How can I make a difference individually?

I believe that one person can’t make much of a difference to being sustainable. With a population as big as ours we need to get people to come together and make a difference that way. For instance if one person turns lights off in a room what difference will that make? It may cut down that person’s electric bill but it isn’t going to stop climate change. However if everyone in halls of residence in England turned out lights in empty rooms this although would only make a small difference it would be a significant difference.


This Christmas I will be living with relatives in a town called Redditch which is called a new town.

Redditch is a bit similar to Milton Keynes which is also a new town. It is a leafy town of a few hundred thousand people and is classed as a commuter town between Birmingham and Worcester.

The way the town was designed is so that people can get around pretty easily by using the dual carriageways. This is in theory quite clever in that compared to other local towns as Redditch suffers from no rush hour gridlocks therefore cutting carbon emissions.

However this has its negative effects, in terms of car usage. I hate the fact I have to use my car to get around the town, but I am not left with many alternatives as the bus links are pretty poor and very expensive. The bus links out of the town are pretty none existent and the cycle routes are dangerous and go through country lanes that are at national speed limit which are bendy and unlit after dark. I am shameful to say that this Christmas there will be five cars outside the house. Although they are all small cars the pollution that we will be putting into the environment is one that will be heavily on my mind.


However a plus note is that the recycling scheme that is in place is pretty effective. We have several bins and boxes in which to get rid of our waste. I admit in our household there will be five of us which means we end up with a lot of waste however we all make an effort to recycle what can be recycled.


One thing that we do a lot in our household and is urged by Redditch District Council is to Freecycle. This involves instead of throwing things away donating them to organisations instead. We have got rid of a lot of furniture such as living room chairs and bedroom furniture this way. http://redditch.whub.org.uk/home/rbc-live-recycling-reuse-freecycle-furniture-and-electrical_items


I think individually I could do a lot more to make a difference, but even if I did do more how would I know that it is making a difference?

UN Debate

From doing this exercise I have learnt that the so called ‘developed’ countries such as USA and China are not as sustainable as they like to think they are. They are apparently the richer countries but when compared to countries such as Denmark they really are doing little to improve sustainable development in their country.

It was quite hard to find information about the Solomon Islands as they do not actually have a National Sustainable Development Plan. However the other policies such as the National Health Policy was quite easy to find as it was already in place and the country view this policy as quite important and we found this coming up quite a bit in internet searches. It was also quite difficult to find many plans and policies because the Solomon Islands are small and with a population of only half a million they are going to be harder to find than say Denmark. Also with the Islands only just coming out of conflict in 2003 they are only just starting to build their country back up which means that any plans or policies that the country wants to develop are going to be new and probably basic.

It was surprised as all countries have completely different approaches to the idea of sustainable development. For instance the USA wanted the money to help its army and navy but to also try to help Africa whilst countries such as Malawi who have barely any national exports want to use it to try and help their national people. I got the impression that the poorer countries had much more genuine ideas of what to use the money for. Why should the USA be given money to improve its army whilst countries in Africa have to sustain droughts and frequent starvation just so the USA can attack a few more countries?

I think our presentation went ok however I lost the plot half way through which didn’t help. However we said everything that we needed to say and got our point across within the time limit set. I think we highlighted well the policy and plans currently in place and clearly defined what the money would be used for. If we were to do the exercise again I think practice would be key as I think if we were more confident with what we were to say then perhaps it would have come across a bit better and the nervousness wouldn’t show so much in the presentation.

I did enjoy this exercise and I think I have learnt more from it than I would have done if it were done in a normal lecture. I think by having a debate it makes you think more widely around the subject as you want to ask the other countries questions to find out more (and to see them squirm).

Overall I think we worked well as a team and found that we got on and was able to research and present our findings.

Northamptonshire Waste Strategy

Right let’s talk some rubbish about rubbish... Get it?

There was a previous waste strategy in 2002 and it highlighted that there is a need for Northamptonshire to seriously think about the way that it collects and manages its waste. To which the majority of this waste was being land filled instead of using other methods to prevent it from getting to this stage.

