In January 2010, I wrote a piece here about 10:10 and what steps we agreed, as a family, to take to reduce our carbon emissions over the year. Since January 2011 I have been intending to write an update of action which we actually took and whether we hit our targets.
Well, some we hit and some we missed. Just to remind you so that you will know what I am talking about, here is my list from 26 January 2010.
1. Monday is now a telly-free day. In fact it is a screen-free day so that people don’t just migrate from the telly to the computer.
2. We will turn off the computer earlier.
3. We will now drive to supermarkets a maximum of half as often as we used to, and use them primarily to stock up on store cupboard items. We will source fruit and veg from local shops and meat and sustainable fish directly from farms, producers and farmers markets.
4. Following on from this, we will spend more of our income in the village and buy less consumables elsewhere.
5. We will use our shopping trolley to carry stuff home from the local shops and hold our heads up high even when people laugh…..
6. We will drive at a maximum of 70 mph on motorways and try to chill out more when travelling and not to zip from A to B as fast as possible. We will drive slower on minor roads.
7. We will carry on turning down heating, turning off lights and making sure that electrical items aren’t left on standby.
So how did we do?
1. Screen free Mondays have been partly successful. The telly typically doesn't come on, Hugh and I have an earlier night as a result, and the kids grumble but don't really mind too much. I, however, completely fail when it comes to the computer. Generally I do some sort of work on a Monday so I need to access the internet, but then I am very undisciplined and look at Facebook and browse the news and yukkety yuk. I have also started giving the kids 20 minutes each on the computer and if I don't helicopter them, then this time extends till I do something about it.
On the plus side though, I also imposed a rule of no telly during holidays till 6pm. Great! Positive, active kids and family life for the most part and a respite when everyone's gasping for it.
2. We don't turn the computer off noticeably earlier. Oops, forgot about that. Will do better.
3. We use supermarkets much, much less. Not only do we avoid shopping there, we have almost stopped having them deliver, since a call from a driver who told me that he was over 30 miles away in Oxford, and I was so outraged that my shopping had taken a late night tour of much of South East England that I decided to try not to use the service again. I would guess that I mostly use supermarkets for store cupboard stuff now, which I buy about every 3 weeks, instead of doing a weekly shop. How much has that enriched my life! Even on holidays we have started shopping locally rather than getting one big load from Sainsbury's.
So, I source meat and fish from farmers' markets and Abel and Cole (not just for rich gits - if we shop carefully, we can get free range meat for less than £2 a kilo) I get a lot of fruit and veg from Abel and Cole too, although that is, in my opinion, expensive. I grow quite a lot of that stuff in the summer anyway. My hens poop out eggs generously and with abandon so that keeps us going too.
Shampoo, washing up liquid and all that sort of stuff I buy in bulk online. Cheaper, with less wasted packaging. Toilet paper I get from my local fairtrade rep. Kitchen paper is banned, except as a treat at Christmas.
I also worry less about running out of stuff. It seems to me to be a good lesson for everyone that our household stocks are limited and that sometimes we have to make do rather than always be able to have exactly what we want instantly.
4. Hmm, do we spend more income in the village? Yes, probably. We use the greengrocers more and we buy birthday presents for kids' parties here - we never go further afield to do that sort of thing. We also use the charity shops a great deal to get second hand stuff.
5. Yes, I use my little shopping trolley to bring stuff home. I'm a bag lady and proud of it.
6. We have relaxed on driving and getting everywhere as though starring in Wacky Races. We can't be bothered to get in a steamed up rush these days and we are aware that to do so will use petrol faster. I have to add here that I feel slightly ashamed whenever I go to fill up the tank.
I drive as little as possible during the week.
7. Yup, we are still switch-off-obsessives.
So, that was what we planned to do. However, we also started to do loads of other things that weren't on our list. I stopped buying clothes. I don't want to dress in fabrics made from petro chemicals and I don't want to wear non-organic cotton since it a very environmentally damaging crop to produce. I also wanted to see if for a year, I could do it. And pretty much, yes, I could.
Whilst I hate shopping with a passion, I still have the impulse to consume (in more brutal language, I like new things) and I am concerned about my appearance. So it was very easy at first, and then I started feeling a little wistful. Anyway, my break with non-organic cotton is permanent. Since it is now 2011, I have bought a couple of organic cotton items, but mostly I indulge myself in Charity Shop chic and have bought waterproof trousers on ebay. I hardly buy shoes, but when I do, I pay the extra and get some which have been ethically produced.
In face, the kids get second hand stuff for presents now. They understand that in the West we have loads and elsewhere others have very little and our excessive life style is supported by ripping off poorer people in a big way. Very, very occasionally, they get new stuff but generally we try to apply what economic muscle we have in as ethical way as possible.
