Airborne pollution may not be at the top of everyone's concerns right now but it is a killer that sits just under our noses. A new report has recently revealed that air pollution in the country's capital is killing over 4,000 annually.

The report released by Boris Johnson's office charted the severity of pollution levels throughout London's wards, detailing that those living in central areas of the capital are most at risk due to their constant exposure to high pollution areas.

Among the poorest of European cities, London's air quality has high trace levels of the matter known as PM2.5 and can be correlated to mortality rates in the capital. This is far from a revelation amongst most Londoners who seem to have grown accustomed to the escalating combustion levels over the past decades. However, twinned with a report by the House of Commons environmental audit committee, Johnson's office have made comment that their target is to take measurable action against airborne pollution with immediate response.

Some of London's worst wards - those with the highest proportion of negative or potentially damaging particulates - are perhaps the most unexpected. Hyde Park, the West End, and even Holborn and Covent Garden all feature in the 10 most polluted areas. This is partly due to their high levels of all-year tourism and surrounding combustion levels generated by twenty-four hour traffic.

Other areas which might be expected to home high levels of pollution include; King's Cross; Marylebone High Street; and Bryanston and Dorset Square. Despite Johnson's efforts, he has come under considerable criticism over his decision to postpone, by approximately two years, the third stage of the low emission zone. This was a strategy devised by the previous Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, which would have introduced further measures to reduce emissions this coming October.

Currently in place is an emissions standards regulation which focuses on combustion pollution generated from high-combustion vehicles such as buses and coaches - which could be charged up to £1,000 of daily fines. The third phase, delayed by Johnson, would target smaller vehicles and expect owners to meet standards and regulations covering the Greater London area.

This is becoming a growing concern for EU officials, whose scrutiny's has been fixed on Britain failure to meet requisites and European standards which put them in breach of international agreements. For instance, Britain's "bad air" monitoring record (Britain is allowed 35 "bad air" days pa) shows that they currently stand on the 36th day of dangerous and potentially harmful pollution levels.

What sees to be done will no doubt be topic for debate amongst MPs and government chambers over the oncoming weeks as the temperature rises and exhaust fumes become ever more apparent.

Posted under Climate

Over the last couple of years, the latest energy policies to face the world’s growing number of ecological problems have all stressed the need to increase the weighting of renewable energy sources in energy generation. However, despite technological and logistical advances, what remains in favour of matured, conventional energy sourcing, and in the way of a more assured adoption of renewable energy generation, is still today simply a question of reliability. Can we risk the blackouts associated with a technological teenage tantrum? Apparently not; so like all good parents, national governments throughout the UN are investing into a strategic compromise. And they call it - the ‘Embedded Generation’.

Embedded generation is one of the possibilities to implement a reliable, economical and all round less harmful power generational structure than the one we have now. Using a combination of renewable and conventional energy sources, you could see its design as a handshake between the past and the present, in view of agreeing on a more sustainable future.

Now, as was mentioned, one of renewable energy’s largest determining constraints is its unreliable nature. This statement can be taken quite literally, as still in its fledgling stages renewable energy generation relies heavily on a direct relationship with its source; for example, solar power with the sun, or wind turbines with the wind. And this is not to outline a negative situation. After all, a principle objective for renewable energy must be that it creates such a relationship in order to achieve the much desired ‘sustainable element’. But, unfortunately for us, modern times and current infrastructure dictates the needs and necessities of our day to day living; which is why for a succession of unpredictable power cuts to hit the UK could result in utter catastrophe. And this, we can be sure, is not at all desirable.

So in order to traverse the pitfalls of zero power, national energy policies are investing in embedded generation to help renewable power get up to speed with current demand. And the most manageable set of training-wheels we’ve got right now is – the microgrid. A microgrid is a community level embedded generation system which incorporates local loads and micro-sources of energy. In other words, it can operate by itself or connect directly to the national grid depending on the source capabilities and power requirements it is providing for. There is also hypothetical work being engineered on connecting one microgrid to another near by microgrid – where one supports the other in times of need or excess generation.

According to current standards, microgrids are technologically capable to meet expected performance rates; but, alas, we wait on the inevitable ‘price tag’ of tradability and ownership before they can make bold steps into the big wide world. But here at EcoSwitch we've got a good feeling about this one. Watch this space, as they say.

Posted under Articles, Climate

How Tamsin Omond first caught our eco-eye was way back before discovering her book, film, academic success or even, to be honest, her name. It was, instead, The Climate Rush group that initially introduced us to the young eco-warrior: a face within a crowd of ecologically concerned activists looking to achieve much more than promises. 

