From Robert Alcock, Forum for a Sustainable Zorrozaurre
Dave Reay makes the oft-repeated assertion that “saving the planet starts at home” (10 September, p 36). But it is illogical to “multiply up” decisions about one’s personal lifestyle to the population as a whole, unless there is evidence that your choices really will influence others. Otherwise, it’s a question of 10 steps to feeling smug.
The vast majority of people are either unaware of or apathetic about the threat posed by climate change. Those seriously concerned represent a small minority. Any small reduction in emissions that this minority may achieve will probably be negated by market feedback and/or used as an excuse for inaction by politicians.
True, some of the actions suggested – install low-energy light bulbs, cycle to work, compost food waste – make good sense anyway. But then it’s superfluous to invoke the environment as a reason for doing them. Others – turn down the heating in the middle of winter, drive more slowly, make sub-optimal transport choices – are forms of self-punishment that have no chance of ever being adopted by the unconcerned majority.
To have any significant impact on environmental problems, the concerned minority must take public, not private, action to change attitudes and behaviour. Riding your bike or installing roof-mounted solar panels, for instance, are public acts. They are seen and may even be imitated by others, albeit mainly at a local level.
Advertisement
But in the end, climate change is a global problem resulting from the unchecked growth of the fossil-fuel economy. Effective action against it must mean somehow transforming – or disrupting – the global economy.
From Maureen Evershed
What happens when a lot of us do take these steps? Inevitably, we save money. The crucial question, then, is how do we spend this money we have saved? I think it will most probably be on luxuries that emit greenhouse gases in their manufacture or use – which sort of defeats the object, really.
Dorridge, West Midlands, UK
From Val Stevens, Optimum Population Trust
I would urge Reay to write an 11th step. It would be “Stop at two children”. Even if everyone responded to his call and reduced energy consumption by a few percentage points, the environmental gain would be wiped out by there being more consumers. Based on present growth trends, the UK population alone will swell by 7 million by 2050, requiring up to 4 million new homes with the associated central heating, washing machines, refrigerators and so on. With that in mind, the goal of a 60 per cent reduction on 1990 carbon dioxide levels by that date becomes almost laughable.
Long Whatton, Leicestershire, UK
From William Stanton
Reay may be interested to know that here in Somerset we have two landfill sites where food and garden waste (biomass) is compacted. Methanogen bacteria convert it to methane, which is an extremely valuable biofuel. It is sucked out of the landfills into two power stations that each generate 3 megawatts, day and night, for the national grid. Each unobtrusive power station thus produces as much electricity in an average year as a wind farm of seven turbines rated at 1.8 megawatts each, given wind-power’s known intermittency.
Unfortunately, the local landfill operators now plan to collect the biomass separately and recycle it, expending much energy, to make compost. At a time when energy is becoming scarce and expensive, renewable electricity is surely more valuable than compost to society.
Wells, Somerset, UK
Bilbao, Spain