Last year we didn't fly at all (with the exception of business travel - don't know quite what to do about that, and why businesses aren't getting the message that they need to scale back flying too). This year for our holidays we have taken the train around Europe and will continue to do so over the summer.
We are getting PV panels as soon as we can persuade the builder to turn up, and we have installed a wood burning stove. My fire starting skills are being shown up to be very poor, but it'll get better. We also need to buy an axe to chop up wood before the winter comes.
We try very, very hard to avoid products containing palm oil and our consumption of soya is going the same way. This really, really limits food shopping. And by the way -if the ingredients include 'vegetable oil' - that's palm oil in hiding!
We recycle almost everything. Our garage is full of stuff that we need to take when we pass the relevant recycling centre since we don't want to make a special journey.
So all in all, we are progressing along this road, and we have made an effort.
However, we are still of this society and we therefore make constant compromises and collaborate in the current system of excessive use, disproportionate sharing of the world's assets and waste. So it seems to me that there is an inherent failure in what we have done and in our life styles. I worry about this a lot.
Wednesday, 29 June 2011
Sunday, 5 June 2011
Nick Clegg's latest love-in
Nick Clegg says that he's had around 30 sexual relationships. Bet he hasn't found any as memorable as the shagging he's getting from the Tories.
Friday, 4 February 2011
A sceptical conversation
So I was out having a drink last night and talking en passant about an organisation which I help to run, which aims to raise awareness of climate change and fossil fuel depletion, and organises local events like film nights and planting a community apple orchard. I was, as is my wont, a little disparaging about it – a bad habit I know, but I am so desperate not to appear intense (I think I fail) or evangelical that I end up saying stuff with a self-deprecating smile like ‘this little organisation that I help run that’s trying to save the planet’ when all of a sudden my interlocutor said ‘I have to say that I don’t think that global warming is happening’.
He went on to explain that he didn’t really understand the issues but was parroting (his word, not mine) the views of his family. Now, had this been me, I would have recognised that this was shaky ground upon which to argue, but in his case, the flood gates flew open and out it all came. People ‘on high’ apparently want us to believe the myth of global warming; the leaked emails from UEA prove that the truth about climate change – ie that it’s all a big bowl of spaghetti bolognaise – is being suppressed; those who buy into this myth are enormously vain – how can we have the audacity to think that little old us, the frail and humble Human Race, have the power to affect something as big as the global climate? Furthermore, we were all growing grapes in mediaeval times anyway; everyone always talks about hot summers, but really nothing seems that different from when we were children; if we run out of coal, we’ll find something else to burn; climate sceptics aren't allowed equal air time anymore and so on and on it went, each utterance more thought-through, evidenced and convincing than the last. Or not.
This is what I said in reply, though with a sinking heart (it’s kind of boring to engage with the same old arguments that don’t even start to bear scrutiny) which also started beating too fast in the face of conflict in a social situation.
First – and presuming that people ‘on high’ are those who lead us rather than those who have left us – to deal with the proposition that there is conspiracy amongst world leaders to mislead the global population. Let’s not even get into why all these powerful beings can shake on this when they cannot find common ground on pretty much anything else (‘World peace, Mr Ahmadinejad? Come on, come on, you’ve got my agreement on screwing everyone over climate change. Huh? Huh? Be happy with that! Now, let’s pick up Michelle and Mr Netanyahu and go out clubbing. I wanna show you DC....’) and cut to the question that I asked – namely, to what end? My query was met with an enigmatic smile. After all, if it’s a conspiracy the whole point is that the little man or woman in the street doesn’t know, so this just goes to prove that it’s a conspiracy. A brilliant, watertight, circular argument if ever there was one.
Second the leaked emails. On this, there is so much to say, and I only said a very small part of it. The most important point, from a public information point of view, however, is this. Should the fact that some academics mishandle a situation, to almost universal condemnation, be accepted as a convincing counterbalance to all the peer-reviewed and verified research out there? Is it enough to do away entirely with the fact that 98% of all climate scientists have an informed belief that climate change is happening, much of it is manmade and if we don’t take action, then the impact on the world, on us and most other species will be dire? If your answer to these questions is yes, then you are looking for a reason to refute the existence of climate change, and sadly this one has fallen into your lap. But if it hadn’t, you would, just as gleefully, have found something else. Since however UEA is the slender hook by which you hang your disbelief and it is therefore critical to understand it, have you researched it? Do you know what was actually said and done?
What I could also have said was – does this mean that every climate scientist or any scientist with any access to research data has not only signed a version of the Official Secrets Act but actually kept completely schtum? And let me see, have there been no leaks at all? Oh, yes, there has been the UEA fandango, but over the last 30 or so years, only one little leak means that someone somewhere is running a pretty tight-lipped campaign which you must admit deserves recognition. Imagine the scene -
‘An MBE for propagating a myth about climate change? Are you sure, Mr Cameron?’
