European initiative

Summary:

Will Hutton, in How Europe can save the world, The Observer 11.03.07, says that the EU has committed itself to reduce its CO2 emissions by 20% from their 1990 level, by 2020. This will be achieved, he says, mainly through the use of renewable energy such as water, air & biofuels. Although France is heavily dependent on nuclear power, this will now be classified as clean. There will be strict limits on carbon emissions, with every new power station in Europe after 2010 having to have 'carbon capture and storage capacity'.

There are, however, problems. Renewable energy is expensive and European business will complain that Indian, Chinese and American competitors will continue to use cheaper fossil fuels.

But Hutton says that there is growing worldwide conviction that action must be taken to prevent global warming and climate change. Clearly pro-European, he praises Europe's politicians, particularly German Chancellor Angela Merkel, supported by Tony Blair, for taking the lead over carbon emissions. With forthcoming UN talks over a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, Hutton says that the European initiative is of worldwide significance and he's optimistic it will be successful.

189 words

Main idea:

Will Hutton, a committed pro-European, says that Europe has taken the lead in the battle to reduce global GHG emissions and he praises European politicians for this. He is optimistic that their efforts will prove successful because he believes there is a growing worldwide awareness of the need for government action to prevent climate change.

Comment:

While I believe that the reduction of carbon emissions is of global importance, I think the article is wildly optimistic. It was written before the current global recession and I feel that many countries will struggle to implement the changes they have promised. The UK's economy, for example, is currently in an awful mess and using renewable fuels is more expensive than using fossil fuels. Can the UK afford to meet the targets it has set? Shell has recently announced the abandonment of much of its research budget re. renewable energy, saying that existing fossil fuels make more economic sense. Hutton is clearly more in awe of the politicians he names than I am.

Carbon footprint

My carbon footprint

I measured my carbon footprint at http://footprint.wwf.org.uk/& it was 4.10.Most of the students had similar figures. The actual average for CRB was 3.778.

The main factors which contributed to my figure were classified as:

a) travel

b) stuff

c) home

My individual carbon footprint is the GHG (greenhouse gases) emissions that I personally am responsible for. However, companies, institutions, e.g. ADMC, and countries all have carbon footprints.

The UAE's carbon footprint per capita is the highest in the world.

What can I do to reduce my carbon footprint?

I don't spend a lot on consumer goods, or bathroom products.

Travel is the largest contributor to my carbon footprint but I'm not sure what I can do to make meaningful change. Admittedley, I drive a large petrol vehicle but I can't switch to the train here in Abu Dhabi because there aren't any. I could use the bus but I can't see that it would make much difference as my journey to work is only a few minutes. My car has been well serviced and I've had it for 12 years. I suspect it pollutes a lot less than most of the local buses I've seen, which also happen to be very dangerous in my experience.

With regard to air travel, I have to fly AD-UK-AD once a year, if I'm to carry on working here.

With regard to my home, in England I have loft insulation, double glazing etc, but here in Abu Dhabi, I live in a rented flat and can do little to improve my footprint domestically, apart from turning off appliances, which I already do.

With regard to food, my diet is extremely healthy and I can't see what I can do to improve it apart, presumably, according to the quiz, from becoming vegetarian or vegan. I play squash every day, usually eat only once daily during the week and so I don't over-consume food.

329 words

Reviews of 'An Inconvenient Truth'

Brandon Fibbs, http://brandonfibbs.com/2006/05/24/an-inconvenient-truth/ , in a favourable review, points out that Al Gore is right and the climate debate is effectively over. Scientific opinion overwhelmingly supports the view that global warming is principally man-made and time is running out for us to find solutions. He says that Gore has a mass of scientific data, charts, diagrams & photographic evidence, enough to convince even the most hardened sceptic. What he finds most alarming is the time-lapse photos of Patagonia, Kilimanjaro, etc. He ends his review by praising the fact that the movie is not pessimistic but rather closes with practical advice as to how we can get emissions back to the levels of 1950.

Scott Nash, http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/inconvenient_truth/articles/156, in a more negative review, says that the film is about Al Gore & his political ambitions, rather than about global warming. He goes on to complain that, with his references to his son's car accident & his sister's death from lung cancer, Gore is being emotionally manipulative. He also criticises the movie for making political digs at Bush & the Republicans. He feels that this will only alienate a lot of people Gore is trying to win over to his point of view. Eric, in a review at the same address, questions the before & after photographs, pointing out that many of the old photos could have been taken in winter & the latest ones in summer.

What is my opinion? I agree with the first review insofar as the mass of evidence, incidentally very effectively & colourfully presented, is, if nothing else, food for thought. It would seem impossible to refute the fact that global warming is a dangerous threat to the planet. I personally don't mind the personalising of the movie as I feel Gore is effectively pointing out that his & our personal tribulations are as nothing to the threat to the whole of mankind. With regard to Eric's point about the photographic evidence, there may be some validity to it, but surely not with regard to Kilimanjaro where there is little, if any, seasonal alteration. The political point made by Scott is more interesting because, in both the film & its trailer, Gore emphasises that the issue is moral, not political, but he concludes the film by saying that only political will can solve the problems created by climate change & that political will is a renewable source in the USA.