Obamarama!

The world celebrates as 'The One' is elected.

While I'm chuffed that the Bush Doctrine is dead, that Obama has shown that the colour of your skin and the nature of your name is no barrier to the highest positions in the world, and that Sarah Palin will never be near the presidency, I'm not getting prematurely excited on the environmental front.

While papers like the Guardian are proclaiming that there will be a new global climate deal and a huge boost to renewables, we should not forget what happened under the last Democrat president. Bill Clinton (then dubbed 'The First Black President" - a bit of a daft statement from today's perspective) and Al "Inconvenient Truth" Gore gutted the Kyoto agreement according to Tony Juniper. Clinton tried to add some green varnish to his rule by rushing through a raft of green legislation in the fag end months of his incumbency knowing that they would be booted into touch by the incoming Bush Jr.

So, while there is a much better chance of moving forward on climate under Obama and he's made all the right noises so far, I'm waiting to see what happens when the wheels of that aspiration hit the rough road of reality.

Blair does a Gore

Al Gore spent the Kyoto negotiations sticking spokes in the wheels. Now he's the champion of the world.

Tony Blair did nothing for the UK's carbon emissions while in office, now he's gonna save the world.

Funny how history repeats itself, isn't it?

Happy New Year!

Yes, I'm back at the keyboard at last after a decidedly ecologically dodgy festive period (flying, eating, drinking, excessive presents for small child). But now we're into the (hopefully) abstemious month of January (more exercise, less food), it seems like a good time to have a look back at 2007 from an eco-point of view.

In my Review of 2006, I was able to quote big events, like the Gore Movie and the Stern Report, as significant steps forward. Unfortunately, looking at 2007, while there were more proclamations of intent (domestically zero carbon homes by 2016 and legally binding carbon targets, internationally the Bali conference) there seems no significant shift from intent to action - emissions, waste and the over-consumption of natural resources continue to rise, and all our leaders do is simply pin the blame on China (where we have shifted our dirty industries). The UK Government has made a right mess of subsidising microrenewables - most of the grants have gone unclaimed and yet there seems no move towards the 'feed in tariff' that has seen the uptake of renewables boom in Germany (along with the industry).

In terms of big names, Al Gore's Live Earth concerts were a peculiar fish - nobody quite seemed to understand what they were for and the restrictions put on reporting by the BBC made the events a bit surreal (the Foos were great tho). In the UK, George Monbiot continued to rant at all and sundry and published the excellent Heat. We sadly lost Anita Roddick, who, love 'er or hate 'er, pulled the green consumerism market out of the grip of the yoghurt weavers and onto the high street.

The good news from the year comes from the private sector - our supermarkets are in a green oneupmanship battle, and we seem to be on the verge of a breakthrough in solar photovoltaics funded in part by Google which could make solar electricity as cheap as that from coal. But some sectors of industry are still trying to spin their way out of trouble - I reported on this awful attempt at justifying battery hens and just before Xmas I saw two adverts for 4x4s at the cinema that portrayed the urban streets as tough places requiring tough vehicles for survival - an obvious attempt to deflect the ridicule heaped on the drivers of 'Chelsea Tractors'.

So, in summary, 2007 saw plenty more promises and precious little action. Hopefully 2008 will provide a good bit more of the latter...

Live Earth - Eh?

Last night I sat down and watched a bit of Al Gore's Live Earth concerts and, when not distracted by the Pussycat Doll's gyrations, was left a bit baffled about the whole thing.

Lot's have people have said "Why should we listen to what all these rich rock stars jetting their way around the world, burning masses of energy in huge concerts have to say about climate change?". Well we didn't ask the same about rich rock stars and Live Aid/Live 8, so why are we so cynical about this one?

I suppose the problem came down to "what are they trying to do?". Raise money? Raise "awareness"? Lecture the audience? But none of these actually happened - just a big gig.

The BBC seemed to have the same problem - Jonathan Ross looked very uncomfortable presenting and no-one seemed to know whether it was a celebration or a protest (the PCDs didn't seem to know anything at all, bless their little hotpants). I switched off after Madonna shouted "If you want to save the planet, make some NOOOOOIZE" which I could have accepted from Spinal Tap, but not from some supposedly being serious.