"Deeds Not Words" was what was seen to be put in action.  

First off it was an artistic echo that rallied support as The Climate Rush group dressed up and back in time, mimicking the Suffragettes who brought about success and reform in their own terms one hundred years before the fresh-faced Omond made her way to Parliament Square, toting banners. Then, it was a rabble of realists, putting in the leg-work and pedalling through London, in peaceful protest. What followed were picnics at Heathrow, tours through the South West and sunsets on Westminster Abbey.  

Seen from under the sinister spotlight of the national press, the concentrated desk-lamps of a huge online following, as well as her band of faithfuls attending candle lit parades, it was clear - whichever way one looked at it - that there was something refreshingly illuminating about Omond.  

And there still is. Now her latest move follows on through a clear trajectory towards achieving those very same goals when she first set out with The Climate Rush group - an impassioned rush for change. Only now Omond has adapted her approach:  

"It has to be time for something new. I'm sick of being told Britain is 'broken'. I want to play a part in fixing it. That is why I am standing for Parliament on behalf of The Commons."  

Running for local elections in her home constituency Hampstead and Kilburn, Omond has committed herself to figure-heading a community approach to modern day politics that has until now left most of us feeling lacklustre and lost. Backed by a campaign directive known as The Commons, Omond's transparency is appealingly enforced by a genuine concern for society.  

Indeed, as was the case in the past for the eco-activist, we can expect to see the same of her future: not preaching from the political soap-box but taking its structures apart, laying the material she has to hand out flat and inviting "Come one, Come all" to have their say. Just take at look at her social network manifesto.  

Already echoing her own history of success, there is a sort of artistic integrity that holds Omond's campaign together. It is not the traditional patena of affairs, that's true. And this might be enough to scare the average voter away. But these are not average times. In fact, they are the opposite. As political deadlines sit in waiting on the monthly calender, so too does an environmental, social and individual calender exist.  

Through the hard work of supporting organisations such as The Commons, the integral drive of Omond herself, and the warm support she receives along the way, the key decisions - as Omond would surely advocate - are ultimately made with action. So without further delay, click here to see how you can use your support.

Posted under Articles, Climate, EcoWarriors

Over the last six months weather in Britain has been a little bit freaky. From several bouts of snow - the heaviest and most frequent to have fallen for a good few years - to several periods of doom and gloom and torrential downpours, it's been something of a grey blur, and the spring doesn't look set to kick in either: with April approaching, the usual 'April showers' are giving way to torrents of rain and little sunshine.

Given that sunshine was a little too sparse for some last summer too, the grey haze that has been an eradication of "traditional" seasons could be worrying for some Take a little comfort, then, from recent information which suggests that the Middle ages were even wetter; in fact, one study is linking the strange lack of sunshine to the "black death".

Ominous indeed: what could the adverse effects of our changing seasons be? Though calls for a new weather induced-black-death-pandemic would be a little on the ridiculous side, what this information does show is that climate can have a real effect on a given population. Now, this wouldn't be the place for speculation on what that effect could be in the modern era, but it's certainly food for thought the nonetheless.

And it dispels that view that things in the good ol' days of yore were better, doesn't it?

Faint witticisms aside, it does represent an interesting thought experiment: is our climate just fostering a misery in us or is it going to have biological effects too? Whilst the link between climate and the plague of the Middle Ages certainly represents an exceptional circumstance, it raises certain questions about what we're doing not only to the "environment" around us but also ourselves, in our society of high-carbon output;.

Hmm.

And if you're wondering how people worked out that the Middle Ages had wetter summers, here follows the answer, from Professor Dr Jan Esper of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz:

"Annual growth rings provide us with an accurate indication of summer droughts for each individual year, dating back to late medieval times"

Who knew the insides of trees could be that interesting?

Posted under Articles, Climate

In a sweeping move to win Republicans and moderate Democrats on energy legislation, US President Barack Obama has recently endorsed nuclear power with revised vigour. In his State of the Union address, Obama outlined the next budget year for the US to include billions more dollars in support of new nuclear reactors.

Despite deep-set concerns over radioactive waste, Obama's administration has refocused its tentative outlook on nuclear power to concentrate on a White House priority - climate and energy legislation. Such reaffirmations have been set in state planning to provide a growing number of 'clean' energy jobs to neighbouring districts.