‘Well, he has done enormously well, Your Majesty. Lots of mad greens running about out all over the place, not only hugging trees but having full sex with them.’
‘Yes, I see what you mean, Mr Cameron. Come on corgis, chop chop. Time for a snack with your favourite class A drug mixed in’.
Nobody out there wanting to sell such a jaw dropping story to the press or are all journalists part of this establishment silence as well? Nobody with a conscience, gagging to be a whistleblower? Everyone so convinced or so threatened that the great unwashed need to be kept in stifling ignorance that they just won’t break ranks? No pillow talk?
It’s as if the story of Harry Potter is all true. It’s known at the highest levels, of course, as Dumbledore has a hotline to the prime minister of the day. The difference here is that the population of the Wizarding world are all scientists with a big secret that none of us Muggles should ever know. Not only is there a Ministry for the Suppression of the Truth about Global Warming, but the civil servants in the department have the power to blank out Muggles’ memories when a scientist carelessly lets something slip. Beware the Dark Lord Juniper. Shiver as Draco Attenborough apparates all over the world to show us melting ice caps and warming oceans.
But let’s cut to the bone of this. Fundamentally, I really don’t care if someone disagrees with me about global warming. Despite the passion with which I have argued above, and my fury at the ridiculousness of most of the sceptics’ arguments, I honestly do not. Whilst I can point to evidence that the climate is changing faster than ever before and that it is likely that human activity is contributing to this increased rate of change, I can no more prove to them that it is happening than they can prove to me that it is not. What I am far more interested in is a strategy to manage the risk that it might be happening.
So, finally, these were the questions that I asked. First, are you absolutely sure that climate change is either not happening, or if it is, that we’re not contributing to it? Of course, the answer has to be no.
Secondly, have you ever taken out car insurance? You have. How sensible. Is this because you are definitely going to have an accident or is it because you have taken the rational decision that the future is unpredictable? Why do you take out insurance? Is it so that, if you are unlucky enough to crash, the insurance will minimise the impact of the accident in terms of impact on your time, finances and convenience? It is, of course.
So. We can all waste a lot of time arguing about whether climate change is or isn’t happening. But this is the wrong debate to be having. There is a lot more common ground if we focus on what might happen and build a model to cover as many of the possible effects as we can anticipate. It takes an enormously confident person, or an incredible risk taker not to insure against the possibility of the negative impacts of climate change. Would you trust such a person if your life, or other people’s lives depended on it?
He went on to explain that he didn’t really understand the issues but was parroting (his word, not mine) the views of his family. Now, had this been me, I would have recognised that this was shaky ground upon which to argue, but in his case, the flood gates flew open and out it all came. People ‘on high’ apparently want us to believe the myth of global warming; the leaked emails from UEA prove that the truth about climate change – ie that it’s all a big bowl of spaghetti bolognaise – is being suppressed; those who buy into this myth are enormously vain – how can we have the audacity to think that little old us, the frail and humble Human Race, have the power to affect something as big as the global climate? Furthermore, we were all growing grapes in mediaeval times anyway; everyone always talks about hot summers, but really nothing seems that different from when we were children; if we run out of coal, we’ll find something else to burn; climate sceptics aren't allowed equal air time anymore and so on and on it went, each utterance more thought-through, evidenced and convincing than the last. Or not.
This is what I said in reply, though with a sinking heart (it’s kind of boring to engage with the same old arguments that don’t even start to bear scrutiny) which also started beating too fast in the face of conflict in a social situation.
First – and presuming that people ‘on high’ are those who lead us rather than those who have left us – to deal with the proposition that there is conspiracy amongst world leaders to mislead the global population. Let’s not even get into why all these powerful beings can shake on this when they cannot find common ground on pretty much anything else (‘World peace, Mr Ahmadinejad? Come on, come on, you’ve got my agreement on screwing everyone over climate change. Huh? Huh? Be happy with that! Now, let’s pick up Michelle and Mr Netanyahu and go out clubbing. I wanna show you DC....’) and cut to the question that I asked – namely, to what end? My query was met with an enigmatic smile. After all, if it’s a conspiracy the whole point is that the little man or woman in the street doesn’t know, so this just goes to prove that it’s a conspiracy. A brilliant, watertight, circular argument if ever there was one.
Second the leaked emails. On this, there is so much to say, and I only said a very small part of it. The most important point, from a public information point of view, however, is this. Should the fact that some academics mishandle a situation, to almost universal condemnation, be accepted as a convincing counterbalance to all the peer-reviewed and verified research out there? Is it enough to do away entirely with the fact that 98% of all climate scientists have an informed belief that climate change is happening, much of it is manmade and if we don’t take action, then the impact on the world, on us and most other species will be dire? If your answer to these questions is yes, then you are looking for a reason to refute the existence of climate change, and sadly this one has fallen into your lap. But if it hadn’t, you would, just as gleefully, have found something else. Since however UEA is the slender hook by which you hang your disbelief and it is therefore critical to understand it, have you researched it? Do you know what was actually said and done?
