barriers preventing people investing in domestic energy efficiency.
• Setting more ambitious targets for the number of electric cars on the road, and protecting funds aimed at accelerating their introduction and acceptance.
• Encouraging farmers to use fertilisers more efficiently, reducing emissions and cost. The use of nitrogen fertiliser was singled out, which can release nitrogen oxides, themselves potent greenhouse gases.

The CCC chief executive David Kennedy highlighted the growing criticism of lack of action, quoted by Richard Black, writing for the BBC.

“We had less than 1 Gigawatt (GW) of renewable capacity added to the system in 2009, we need in the order of 2-2.5GW added each year over the next 10 years in order to meet our carbon budget and European targets for renewables. Is it going to happen in its own? No; we’ve had a light touch approach for years in the UK, we’ve talked a good game, but we’ve seen that emissions haven’t reduced enough as a result of policies.”

The policy debate is foregrounded by further apocalyptic warnings from science. A new study from the Potsdam Institute, predicts with current committed targets, warming will be in a range of 1.7 – 4.6C. However, these optimistic models have extrapolated potential commitments, not enacted by many nations.

Kevin Anderson, Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, speaking at the Gov Today Carbon Reduction Conference, said the implications a 4C change in temperature for a country mitigating for a 2C increase would be disastrous. Anderson is critical of the response of government to the Herculean task of nullifying greenhouse emissions, and notes it is a battle not measured against 1990 emissions but the total amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.

As a final comment, Juliette Jowitt and Christine Ottery wrote in the Guardian:

“The predictions will be particularly worrying for many watchers because the 2C target was based on research which suggested that at that level there was only a low to medium risk of key changes to the conditions in which humans survive; however an update of the ‘burning embers diagram’ by the authors, published last year by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in the US, suggested that at 2C there greater risk in all categories, including a significant to high risk to unique and threatened ecosystems, of extreme weather events and a global distribution of the worst threats.”

Website links: theccc.org.uk; bbc.co.uk/Richard_Black; guardian.co.uk/Jowitt_and_Ottery and pnas.org/large_image_of_burning_ember

The difference between supply and demand is described as the water gap. The size of the gap will depend on the growth of demand. Supply can be constained by either physical or economic conditions. There are various approaches to close the gap, from most cost effective, to the most palatable. Different places will have different solutions. ‘Charting our Water Future’ compiles case studies of the fastest emerging economies, Brazil, South Africa, India and China, often amalgamated to BASIC. Juliette Jowitt, in a commentary for the Guardian, disbelievingly noticed “that 42% of all project demand will be required by [these] four countries.”

Solutions in India will achieve the highest impact by reducing the amount of water agriculture uses. In China, it is industrial and residential uses which are increasing rapidly, here building water infrastructure and pushing through water saving reforms are the best solutions.

Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, Chairman of Nestlé and signatory of the report, argues water needs a more representative price. Writing in the Guardian, Brabeck-Letmathe advances “no country understands the water crisis better than South Africa.” One of South Africa’s progressive policies is a two tear pricing structure. There is a subsidised price for the amount of water needed for basic sanitation, cooking and drinking, and charging the full cost of infrastructure for additional use. Brabeck-Letmathe explains:

“While it is a basic human right to have access to subsidised water for hydration and hygiene, why should washing your car, filling a swimming pool or watering a garden be priced in the same way? Full cost recovery for these activities will not only ensure that we are more judicious in our use, but will also, crucially, help repair our leaking infrastructure. In the poorest areas, it will also help to extend pipes so that water reaches more homes.”

Jowitt describes the level of investment proposed as gargantuan, but “the big question…is how to get it done;” that is to say few politicians would relish the spectre of raising the price of water.

Website links: guardian.co.uk/Brabeck-Letmathe; guardian.co.uk/Juilette Jowitt and nestle.com

This year the awards linked with Race Online 2012, the national campaign for digital inclusion led by the Government’s Digital Champion Martha Lane Fox.

The winning digital inclusion project was the NHS Choices ‘Libraries Inclusion Programme’ which aims to tackle health inequalities and improve the health of excluded groups through digital engagement programmes in libraries.

The judges singled out one organisation for special recognition for a true, long-term commitment to promoting digital inclusion: Bristol based social enterprise, Knowle West Media Centre. This project demonstrated considerable social benefits creating jobs and building skills as well as changing community perception in one of the most deprived areas in the country.