US spokesmen have addressed Obama's actions as reflecting his long term support of nuclear power. However, there has been considerable pressure on the White House for not exploring the viable role nuclear energy and its existing infrastructure can play in mitigating global warming.

Presently, there are over one hundred nuclear reactors in operation, providing around 20 per cent of US electricity. But the potential of nuclear energy and its operating success in pollution-free power sources outweighs even some of the more esteemed favourites, such as wind power, solar and hydroelectric dams. Nuclear energy contributes 70 per cent of power in this field. And US senators are ever-more aware of these potentials.

Nuclear power generation in the US has proved to be a remarkably safe and reliable form of power generation since its first sites came online. However, in order to ensure that nuclear power can act as a viable source of energy for the US and other global markets, engineers and not scientists have got their work cut out for them. It is less with the technology of nuclear power rather than with the constructability of nuclear units throughout the US that need to be addressed.

Sen. Lamar Alexander, for instance, plans to see 100 plants built over the next 20 years. This is not unrealistic according to the Environmental Protection Agency who, after recent surveys, postulate 180 new reactors would be supporting the US energy grid by 2050.

As with any national plans to fully integrate a modified - and by all means advanced - method of generating power, the changes made to the face of American power industries will be vast and demanding. And this has evidently been acknowledge by White House planners.

Even Obama himself has changed the course of his rhetoric to suit forthcoming advancements. He said last week:

"Up until now, the administration has been pursuing a national windmill policy instead of a national energy policy, which is the military equivalent of going to war in sail boats."

Brook Buchana, a spokeswoman for Sen. John McCain, has stated that the senator was enthused by the President's momentum, but also highlighted some of the potential quandaries facing the current administration.

McCain, who criticised Obama's standing on nuclear power throughout the 2008 campaign, remains, along with a large number of state senators, unclear as to whether or not the President receives full backing at this time in present. Industry talks are set to clarify some of the next steps over the oncoming months.

Posted under Articles, Climate

Reports from the Renewable Fuels Agency have warned that using bio-fuel in vehicles may be having adverse effects on the environment. A watchdog recently reported that the use of bio-fuels could actually be helping to destroy the rain forest rather than saving it. Enquiries also point to the possible rise in pump prices due to the Government's policy of ensuring fuel companies add bio-fuels to stand along side petrol and diesel.

Over 1 million hectares of land was used in Britain to contribute approximately 2 per cent of the required fuel last year.

This is a relatively new initiative enforced by the Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation, one that is in place to shepherd a growing proportion of bio-fuel into the UK fuel market. On average, 3.25 per cent of fuel must be renewably sourced this year. And by 2020, this figure will rise to 13 per cent. Although this is a positive step for the renewable fuel markets, its immediate impact on consumers may increase fuels prices quite considerably.

The Renewable Fuels Agency revealed that leading fuel companies had previously exploited a loophole which excused them from reporting the exact source of almost 50% of the bio-fuel they supplied to filling stations last year. In 2009, Esso identified the source of only 6 per cent of its bio-fuel and BP, with a similarly low figure, reported only 27 per cent. This activity has been subscribed to the somewhat loose practise that fuel companies are able to describe fuel origin as "unknown" if it is from recently cleared land.

Grey areas such as these need to become a clear Green before 2020, where over a tenth of fuel will be required to have come from renewable sources - a reality which requires the significant adoption of large patches of land. The agency's concerns over the "unknown" areas of last year's reports stem from the threat of a net release of carbon. Such carbon release may have been detrimental to last year's bio-fuel savings as a whole if, for instance, even a small percentage of the "unknown" land was carbon-rich grassland or forestland.

Another concern that has been flagged by recent reports is the method that some companies have partaken in to ensure they achieve bio-fuel targets.

A majority of fuel companies have been keeping up their bio-fuel obligation by buying large quantities of palm oil. Although palm oil is a relatively cheap alternative it is also, potentially, one of the most threatening to the environment due to the carbon-release caused by deforestation in order to create plantations. The Renewable Fuels Agency added that industry leaders had failed to invest in more expensive, sustainable palm oil and have thus stimulated rather dubious areas of the renewable field.

This news comes at the same time, under a European directive, that from March 2011 fuel companies will receive another get-out-clause; that being, fuel firms will not be required to declare using rain forest land if the trees were removed before 2008.

Posted under Articles, Climate

More than ever before the Copenhagen climate Change Summit drew interest and scrutiny on the political side of climate change and global warming problems. Now, all eyes are fixed firmly on the negotiators, and the lack of development at the summit has angered many who would brand those negotiators as the culprits, and has been reported in newspapers, on blogs, news websites and social networks.