What I could also have said was – does this mean that every climate scientist or any scientist with any access to research data has not only signed a version of the Official Secrets Act but actually kept completely schtum? And let me see, have there been no leaks at all? Oh, yes, there has been the UEA fandango, but over the last 30 or so years, only one little leak means that someone somewhere is running a pretty tight-lipped campaign which you must admit deserves recognition. Imagine the scene -
‘An MBE for propagating a myth about climate change? Are you sure, Mr Cameron?’
‘Well, he has done enormously well, Your Majesty. Lots of mad greens running about out all over the place, not only hugging trees but having full sex with them.’
‘Yes, I see what you mean, Mr Cameron. Come on corgis, chop chop. Time for a snack with your favourite class A drug mixed in’.
Nobody out there wanting to sell such a jaw dropping story to the press or are all journalists part of this establishment silence as well? Nobody with a conscience, gagging to be a whistleblower? Everyone so convinced or so threatened that the great unwashed need to be kept in stifling ignorance that they just won’t break ranks? No pillow talk?
It’s as if the story of Harry Potter is all true. It’s known at the highest levels, of course, as Dumbledore has a hotline to the prime minister of the day. The difference here is that the population of the Wizarding world are all scientists with a big secret that none of us Muggles should ever know. Not only is there a Ministry for the Suppression of the Truth about Global Warming, but the civil servants in the department have the power to blank out Muggles’ memories when a scientist carelessly lets something slip. Beware the Dark Lord Juniper. Shiver as Draco Attenborough apparates all over the world to show us melting ice caps and warming oceans.
But let’s cut to the bone of this. Fundamentally, I really don’t care if someone disagrees with me about global warming. Despite the passion with which I have argued above, and my fury at the ridiculousness of most of the sceptics’ arguments, I honestly do not. Whilst I can point to evidence that the climate is changing faster than ever before and that it is likely that human activity is contributing to this increased rate of change, I can no more prove to them that it is happening than they can prove to me that it is not. What I am far more interested in is a strategy to manage the risk that it might be happening.
So, finally, these were the questions that I asked. First, are you absolutely sure that climate change is either not happening, or if it is, that we’re not contributing to it? Of course, the answer has to be no.
Secondly, have you ever taken out car insurance? You have. How sensible. Is this because you are definitely going to have an accident or is it because you have taken the rational decision that the future is unpredictable? Why do you take out insurance? Is it so that, if you are unlucky enough to crash, the insurance will minimise the impact of the accident in terms of impact on your time, finances and convenience? It is, of course.
So. We can all waste a lot of time arguing about whether climate change is or isn’t happening. But this is the wrong debate to be having. There is a lot more common ground if we focus on what might happen and build a model to cover as many of the possible effects as we can anticipate. It takes an enormously confident person, or an incredible risk taker not to insure against the possibility of the negative impacts of climate change. Would you trust such a person if your life, or other people’s lives depended on it?
Tuesday, 28 September 2010
Red Ed? Green Ed??
I have just been cleaning out the chicken house and putting down fresh newspaper under the perches and it tickled me greatly that Ed Miliband's face which is splashed all over the weekend papers will now be splashed with something - well, recycled......
Nevertheless, I am glad - very - that Ed Miliband is the new Labour leader. His brother's part in the rendition scandal is still in question (see this article in The Guardian - http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/sep/01/extraordinary-rendition-david-miliband) so I wouldn't have wanted him. Ed also appears the more courageous (ruthless?) character - I can't forget David's hesitant opportunism over challenging Gordon Brown, not least his lily-livered article in July 2008 in which he didn't have the balls to face down the then PM.
Ed has had a slightly more lightweight career than his brother, and this might be a reason why his nose is apparently cleaner (although not for long, the one on my chicken house floor) having been minister for the environment and climate change. I am pleased that someone with this background is now leader, although I acknowledge that his commitment to the environment may well be watered down now as he has other imperatives to deal with too. I hope not. I hope that he got into it enough to realise that it is the most important issue and one for which he will need all his courage to push up the political agenda.
Will he mention the environment in his speech to the Labour party conference this afternoon?? That will be a telling moment......
Nevertheless, I am glad - very - that Ed Miliband is the new Labour leader. His brother's part in the rendition scandal is still in question (see this article in The Guardian - http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/sep/01/extraordinary-rendition-david-miliband) so I wouldn't have wanted him. Ed also appears the more courageous (ruthless?) character - I can't forget David's hesitant opportunism over challenging Gordon Brown, not least his lily-livered article in July 2008 in which he didn't have the balls to face down the then PM.
