10
Ways To Help Save The planet
By Terry Kirby and
Lucy Phillips
03 April, 2006
The Independent
Change
a light bulb - and help save the planet. When it comes to the big question
of how the world responds to the threat of climate change, it is clear
that it is the small, everyday things that can really matter.
This is a major theme to
have emerged in the phenomenal response to The Independent's appeal
to readers for their views on how to tackle global warming, given the
seeming inability of politicians, in Britain at least, to find ways
of reducing carbon emissions.
But among the hundreds of
letters and e-mails there are also demands for bigger, more fundamental
changes - encouraging people to work from home, reducing packaging on
consumer goods, enforced recycling and banning four-wheel drives from
cities.
Fundamentally, there is also
an underlying message common to ideas both big and small: that people
desperately want politicians to take action to make these things come
about. It is based in the knowledge that this must be a collective issue
and that for every one of us who voluntarily makes those big and small
adjustments in our lifestyles, there are many millions more who need
to be told, encouraged and, if necessary, forced to make the moves needed
to preserve the future for their children - and those of everybody else.
Heidi Siggers wrote: "We
have replaced all the light bulbs in our two-bedroomed house with low-energy
bulbs. We now use the same amount of watts for the whole house as we
did with one 60-watt bulb before ... Why not make the eco-bulbs compulsory?
As this Government seems so keen on banning things, why not ban something
worthwhile?" All the contributions from our readers are being forwarded
to the All-Party Climate Change Group, led by the Labour MP Colin Challen,
who has argued that radical initiatives, free of narrow party political
concerns, may have to be taken.
It is a call taken up by
Tony Juniper of Friends of the Earth: "We have long campaigned
on all these issues. But it is vital that the Government introduces
a legislative framework to reduce carbon emissions. It is wonderful
that people see the connections between small actions and the bigger
picture of saving the planet. But such people are still in the minority
and the Government urgently has to make it easier for everyone else
to help save the planet.''
The contributions from Independent
readers range from the micro-issue of the light bulbs in our homes to
the macro-economics of the world and a realisation that the driving
force behind climate change is simply the pursuit of economic growth.
Richard Houlden wrote: "We cannot continue to allow individuals
and corporations driven by personal short-term gain to continue to perpetuate
the myth of economic growth as a global panacea."
In between these two poles,
our readers argue that a series of straightforward changes are needed,
all of which require legislation and public money in one form or another.
Clearly, transport of all
kinds is a major issue. "The best transport solutions are to walk
and cycle where we can, and giving proper funding to make public transport
really usable and convenient for people," said Dr Andrew Boswell
from Norwich, a theme taken up by many readers. There were many calls
to ban the use of "gas-guzzling" four-wheel drive cars in
cities, They "epitomise the greedy, self-indulgent, oil-driven
Western world,'' said Hugh Mitchell.
What one reader called the
"madness" of cheap flights is also seen as an unnecessary
luxury: "Charge the actual environmental cost of flights to the
end user,'' wrote Valerie Fitch from Maidenhead.
Also important is way we
build new homes without sufficient consideration of energy use. "They
should all have solar panels; much, much better insulation; condensing
boilers, etc. These items wouldn't be so expensive if they were mass
produced," said Maggie Postle from Dorset. For many readers, the
home is the key - banning patio heaters, wearing more clothes and fitting
triple glazing, were all enthusiastically endorsed.
And once we have our eco-friendly
homes, we should be encouraged to spent more time working from them,
to reduce car travel and transport congestion, say readers. "The
technology exists, but it will need a new breed of managers who do not
measure productivity by presenteeism," wrote Richard Curtis, from
Newport Pagnell.
Proposals for change
Fit new buildings
with solar panels or wind turbines
* PRO: Would reduce reliance
on fossil fuels and provide renewable source of energy. Solar panels
are benign and getting better at converting sunlight into electrical
power.
* Against: Wind turbines
would pose planning problems as well raising concerns over health and
safety. Larger turbines already opposed on grounds of unsightliness
and interference to birds. Solar and wind power may not be substitute
for fossil fuels.
Label products according
to their effect on climate:
* Pro: Would raise awareness
among consumers about environmental impact of products. Could lead to
companies competing in terms of being environmentally friendly.
* Against: Difficult to judge
product's true impact on environment.
Force passengers
to pay environmental cost of flying:
* Pro: Would have an impact
on one of biggest sources of carbon dioxide emissions.
* Against: True environmental
cost of flying difficult to assess and would be difficult to reach a
consensus.
Public transport
should be made cheaper:
* Pro: Minimises pollution
in urban areas.
* Against: Trains are infrequent
in certain areas.
Make energy- efficient
light bulbs compulsory:
* Pro: Compact florescent
light bulbs use up to 67 per cent less energy than traditional bulbs,
and last 10 times longer. Incandescent bulbs waste 90 per cent of their
energy as heat.
* Against: Currently CFLs
cost between £5 and £8 each, compared with less than £1
for an ordinary incandescent bulb
Encourage people
to work from home:
* Pro: Companies could reduce
road congestion and greenhouse gas emissions, and help revive rural
communities.
* Against: Companies would
have to stump up to install computers and home offices for workers.
Health and safety standards could be hard to enforce, and employees
used to might find home-working an isolating experience.
Use the law to encourage
recycling:
* Pro: Britain produces some
28.2 tonnes of household waste every year. Of this 87 per cent is incinerated
or dumped in landfills, yet most household waste is suitable for either
composting or recycling.
* Against: Collecting, sorting
and recycling waste not cheap - councils with high recycling rates spend
up to three times as much on waste collection as other local authorities.
Ban 4x4 cars from
cities
* Pro: Would reduce harmful
emissions and would make roads safer for other motorists and pedestrians.
* Against: Motorists are
still buying them - 187,000 4x4s were sold in Britain last year.
Reduce packaging
on products
* Pros: Would drastically
reduce the amount of waste we produce.
* Against: Recyclable wrapping
can be more expensive, with costs passed on to buyers.
Ban patio heaters
* Pro: There are 750,000
in Britain producing 380,000 tons of greenhouse gases every year.
* Against: Ban would be difficult
to police.
© 2006 Independent News
and Media Limited