There was nothing of the sort in 1997. The Kyoto Protocol was a matter of great press interest, but nothing of the level of scrutiny reached other forms of expression. But the move towards the Copenhagen Climate Change Summit has coincided with the rise in blogging, and now a whole host of angry activists - neither politicians nor journalists - are getting in on the act.

Putting pressure on both the politicians involved and the journalists expected to deliver interpretation of those actions to the world, blogs and social networks have allowed for an explosion of public opinion on the summit. One such example comes from Radiohead front-man Thom Yorke, who attended the summit and kept the Radiohead website in a state of frequent flux with his thoughts on the talks.

In a final flurry of anger, he wrote as follows:

"i guess this time of year is a time for serious reflection and i have been doing a lot of that since coming back from copenhagen.
you know what has stunned me coming back is the anger you can taste in the air about this, everybody i meet wants to talk about it.. everyone is angry and despairing and i have tried to remain positive when i talk to them about it.. it has perhaps awakened something in the back of the mind of sane people throughout the world who perhaps naively assumed that something positive would come of these talks."

And anger has been the reaction for so many that it will now be hoped that the unsatisfactory deal done at Copenhagen will not be met by an equally disappointed lack of protest and backlash from those who oppose its weaknesses.Still in the immediate aftermath, it is difficult to tell. Let's hope, though, that at a grass-roots level, something can be done.

Posted under Articles, Climate

What is it to be environmentally aware these days? It seems that there is no such direct answer. A few years ago recycling, using public transport and buying Organic would've qualified you as an environmentalist in most UK homes. Nowadays, as the threats of Climate Change become ever more apparent, we can see that all our day-to-day actions have ramifications.

This little revelation, as obvious as it is, has shocked most of us into not only considering our own activities within an ecological world but also valuing the work of others. And it's true: almost everything has a Green edge. That is, from your next door neighbour down the road, to the top-end business corporations, everybody can see that it pays to be Green. Businesses sink or sail under this gust of fresh air. And consumers too - having built themselves the supermarket ceremony of digesting the back of product packets in order to contents-check what it really is they're buying - recognise the relevant eco-activities and are impressed by governed Green Seals of approval.

And so it seems that to be environmentally aware today is to question the effects you'll have on tomorrow. Whether we choose to see the worth in this new culture is entirely up to us. But it is up to us. Questioning the real 'value' of our everyday products and services is key. And sometimes the simplest changes are right in front of our noses. Did you know that switching energy tariffs is a sure way to support the shift we need away from fossil fuel consumption? It's true: as a result of growing concern over the earth's finite fossil fuel resources, energy companies have designed green energy tariffs to meet the demands of an ever-emergent environmentally aware market.

Did you also know that it costs just as much to change energy tariffs from your traditional 'grey' suppliers to a 'green' one; but now with the added bonus that next time you switch-on you'll be safe in the knowledge that you are minimising the carbon impact on our environment whilst encouraging others to source their power from renewables too.

It's a cyclical pattern: the consumer demands that at least a portion of their energy is sourced from renewable sources (solar power, wind farms, water turbines etc); power suppliers recognise this demand and align their business service accordingly, investing in the generation of 'clean' energy; other competing firms notice this developing market and bustle for market space, creating further services, again making further investments into renewable sources, and attempting to under-cut the prices of the leading tariffs. This cycle repeats and renews itself until the market is fully developed to meet all the needs of its Green market. And why? Simply because we 'read the back of the packaging' and made the quick calculation for whether or not it is sustainable.

Isn't that brilliant? And it doesn't have to stop there: checking your tariff (which you can do now by clicking the ecotricty link below) is the perfect place to start questioning the services you have in place right now. Just as scanning the ingredients of the food we put into our bodies has become instinctive, so will our ways of valuing, or, if you like, 'calculating' the sum of our day-to-day activities for tomorrow: this will become a second nature we can all invest our pride in.

Posted under Articles, Climate, EcoWarriors

A Hindu theologian, living in Brecon, Wales, has discovered possibly one of the simplest ways to carve our domestic carbon footprint down to its bare essentials. Akhandadhi Das, through his study of Hinduism and the religion's focus on the symbiotic relationship between mankind and the cow, has began to advocate a life without meat as a cause to help decrease the carbon emissions created by UK markets driving intense beef farming.