Ed has had a slightly more lightweight career than his brother, and this might be a reason why his nose is apparently cleaner (although not for long, the one on my chicken house floor) having been minister for the environment and climate change. I am pleased that someone with this background is now leader, although I acknowledge that his commitment to the environment may well be watered down now as he has other imperatives to deal with too. I hope not. I hope that he got into it enough to realise that it is the most important issue and one for which he will need all his courage to push up the political agenda.
Will he mention the environment in his speech to the Labour party conference this afternoon?? That will be a telling moment......
Wednesday, 22 September 2010
How Green is my Garden....
In the last year, we decided that our garden should become a working garden, with fruit trees, a vegetable patch and chickens. This, despite the fact that we have little knowledge about growing plants, no experience of looking after fowl, and were not a little concerned about whether we would have the patience, time or inclination for the extra work. Nevertheless, this summer we have had it all up and running and I want to record the happiness that this extra dimension has brought to our family’s life.
The most fundamental source of happiness the reconnection with the land upon which we live. We are out in it far more, in more types of weather, we work it, we care for it. Our habits have changed so that we have come to depend on it. In other words, we look after our land, and in return,our land supports us. Our garden is no longer just there for the view – it’s not enough anymore that it merely looks nice, is an extension of the house, has wonderful decking, and so on.
There are so many reasons to produce your own food from your garden. For instance – just how much more local can you get? I hate shopping so walking into my garden to collect the raw ingredients for supper feels glorious. Since I shop less, I drive less, and I buy less packaging materials which end up in landfill. That alone enriches our quality of life.
Also, just how good does food taste when it goes from plot to pot in less than 5 minutes? How much money are you saving? How good does it feel to have rescued 7 ex-battery chickens (even though one died shortly afterwards...)? How much fun have the kids had this summer looking after them? How uplifting is it to eat stuff that you have grown? How nice is it to swop home grown food with your neighbours, or even better, to give surplus away? And possibly most curious of all – why does one eat so much less when the food is so tasty and chemical free?
It’s only September, there is still stuff out there to harvest, and I am already looking forward to next year’s growing – what will I plant, what have I learnt, can I stretch the season?
If I sound smug, I hope that I’m not really. I could have done this years ago and didn’t. I’m just glad that it’s happened now.
So these are our ‘heart and soul’ reasons for growing a bit of broccoli, spinach and courgette, potatoes, onions, corn and so on. However, there are other, more ‘macro’ reasons for working your piece of earth. For example, if the price of fuel escalates, then food will cost a great deal more – oil fuels the growth, fertilisation, transportation, cold storage, packaging and selling areas of food. If its price increases, no supermarket will be able to absorb those costs and they will be passed straight onto the consumer. Also, crucially, the world has little enough land to support a growing population so that we need to plan carefully how we are going to utilise it. Maybe having a garden which is more than decorative is an idea whose time has come.
Growing your own brings people in touch – literally – with the seasons. It also gives you an awareness of the seasonality of food. Maybe that will lead onto a heightened consciousness of the all year round availability of fruit and veg in the supermarkets and a decision about whether we want to use our financial muscle to discourage the sale of foods with high food mileage. Maybe strawberries at Christmas will be regarded universally as ridiculous. Maybe the sharp taste of the first autumnal apple will be worth waiting for.
Anyway, I love it, from the planting of seeds and anxious glances into pots for the first signs of germination, to swopping seedlings, to excitement that other people are growing stuff too, to talking to older people about how they grew everything they could in war years, to washing the mud from under my nails, to taking a bucket full of food into the hens and bringing it out full of eggs, to tasting the sweet nuttiness of a squash....what a way to live, on the fat of the land.
The most fundamental source of happiness the reconnection with the land upon which we live. We are out in it far more, in more types of weather, we work it, we care for it. Our habits have changed so that we have come to depend on it. In other words, we look after our land, and in return,our land supports us. Our garden is no longer just there for the view – it’s not enough anymore that it merely looks nice, is an extension of the house, has wonderful decking, and so on.
There are so many reasons to produce your own food from your garden. For instance – just how much more local can you get? I hate shopping so walking into my garden to collect the raw ingredients for supper feels glorious. Since I shop less, I drive less, and I buy less packaging materials which end up in landfill. That alone enriches our quality of life.
Also, just how good does food taste when it goes from plot to pot in less than 5 minutes? How much money are you saving? How good does it feel to have rescued 7 ex-battery chickens (even though one died shortly afterwards...)? How much fun have the kids had this summer looking after them? How uplifting is it to eat stuff that you have grown? How nice is it to swop home grown food with your neighbours, or even better, to give surplus away? And possibly most curious of all – why does one eat so much less when the food is so tasty and chemical free?
It’s only September, there is still stuff out there to harvest, and I am already looking forward to next year’s growing – what will I plant, what have I learnt, can I stretch the season?
If I sound smug, I hope that I’m not really. I could have done this years ago and didn’t. I’m just glad that it’s happened now.
