What we need are machines that remove the carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, cost nothing to produce, are made entirely from natural products available worldwide, produce no harmful waste materials, fit into the landscape harmoniously and also provide countless other benefits to us, wildlife and the environment.
We already have them.
They are called trees.
We need to plant them in their millions and to stop cutting down those we already have.
The other night there was a piece on the TV news in which a child psychologist bemoaned the fact that children were being frightened by news about the Climate Emergency, suggesting that we should tone it down and perhaps not mention it in schools – I don’t remember the precise details – to which I said ‘Good! Children need to be frightened by it!’
That didn’t go down too well with my wife, who naturally felt that children shouldn’t be frightened.
And usually I would agree with that, but as unfeeling as it might sound I think it is right that they should be frightened by what is happening. It is their future which is inevitably going to be impacted by the actions we do or do not take in the next few years. Their future which our inaction will damage or destroy. And at the moment, that future looks none too promising.
If they are frightened they are likely to raise the issue with their parents, and the resulting conversation may result in more adults learning how imperative it is we take action, and perhaps beginning to add their voices to the demands for action.
And they will be far more frightened if their homes and schools are flooded, or their neighbourhood catches fire, or armed conflict breaks out, all of which look increasingly likely unless we really DO SOMETHING!
It is the actions taken by concerned and frightened children which have become school strikes, and which have led to the formation of Extinction Rebellion, and which may ultimately lead to a people-led drive to finally take meaningful action to try to prevent catastrophe.
So, sad as it seems, they need to be frightened.
We all need to be frightened.
It has been mind-buggeringly hot and humid for most of the last week, breaking records for mind-buggeringly hot heat here in the UK. But now, with heavy rain and gloom and a delicious green light filling the kitchen from the trees and bushes outside in the garden, it not only feels refreshingly cooler but looks it, too.
During this last week, almost the only way I could bear to be outside at all, was sitting on our lawn in the shade of the gorgeous hazel tree that dominates the garden.
In so many countries, trees are planted to provide shade whether it be for travellers, or for residents in towns and villages or city squares.
They understand the value of the shade the trees provide in hotter climates, but in the UK we, and by that I mean governments and entrepreneurs and business people, we seem to be obsessed with cutting down trees, almost for the sake of it.
Yet we can no longer pretend we have no idea how vital trees are; for us, for the ecosystem, for the planet. We need them to remove the carbon from the air and to replenish oxygen. They are habitats for huge numbers of wildlife. Their roots help bind and provide stability to the soil, preventing erosion, landslides, and the spread of deserts. Where they exist in sufficiently large numbers the water vapour they give off helps to bring down local temperatures and increase rainfall.
They are sources of food for animals and for people, and for thousands of years their wood has been used for building dwellings, making furniture and utensils, fencing, tools, boats and wagons, and as a beautiful raw material for artworks.
And they soothe the soul!
Used intelligently and sustainably, they will continue to perform this role for as long as we wish.
Yet despite all we now know, we continue to cut down trees at a ridiculous rate. In Brazil, we are losing rainforest now the size of three football fields per minute! The rainforest in Indonesia is also being cut down at a rapid rate. The HS2 rail link planned for the UK will cost a stupid amount of money and destroy massive amounts of woodland, just to take a little time off rail journeys that already happen.
Yet there are many smaller – petty – instances of trees being cut down that amount to official vandalism, no less. I feel particularly strongly that in many towns in the UK it has long been the policy that when trees planted along streets have become larger than the council thinks appropriate, they cut them down but rarely if ever replace them with new, younger, ones.
The call to re-wild areas of the UK is growing, and I feel we should now be devoting as much land as possible to the creation of new woodland, as well as re-planting hedgerows to replace fences, and individual trees in gardens and parks and along roads.
And stop cutting them down!
For my own sanity, I’ve had a week away completely from writing and blogging and all but the odd glance at social media.
Although if I had any sense, I’d stay away from the news, too.
In my last post I suggested that if the Government were at all serious about tackling the climate emergency they would cancel the expansion of Heathrow Airport. I also said I was certain they would not, because I just don’t believe they either take it seriously or care.