The awards highlighted independent living projects, such as the winning entry, Self Help Services’ ‘Community Based Computerised Cognitive Behavioural Services’ programme which aims to deliver Cognitive Behavioural Therapy Services (cCBT) to those experiencing mild to moderate mental health problems within non-stigmatising community settings.

The Sustainable Use of ICT in schools category saw the title of winner to the Djanogly City Academy Nottingham, Nottingham Blue Coat and Technology College and Fernwood Schools’ ‘Energy Reduction Project’ run by students from 3 schools looking at innovative ways to halve the Academy’s energy consumption.

There were an impressive variety of projects designed to improve public services. The winning entry, ‘One Link’, an Isle of Wight Council project which provides a ‘one-stop-shop’ for information which empowers people with long-term health and social care needs to better manage their condition.

Looking at the area of green IT, the Energy Efficiency category was topped by TelecityGroup’s Energy Management Programme, which is improving the environmental efficiency of its data centres through innovative operation and design.

The judges selected Consense as the overall winner of this year’s awards for their ‘Open Debate Online Consultation System’.  In 2005 Consense launched the online tool which enables businesses to put forward their plans to local communities and engage in discussion helping to form a planning system. It is unique in that it aims to engage the silent majority – those who may not have much free time, are without a preconceived opinion or are in support but don’t realise the value of their comment. All this makes for much more of a balanced and accurate account of public opinion.

In her keynote address at the awards, Saeeda Begum, a Cabinet Office Social Enterprise Ambassador and Director of Trescom, praised the finalists for being at the forefront of innovation in ICT for environmental and social improvement and encouraged other organisations to follow the best practice demonstrated by this year’s winners.

Following the event the dissemination of best practice will be further facilitated by the publication of an award digital magazine with details of all the highly commended and winning projects with film, photos and articles.

For a full list of finalists and further information on the National eWell-Being Awards visit sustainitawards.co.uk or contact Sarah Weaving at UK CEED on 01733 311644 or s.weaving@ukceed.org.

As Celia Cole writes in yesterday’s Guardian, “part of the problem is our confused sense of self.” Leonard successfully shows our obsessive relationship with material wealth is jeopardising our social relationships. Relationships are the “biggest determining factor in our happiness [once our basic needs are met]”

Leonard does in fact argue for more consumption. But only for those, largely in the developing world, whose income is below the poverty line.

Interestingly, Leonard is critical of so-called ethical consumerism. “The real solution is not perfecting your ability to choose the best option, it’s getting that product off the shelf,” she says. “It’s increasingly looking like buying green delays people engaging with the political process.”

This engagement is contrary to James lovelock’s guiding philosophy is to “enjoy life while you can.” Lovelock’s outlook successfully refutes the problem of getting sustained action from the multitude.

However, we do live in a rich society. Peter Singer, although writing about money, draws out some interesting issues. “Money enables us to trade – and thus to benefit from each other’s special skills and advantages. Without money, we would be immeasurably poorer, and not only in a financial sense.” To quote Singer’s excellent Guardian article as such would misrepresent him. Like Leonard, Singer argues money is widening the social and emotional distances between us.

So is ‘money, or indeed consumption, the root of all evil’? Singer notes, this quip isn’t usually taken to “mean that money itself is the root of evil. Like Saint Paul, from whom the quote comes, [people] have in mind the love of money.”

I would argue money should be enjoyed. Many people work hard for their money. Is there a right to consume? Many workers, on the lower rungs, feel alienated by their labour, (although different perspectives can be more positive.) However along this line of thought, Marx argues money is ultimately alienating and a means of control.

Clearly, consumption is not a means of fulfilment. Contentment has historically decreased as affluence has increased. Many of us in the UK could have more enjoyment with less money: not withstanding the corresponding effect of less time spent working. Hopefully, if we were to enter an age of austerity, our social fabric would go some way to being repaired. I particularly like the idea of Leonard and her neighbours tearing down the fences between their homes. “It’s not like a commune of anything. We are all just regular families in these six houses [who] share things. And we just have so much fun.”

There are ways forward to transform our material consumption. The vision is a closed material loop. This would limit the use of non-renewable materials and make waste obsolete, coupled with further intelligent design. However, Leonard doesn’t think we have all the answers yet. 

Leonard is sure of one thing though: “Change is inevitable. You can’t keep using one and a half planet’s worth of resources indefinitely.” Worryingly, however, our consumption is continuing to increase, with the middle class burgeoning in the emerging nations.

Website Links: guardian.co.uk/Celia_Cole; guardian.co.uk/Peter_Singer and guardian.co.uk/James_Lovelock