So these are our ‘heart and soul’ reasons for growing a bit of broccoli, spinach and courgette, potatoes, onions, corn and so on. However, there are other, more ‘macro’ reasons for working your piece of earth. For example, if the price of fuel escalates, then food will cost a great deal more – oil fuels the growth, fertilisation, transportation, cold storage, packaging and selling areas of food. If its price increases, no supermarket will be able to absorb those costs and they will be passed straight onto the consumer. Also, crucially, the world has little enough land to support a growing population so that we need to plan carefully how we are going to utilise it. Maybe having a garden which is more than decorative is an idea whose time has come.
Growing your own brings people in touch – literally – with the seasons. It also gives you an awareness of the seasonality of food. Maybe that will lead onto a heightened consciousness of the all year round availability of fruit and veg in the supermarkets and a decision about whether we want to use our financial muscle to discourage the sale of foods with high food mileage. Maybe strawberries at Christmas will be regarded universally as ridiculous. Maybe the sharp taste of the first autumnal apple will be worth waiting for.
Anyway, I love it, from the planting of seeds and anxious glances into pots for the first signs of germination, to swopping seedlings, to excitement that other people are growing stuff too, to talking to older people about how they grew everything they could in war years, to washing the mud from under my nails, to taking a bucket full of food into the hens and bringing it out full of eggs, to tasting the sweet nuttiness of a squash....what a way to live, on the fat of the land.
Friday, 7 May 2010
School trip - a rant
Yesterday, I accompanied my daughter's class on a visit to London Zoo. Zoos these days major on environmentalism - preservation of endangered species, recyclable packaging of food from the caff, and all sorts of laudable aims, if you can get over the ethical issue of keeping animals in undersized cages for small children to scream at.
So it was with a sinking feeling that I received the letter from the school outlining the arrangements for the trip. Each child was to bring their lunch in a plastic bag so that it could be dumped after the food had been consumed so that the little precious sweetlings wouldn't have to carry too much. Diddums.
I hate this policy. What it means is that 30 plastic bags are dumped in landfill, plus of course the 30 plastic bottles and drinks cartons. I visualise the black bin liner containing all our detritus enduring, as some sort of morbid time capsule, until someone digs it up in several hundred years' time (if we're not all under water by then) to find out just how embarrassing was the level of waste generated by this so-called civilised society in the early 21st century.
And of course, as we sat down to eat lunch, the reality was even worse. It is astonishing how much parents spend on kids' lunches, in terms of buying individually packaged stuff that must be so much more expensive than merely buying a good old lump of something nourishing and cutting off a hearty chunk. Out came the little individual plastic packets of cheese, individually wrapped cakes, tubes of yogurt (what's THAT about??) and plastic pots of cut fruit. Not only was the packaging outrageous, the fruit was often an unholy mix of mango and pineapple and other exotics - nothing seasonal or local. What's the problem with giving a child an apple or pear? There are still some around which were grown in the UK - although so late in the season they have to be a bit suspect, I guess.
To keep their darlings' foodie fresh, parents wrap it in aluminium foil, so then non-renewable metal is also dumped in landfill. ....and as predicted, kids had drinks in all sorts of non-re-usable containers that most of them chucked away half-full.
Finally, and on a slightly different point, several kids were chomping into sandwiches of slimy looking ham - probably from Denmark or another cheap source where animal husbandry is notoriously callous. Don't get me started......
People often tell me that children 'get' the idea of recycling in a way that their parents do not. So why have all the responsible adults missed this opportunity to educate, or at least to reinforce ideas about recycling? The school, no matter what it teaches day to day in the classroom, has not only shown the children that it is ok to 'throw away' on a huge scale when it isn't really really easy to recycle, it has actually required them to do so. And to make matters even worse, parents are supplying the rubbish to be chucked out after a single use, thereby demonstrating to their children very clearly that 'stuff' has no value and that we should waste without a second thought. What a brutal lesson.
We are not an unsophisticated society, in terms of our education and our access to information. Many of us, and certainly the families from which the children on yesterday's trip were drawn, have a reasonable level of economic choice. Most are kind, humane and thoughtful.
So why do we go for the high waste options so thoughtlessly and gratuitously? I am sure that every child there is loved with intensity by his or her parents, who would protect that child from harm in every way possible. So how ironic is it that there is no consideration for the fact that by carrying on like this, we are thoughtlessly and casually trashing the planet for our children's future.
So it was with a sinking feeling that I received the letter from the school outlining the arrangements for the trip. Each child was to bring their lunch in a plastic bag so that it could be dumped after the food had been consumed so that the little precious sweetlings wouldn't have to carry too much. Diddums.