Over the next twenty or so years there is going to be an estimated 108,000 extra households built in Northampton equating to several hundreds of thousands of extra people. The strategy suggested this will be a 39% increase in households. This will ultimately create huge amounts of extra waste that if not seriously thought about will end up just going into land fill sites. To give Northamptonshire County Council (NCC) some credit with the introduction of this strategy they are beginning to seriously think about the environment around us and ways of increasing recycling and other methods and not just dumping everything into the ground.

In this blog post I intend to explain the variations in recycling rates amongst county and borough Councils in Northamptonshire in particular I will be comparing Corby Borough Council (CBC) and Daventry District Council (DDC).

When we look at this data we can see that at the beginning in 2001/2002 CBC had the worst household waste recycling of 3.5% compared to DDC which had the highest rate of household recycling with 44%. I think the difference in these numbers is absurd. How can one be doing that much better than another? However if we then look at the changes that have occurred up until the latest figures of 2006/2007 we can try to evaluate the amount of household waste being recycled. If we look at CBC in 2006/2007 they actually recycled 28% of their waste. This may still be lower than others but is still a drastic improvement of 24.5% when compared to DDC. Although they started off with 44% they only had recycling rates of 47% in 2006/2007 so an overall growth of only 3%. These reasons can be explained more by looking at table 4 of the strategy

If we compare both CBC and DDC we can see that there are small but subtle differences. CBC only has their recyclables collected fortnightly whilst DDC is weekly. Also another difference is what is collected as recyclables. DDC accept a wide range of recyclables including glass and textiles which CBC does not. This could explain the lower figures of CBC in terms of how much household waste is recycled. Those living within DDC have the option of recycling items which they may not have otherwise done had they not been able to do this again could increase that total figure.

Right finally what can be done to improve recycling?

One method that could possibly be used to improve recycling is that of community involvement. I have no idea to what the community involvement is in like in Northampton obviously with being on campus. However certain areas of the community may not know about the recycling schemes or what can be recycled. These areas need to be targeted such as perhaps leaflets in different languages, in Braille or on audio tape. Also sessions could be put on for groups such as the elderly and perhaps even demonstrations in schools to promote recycling to children. These social groups are often left behind in society but for us to get the most out of our resources and to be “sustainable” the message needs to be spread to everyone. We need to be inventive in how we involve whole communities it’s alright to put fliers through the door but not everyone can understand it in that form and other methods need to be thought of alongside it.

Also communities need to be involved in decisions on what happens to their waste. This can be small things such as a change in the day of collection or be invited to meetings to discuss alternatives to where the next land fill site is located. In my opinion if people are included in things they will want to take a more proactive approach and to try their best if they are fully informed. If county councils and boroughs want their communities to take responsibility for their role in managing waste then they need to do their upmost to involve communities because at the end of the day one persons waste is everyone’s waste!

http://www.northamptonshire.gov.uk/environment/waste/strategy.htm (January 2008)

Bad news sells papers! Blog 2

"How reliable do you think newspaper reports are about climate change? To what extent do UK newspaper reports link climate change to sustainable development?"


For this blog post I aim to look at the content of both tabloid and broadsheet newspapers in regard to climate change and the link to sustainable development, I will also be looking at class structures of the reader of each type of newspaper. Finally I will be using my personal experiences of the July 2007 floods in Worcestershire to try to support my opinions.

First of all in my opinion what do I think are the main differences between tabloid and broadsheet newspapers? I personally think class structure is a huge issue. Broadsheet readers tend to be defined as A (Upper class) or B (Middle class) to which comprises over half of total readership. Whilst those who tend to read Tabloids are supposedly from C (Lower middle class/skilled working class, D (Working class) and E (Underclass) which comprise of most of the total readership. The Newspaper Marketing Agency (2007) highlighted from their research that 60% of those who read Broadsheet newspapers are from the social groups A and B. However those readers only make up 20% of Tabloid readers.

