Brown just doesn’t get it – it’s official.
The camel’s back has finally broken; nine years after being appointed by Tony Blair to the post of chairman of the Sustainable Development Commission (SDC), Sir Jonathon Porritt has finally had to accept that Gordon Brown has as little understanding of the importance of sustainability and its key role in the future viability of business in the UK (and globally) now, as he had when he was chancellor.
And what is worse, his decisions reflect it on a daily basis, culminating this month in his support of a third runway at Heathrow.
For nine long years, Sir Jonathon has probably had to work hard to temper his own, deep understanding of the impact of government action (or inaction) on the environment with a desire to shake some people by the scruff of the neck and get them to see sense the old fashioned way! His work was not made easier when Gordon Brown took over from Tony Blair and has been made considerably tougher since Sir Peter Mandelson slid back into a position of influence; Mandelson is definitely not someone who either does, or will ever, ‘get it’, as he drives a cart and horses through what is left of the British economy, promises panaceas to every group he comes into contact with, whilst not actually delivering anything at all.
Although Sir Jonathon will continue his work with the Forum for the Future, he will be sadly missed from the SDC by those who understand that, at some point, you need to have political will behind corporate intentions. With his departure, there is really no-one left to curb the economically suicidal actions that this government are taking in the pursuit of re-election votes… and it is small comfort that, if nothing changes and we inherit the geo-economic near-future that, without a change of political ‘hearts and minds’, will be inevitable, people such as Sir Jonathon will be able to say “I told you so”.
The irony of what has transpired is that Brown might actually have had, by now, some good news to publicise – instead of using the govt. (in collusion with the press) induced H1N1 flu ‘panic’ to hide bad news behind.
In an attempt to look as if they care, Brown’s eco-puppy, Ed Miliband (energy secretary), spoke this week of how the Low Carbon Transition Plan is “starting to come right” – which might have made us feel a little more positive had he not opened his mouth in the same week that the UK’s only large wind turbine manufacturer, Vestas, was set to close.
This series of political gaffes comes from two major misconceptions that the political incumbents live under; despite the fact that the last decade of political leadership has turned this country into a service economy, they still believe that they can manufacture their way out of a recession and, as a result, have consigned the sustainability issue to the front lawn, together with the old mattress and the broken fridge, completely missing the point that, since we are now almost completely reliant on service revenues, our avoidance of the carbon resource reduction issue (a key aspect of sustainability practice), creates the very real risk of our losing access (or, at the very least, economically-viable access) to the very energy sources that will continue to power and drive that service sector.
I sincerely hope Jonathon Porritt will now work with the corporate sector to delivers actions in a way that he was unable to with politicians. He’s the right man for that job and we need to replace some of the big corporate gentlemen’s eco-smoking clubs (like the Clinton Global Initiative) and get down to some actual action.
I wish him every success. If he doesn’t contact you, contact him; he’s got real solutions that are worth implementing and you should be working with him.
July 27th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
But what about all the work that has been done in the auto industry?
Last week it was announced that Nissan will produce electric car batteries at its Sunderland plant, Toyota will start producing petrol/electric hybrid version of the Auris in the UK, Vauxhall, meanwhile, may yet win the contract to produce General Motors’s new electric car, the Chevrolet Volt. All this is a massive testament to UK manufacturing, saving and creating jobs.
Taxpayers money is also being spent on a lot of green infrastructure projects, including electricity charging points, a test track in the north east, and an R&D facility linked to local universities, and a training centre for electric cars.
A lot is currently being done that we can’t discount.
July 28th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
May I refer the honourable member to the Toyota Prius v Humvee life cycle cost fiasco (which was discussed here) and can be read in detail here.
Additionally, are electric cars just an electric dream; after all, where does the juice come from if not from more carbon intensive power generating stations (even if Miliband is supporting the carbon capture story)? Even the hydrogen cell car needs a power station to create the fuel…
… and just how long did the automotive industry sit on these ‘innovations’ before dusting them off after being promised our hard-earned tax money to ‘develop’ an alternative (18 years working with the OEMs can be quite enlightening as to just how much technology they are still sitting on!).
Additional feedback welcome!
July 28th, 2009 at 3:31 pm
Sure I am also skeptical about the issue of where the electricity for the cars comes from and this is an issue that must be dealt with.
But there is a huge advantage to going electric if green power generation continues to develop. I firmly believe carbon capture will eventually come right and less carbon will be burnt in the future for each KwH. If it does and power generation becomes a lot cleaner then phasing in electric cars will have been completely justified. And this country will have come out on top for having invested its manufacturing in this area. What are the alternatives for personal transport, (bicycle???)
With regards to your last point - like any industry the economic incentive was not there to invest in new technologies. A company with a bit of foresight would be sitting very pretty now - there is no reason a car company should sit on green technology when that technology would give them a market advantage.
July 28th, 2009 at 6:03 pm
Peter Wognum hit the nail on the head when saying “… and just how long did the automotive industry sit on these ‘innovations’ before dusting them off after being promised our hard-earned tax money to ‘develop’ an alternative ..”. This is precisely what the energy companies are doing over the development of energy sources to replace fossil fuels. They have known for decades that these will run out eventually and would have to be replaced with alternatives in order for them to survive. There’s no great rush for them to invest much at the moment because theres still plenty of fossil fuels around for decades yet (Natural gas and coal in particular) but with the opportunity to get government funding for the research that they would have to fund themselves in future, why not get moving now. They have everythinmg to gain and nothing to lose.
Regards, Pete Ridley, Human-made Global Climate Chnage Agnostic
July 29th, 2009 at 9:50 am
[response to Question]: unfortunately, the point I was making about the Automotive Industry is that they had electric car technology as far back as the 1970’s. The reason the technology sat on a shelf gathering dust is because they were doing very nicely, thank you very much, colluding with the oil giants, so there was no need to dust it off.
They have had cars that can drive themselves and reduce traffic accidents to 0% since the late 60’s, but there is more profit in charging extra for airbags and parking sensors… and every crash write-off means another registration to replace it - trust me, they were just waiting for a govt. injection of cash to bolster flagging sales revenues before they agreed to take the old technology off the shelf - remember, if the battery in your cell phone can now give upward of 200 hours standby time, why haven’t they leapfrogged to a slim cell instead of putting large acid battery lumps into car floors?
[response to Peter Ridley]: At the risk of being labelled the world’s greatest cynic, why would I, as an energy company senior exec, use the research money for research into technologies that already have a proven track record (wind, wave, lightning, solar, etc.), when my CFO can play balance sheet merry-go-round and ensure that my profit statement still looks good enough for million pound bonus? Just a thought…
July 29th, 2009 at 10:41 am
Peter: I will be happy to accept your argument if you have evidence or could point out evidence of industry wide collusion between car manufacturers and the oil industry…. It is often talked about and speculated about because it does make sense. But - is there hard evidence?
Surely there can be no doubting the market share to be gained from a purely ‘green’ car.
I do agree with your point on batteries- why the hell have they not developed more efficient batteries!!!!!
July 30th, 2009 at 10:29 am
Question: Happy to take this further off-line. In the meantime, I can recommend an excellent documentary made a few years ago, called “Who killed the electric car?” (http://www.whokilledtheelectriccar.com/)