Mr Das, who found Hinduism in his adult life, has taken an economic edge to his new found enlightenment: "I've been following Hinduism all my adult life and over the years have got very much involved in environmental projects, both here in the UK and in India. My big interest at the moment is the Food Chain. As far as I can see, there is one single thing that each one of us can do that would make a huge impact to our planet, to our carbon footprint, to changing Climate Change, and that is go vegetarian."

One of several religious representatives who attended the Faith in the Environment conference hosted by BBC Wales in November 2009, Mr Das is firm in his belief that vegetarianism is the right step but not for ethical reasons:

"The reason is that the meat industry is responsible for more green house gases than all of the transport systems of the planet. It's destroying the rain forest - two acres disappear every second - given over to temporary grazing and production of soya to feed animals fattening them for beef. This can't be sustained, even for the handful of people on the planet eating that never mind the rest of the population properly."

He continues. "What we need is a holistic approach to the food chain. That, I think, is summarised in the Hindu which really incorporates the symbiotic relationship that humans have with cows. The cow produces the miracle food milk, eats grass that grows freely all over the place; the bull ploughs the land, provides draft, and is the power and the bread-winner. If humans concentrated on their relationship with the cow and the bull, they would enrich the earth with manure; improving the soil, improving productivity and, actually, we could happily feed the planet in a way that is not exploitative either of the earth and the animals."

Mr Das' studies are rooted in the Hindu concept 'Ahimsa' which translates to 'non-violence'. The concept itself goes beyond the obvious state of not being violent to each other, it practises a reciprocal relationship with man and his surroundings in an attempt to achieve Harmony with his Environment.

According to reports in 2006 by the Livestock, Environment and Development Initiative, the livestock industry is currently one of the largest contributors to environmental degradation worldwide. Its impact on the planet includes; air and water pollution, land degradation, climate change, and an increasing loss of biodiversity. Mr Das' approach to vegetarianism is one that should be expanded on with regards to the ineffective and inefficient infrastructures that today hold our meat markets in place.

For more information on this subject and to see Mr Das' interview in full, click here or visit the BBC website.

Posted under Articles, Climate, EcoWarriors

Who's responsibility is it to question and answer the ever-changing problems of the world? Traditionally it has fallen to the artists of civilisation to raise these never ending questions and invite us, the spectators, to participate and think. However, one thing has remained the same: there is no clear or set solution: no straight line.

And as science, technology and industry have reached their own contemporary boundaries, pushing these limits together and individually, they too have asked the same questions with their very own specific languages. So what is it that the arts have to offer to, what seems like, a question only a synthesis of the latter three can answer?

Never before have we seen such a direct and clear acknowledgment that planet Earth is under threat. Headline after headline reinforces these troubled times in waves. Climate change too has become quite a colloquialism, and one that, unfortunately, has become part of the mis-understood idiom of the 21st century. Rain forests are in decline, the O-zone layer is deteriorating and ice-caps are shrinking back into the sea. The only things that seem to be on the increase are pollution levels and the general sense of overwhelming bewilderment that all this information can weigh upon one mind alone.

Is there any hope or solution? A collection of exhibitions, talks and seminars held at the Royal Academy of Arts are inviting the public to respond to these very issues. Earth: Art of a changing world is one example of how art today attempts to grasp the discursive questions relating to climate change and the environment. Through the eyes of contemporary artists, looking to address topical, environmental issues, present time old questions in today's more than relevant situation. The Royal Academy of Art explains:

"'Earth: Art of a changing world' brings together the work of over thirty leading contemporary artists in order to show how art can help us to explore and debate the issues surrounding climate change. Many works in the exhibition highlight both the beauty and fragility of the natural world, leading us to think about our own impact on the environment

As the title of the exhibition suggests, our planet is already experiencing change and the exhibition also invites us to consider the cultural as well as environmental consequences of rising temperatures."

The success of this exhibition and exhibitions just like it being held around the country depend on its participating spectators. That being said, the very concept of this kiln of art exhibition begins to works its way into the imagination before even setting foot into a gallery. If art, artists and their spectators are to help 'save' the world, it seems highly significant that what must be done in order to achieve its result, is to hold a public exhibit: one where anyone is invited to simply turn up, look, and begin to question. Whatever those questions may be.

It's true to say that everyone has a different interpretation, a unique way of understanding the possible meaning of a single piece of art, but whatever the maxim 'seeing is believing' may mean to you, the Royal Academy of Arts, regional galleries and artists up and down the country, are hoping to open your eyes, whichever way they can.

Posted under Articles, Climate, Events