I hate this policy. What it means is that 30 plastic bags are dumped in landfill, plus of course the 30 plastic bottles and drinks cartons. I visualise the black bin liner containing all our detritus enduring, as some sort of morbid time capsule, until someone digs it up in several hundred years' time (if we're not all under water by then) to find out just how embarrassing was the level of waste generated by this so-called civilised society in the early 21st century.
And of course, as we sat down to eat lunch, the reality was even worse. It is astonishing how much parents spend on kids' lunches, in terms of buying individually packaged stuff that must be so much more expensive than merely buying a good old lump of something nourishing and cutting off a hearty chunk. Out came the little individual plastic packets of cheese, individually wrapped cakes, tubes of yogurt (what's THAT about??) and plastic pots of cut fruit. Not only was the packaging outrageous, the fruit was often an unholy mix of mango and pineapple and other exotics - nothing seasonal or local. What's the problem with giving a child an apple or pear? There are still some around which were grown in the UK - although so late in the season they have to be a bit suspect, I guess.
To keep their darlings' foodie fresh, parents wrap it in aluminium foil, so then non-renewable metal is also dumped in landfill. ....and as predicted, kids had drinks in all sorts of non-re-usable containers that most of them chucked away half-full.
Finally, and on a slightly different point, several kids were chomping into sandwiches of slimy looking ham - probably from Denmark or another cheap source where animal husbandry is notoriously callous. Don't get me started......
People often tell me that children 'get' the idea of recycling in a way that their parents do not. So why have all the responsible adults missed this opportunity to educate, or at least to reinforce ideas about recycling? The school, no matter what it teaches day to day in the classroom, has not only shown the children that it is ok to 'throw away' on a huge scale when it isn't really really easy to recycle, it has actually required them to do so. And to make matters even worse, parents are supplying the rubbish to be chucked out after a single use, thereby demonstrating to their children very clearly that 'stuff' has no value and that we should waste without a second thought. What a brutal lesson.
We are not an unsophisticated society, in terms of our education and our access to information. Many of us, and certainly the families from which the children on yesterday's trip were drawn, have a reasonable level of economic choice. Most are kind, humane and thoughtful.
So why do we go for the high waste options so thoughtlessly and gratuitously? I am sure that every child there is loved with intensity by his or her parents, who would protect that child from harm in every way possible. So how ironic is it that there is no consideration for the fact that by carrying on like this, we are thoughtlessly and casually trashing the planet for our children's future.
Wednesday, 7 April 2010
Apples for Everyone
Why should anyone want to establish a community orchard? Who is it for and why bother?
These are questions that I have addressed as I am trying, with other members of a small environmental organisation, somewhere in the Chilterns, to find a piece of land to plant some apple and some pear trees. I belong to a local group called Change4Chalfont. We are in the process of joining the Transition movement, a grass roots movement of local communities committed to combating the effects of climate change. The movement is fast gaining in membership across the country, and throughout the world.
Based in Chalfont St Peter, our initiative aims to reduce our local area’s contribution to climate change and our dependence on fossil fuels. We are going about this task in various ways, and one approach is to encourage people to think about sourcing their food locally and making choices that include lower ‘food miles’. This is a reason why we should like to plant and tend a community orchard in our village.
There are many benefits of planting an orchard. Some of them are as follows:
• To cultivate local and more unusual varieties of fruit.
• To be an open and free amenity for the public to enjoy.
• To encourage wildlife.
• To provide an educational resource for local schools.
• To be used as a meeting place for older people and to host local events such as Apple Days.
• To raise awareness of orchard projects.
• To promote the health benefits of eating fruit.
• To encourage people to plant fruit trees in their own gardens.
By way of a brief background, since 1970 half of the pear orchards in Britain have been destroyed. The situation with apple growing is even worse: in the mid 1950s there were three thousand commercial apple growers in Britain, whereas now there are just eight hundred and many of these are on a very small scale. Instead, we import and today seventy-six per cent of apples consumed in the UK come from overseas, mostly from China (which produces pretty much all the apples from which we make apple juice) and Turkey.
There is now, however, a growing movement to rediscover local fruit varieties and to plant new orchards. Common Ground, an organisation dedicated to promoting the planting of new orchards and recovering abandoned orchards throughout England, says there are already more than 300 community orchards in the UK run by and for local people.
We are looking for land situated as centrally as possible upon which to plant the fruit trees, which we intend should be both apples and pears of types that have historically been grown in this area, rather than the usually homogenous varieties. There is a triangle of land at one end of our local allotments which has been left to grass for as long as I remember. Since there appears to be little demand for it as cultivated allotments, we are trying to persuade the owner, the local parish council, to let us have it so that we may use it to benefit the community as a whole, as the site of our orchard.
We do not wish to upset anyone by planting an orchard and clearly current allotment holders could feel imposed upon if we are not careful. From this point of view, the location of this land is ideal: if trees are planted on it, they would not shade other people’s plants; it is also on the edge of the allotments so would not cause pedestrians (or their pooing dogs) to wander from existing paths. The site would also be clearly marked as a community orchard and we would display signs which make it clear that whilst people have the right to help themselves to the fruit, they may not pick anything elsewhere.