This morning I read that the advisory Committee on Climate Change (CCC) recently said the UK’s planned increase in aviation would need to be curbed to restrict CO2, and that a ‘senior civil servant’ (whatever that means) has told a green group that means ministers may have to review aviation strategy.
The group says climate concern is so high the decision on Heathrow expansion should be brought back to Parliament.
Unsurprisingly, the Department for Transport has defended the proposed expansion, saying it would “provide a massive economic boost to businesses and communities” across the UK, all at “no cost to the taxpayer and within our environmental obligations”.
Unless you define ‘environmental obligations’ as an obligation to destroy the environment, an expansion of the world’s second largest airport to enable yet more flights to take place is NOT within them.
So there you have it. The official line is that we can all go to hell in a handcart, because economic growth is more important than the environment, or our children’s and grandchildren’s lives.
Revolution, anyone?
Yesterday, history was made in the UK with Parliament passing a motion declaring we are facing a climate emergency, although if you look at news websites this morning you might be forgiven for thinking nothing had happened. Is that an omen?
Are we going to see some meaningful action, now? I’d love to think so, but I strongly doubt it. The Political Right is in thrall to Big Business and vested interests, while the Left is more inclined to measure things by employment. As usual, there will be hand-wringing and lip-service paid to the ideals of cleaning up the mind-blowing mess we have made of this planet, and then all sorts of excuses why we can’t actually do anything that makes a difference.
The usual reasons are that it will impact upon economic growth and that it will cost jobs.
Not that there will be any of either of those when Earth begins to resemble Mars or Venus.
Yes, there has been some progress in some areas, but it all seems to be driven by activism and protest. This is why we need them more than ever. Without the School Climate Strikers, without Extinction Rebellion, last night’s debate in parliament would not have happened. It did so only because M.P.s were pushed into it.
All of the impetus so far for companies to change their policies with regard to the likes of excess packaging, changing plastic straws to paper, removing plastic from cotton buds and the like has come from activists, not from the government. From public pressure.
And so we must not only keep up that pressure, but ramp it up further.
If the government were really serious about tackling Climate Change, the first thing they should do now – do today – is to cancel the Heathrow airport expansion.
But they won’t. They will argue we need it for economic reasons, and therefore that earning money is more important than halting climate change.
In short, they will demonstrate an absolute disregard for the planet. I’d love to be proved wrong, but I won’t be.
On the back of the climate change protesters in London this month, inspirational Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg yesterday addressed MPs at the UK Parliament. And she scathingly shredded our responses to the crisis.
The UK has, admittedly, done a little more to tackle the issue than many other countries, but compared to what is needed our response has been, quite frankly, pathetic.
There is still no political will to tackle climate change. Politicians would rather the protesters just disappeared and everything could go back to business as usual. But, no matter what they would like to think, unless there is drastic change, one day it won’t be business as usual any longer. Not for any of us. Their response to the protests? This is bad. People are being inconvenienced.
Inconvenienced?
I’ll tell you what the end of the world isn’t, it isn’t people tutting because their bus is a bit late because of protesters. It isn’t people getting angry because other people who care passionately about the world and its future are telling them uncomfortable truths. It isn’t people being ‘inconvenienced’. And it isn’t some already rich and privileged people having to pay themselves less to ensure that millions of ordinary people aren’t made homeless and destitute by rising sea levels, devastating weather patterns and disappearing farmland.
Inconvenienced?
I cannot tell you how angry that makes me!
‘One day, my boy, all this will be yours’
As Greta Thunberg said, climate change is not a matter of opinion, it’s real. It’s a fact. It’s science.
And it’s not someone else’s problem – it’s your problem and it’s my problem. Every one of us needs to do more:
And badger politicians and manufacturers to do more:
Even if you don’t do this for yourself, do it for your children, and for their children.
Let nobody fool themselves. If we do not seriously tackle the issue now – as in NOW – then the consequences will be spreading deserts, rising sea levels flooding large areas of land, more devastating forest fires, wars over water and food supplies, and possibly other consequences too terrible to contemplate.
Now that’s what I call inconvenient.
Mick Canning 