We aim to make all aspects of the establishment of the orchard as inclusive as possible; in particular we would like to encourage local schools and organisations such as scout and guide groups to raise money to buy their own tree. We plan to organise a day when everyone who has contributed or is interested can get together to plant the trees.
The trees will be financed through sponsorship as outlined above, individual donations and grants. In particular, our local district council runs a Community Grant Scheme which is designed to support local community voluntary groups and not for profit organisations which deliver community projects and services that improve the quality of life for Chiltern residents. Our scheme clearly fits the criteria for this scheme as we are able to demonstrate how it links into Chiltern’s Sustainable Community Strategy and the Council’s key objectives. We understand that grants are made of up to £1,500 per year for any project.
We intend to plant the trees in the late autumn so that they may establish themselves over winter and spring. We have sufficient volunteers to take care of the trees and keep them well-watered when necessary, so we will not depend for any outside help.
We hope that the planting of a community orchard will go ahead in our village as we believe it would enhance community spirit, and contribute to awareness raising and action against climate change.
These are questions that I have addressed as I am trying, with other members of a small environmental organisation, somewhere in the Chilterns, to find a piece of land to plant some apple and some pear trees. I belong to a local group called Change4Chalfont. We are in the process of joining the Transition movement, a grass roots movement of local communities committed to combating the effects of climate change. The movement is fast gaining in membership across the country, and throughout the world.
Based in Chalfont St Peter, our initiative aims to reduce our local area’s contribution to climate change and our dependence on fossil fuels. We are going about this task in various ways, and one approach is to encourage people to think about sourcing their food locally and making choices that include lower ‘food miles’. This is a reason why we should like to plant and tend a community orchard in our village.
There are many benefits of planting an orchard. Some of them are as follows:
• To cultivate local and more unusual varieties of fruit.
• To be an open and free amenity for the public to enjoy.
• To encourage wildlife.
• To provide an educational resource for local schools.
• To be used as a meeting place for older people and to host local events such as Apple Days.
• To raise awareness of orchard projects.
• To promote the health benefits of eating fruit.
• To encourage people to plant fruit trees in their own gardens.
By way of a brief background, since 1970 half of the pear orchards in Britain have been destroyed. The situation with apple growing is even worse: in the mid 1950s there were three thousand commercial apple growers in Britain, whereas now there are just eight hundred and many of these are on a very small scale. Instead, we import and today seventy-six per cent of apples consumed in the UK come from overseas, mostly from China (which produces pretty much all the apples from which we make apple juice) and Turkey.
There is now, however, a growing movement to rediscover local fruit varieties and to plant new orchards. Common Ground, an organisation dedicated to promoting the planting of new orchards and recovering abandoned orchards throughout England, says there are already more than 300 community orchards in the UK run by and for local people.
We are looking for land situated as centrally as possible upon which to plant the fruit trees, which we intend should be both apples and pears of types that have historically been grown in this area, rather than the usually homogenous varieties. There is a triangle of land at one end of our local allotments which has been left to grass for as long as I remember. Since there appears to be little demand for it as cultivated allotments, we are trying to persuade the owner, the local parish council, to let us have it so that we may use it to benefit the community as a whole, as the site of our orchard.
We do not wish to upset anyone by planting an orchard and clearly current allotment holders could feel imposed upon if we are not careful. From this point of view, the location of this land is ideal: if trees are planted on it, they would not shade other people’s plants; it is also on the edge of the allotments so would not cause pedestrians (or their pooing dogs) to wander from existing paths. The site would also be clearly marked as a community orchard and we would display signs which make it clear that whilst people have the right to help themselves to the fruit, they may not pick anything elsewhere.
We aim to make all aspects of the establishment of the orchard as inclusive as possible; in particular we would like to encourage local schools and organisations such as scout and guide groups to raise money to buy their own tree. We plan to organise a day when everyone who has contributed or is interested can get together to plant the trees.
The trees will be financed through sponsorship as outlined above, individual donations and grants. In particular, our local district council runs a Community Grant Scheme which is designed to support local community voluntary groups and not for profit organisations which deliver community projects and services that improve the quality of life for Chiltern residents. Our scheme clearly fits the criteria for this scheme as we are able to demonstrate how it links into Chiltern’s Sustainable Community Strategy and the Council’s key objectives. We understand that grants are made of up to £1,500 per year for any project.
We intend to plant the trees in the late autumn so that they may establish themselves over winter and spring. We have sufficient volunteers to take care of the trees and keep them well-watered when necessary, so we will not depend for any outside help.
We hope that the planting of a community orchard will go ahead in our village as we believe it would enhance community spirit, and contribute to awareness raising and action against climate change.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