From this information we can work out who reads what. This information then tells us that people who read Broadsheets are likely to be interllectuals who are most likely to have a better education than say someone who reads Tabloids. So perhaps we can say that this could mean that Broadsheets are perhaps more reliable in terms of accurate and reliable content.

As I live in Worcestershire I have memories of a lot of Tabloid coverage of the July 2007 floods. Worcestershire along with other counties suffered quite badly. In particular areas such as Droitwich and Upton upon Severn both have rivers running through them, both burst their banks during this time. I remember pictures in Tabloids such as The Sun and The Mirror which show Droitwich High Street under several feet of water. Having only been living about five miles away from Drotiwich it made me aware of exactly how bad the weather was especially with the M5 being closed and people spending the night in their cars on the motorway. Looking back now through the articles from the time there was a high volume of articles in the Tabloids and even quite a few in the Broadsheets. Even several months later both were still reporting about the event and the clean up that followed.

An area of Drotwich (This is actually a main road)

Droitwich High Street July 2007

Two links below one from a Tabloid and one from a Broadsheet reporting on the floods:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article2120992.ece

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article246571.ece

Having looked back on the articles from both Tabloids and Broadsheets from that time I can honestly say from experience that the Broadsheets tended to be more informative, reliable and accurate than the Tabloid newspapers. As for linking with climate change with sustainable development I can honestly say that Broadsheets do this a lot better than Tabloids. The latter tend to have shock tactics headlines, short articles but dont explain what we can do about it. Whilst in my opinion Broadsheets tend to analyse and try to come up with reasoned arguements and logical solutions.

For instance I found an article by The Mirror "Golf Course at St Andrews could sink under the sea by 2050" However all the article states is that a climate change expert states that the golf course could be lost by rising sea levels. This 'expert' does not state why they believe this, or what evidence they had to come up with this conclusion. This article is misinforming the public and not giving them the facts to make informed decisions.

I also found an article from The Times "Looting, panic buying and a water shortage" . This is a reasonable article and states facts and what the issue is, it also states the problems faced and how they were overcoming them.

In conclusion I believe that there are many theories and opinions to whether newspaper reports are reliable in regards to climate change and the link to sustainable development. However there is a distinct gap between the content of Tabloids and Broadsheets and that Broadsheets are more likely to find a link between climate change and sustainable development.

http://www.http://www.bbc.co.uk/herefordandworcester/content/image-galleries/droitwich_floods_jul07_gallery.shtml?36

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article2120922.ece

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news-old/top-stories/2008/10/14/golf-course-at-st-andrews-could-sink-under-sea-by2050-115875-20801729/

Boykoff, M.T. (2008) The cultural politics of climate change discourse in UK tabloids. Political Geography 27 (5) 549-569

Private Cars! No1

Lets start this blog with a little theory *yawn*. The UK Government Sustainable Development Strategy 'securing the future' was launched in March 2005 by the Prime Minister. It states that sustainable development is "enabling all people throughout the world to satisfy their basic needs and employ a better quality of life for future generations".

It is suggested that the strategy is supposed to be useful and be an accessible reference for people and to highlight the challenges of sustainable development to those who may not know what it is or what it is about. The final idea is that it should help the reader to understand these issues and want to find out more.

Now that the extremely boring bits are out of the way things should start to get a little more interesting. The private car indicator from the above document states that "carbon emissions have increased by 4% between 1990 and 2006. To me this sounds a bit daft that emissions have increased by quite a huge amount in 4%. Yes I agree no doubt that there are more cars on the road in 2006 and 1990 however the majority of them in my opinion use cleaner fuel, do more miles to the gallon and don't emit as much emissions. However in hind sight perhaps the reason why the levels have increased this much could be do with the fact that the amount of cars coming onto the road every year have overtaken our advances on trying to meet this goal of lowering fuel emissions.

I think perhaps to lower these emissions and get in line for when the next strategy is released people need to seriously think about what they are driving. We all know about the mothers who drive their kids the 1 mile to school in their big 4 x 4's and people carriers instead of walking or getting the bus. What's the harm in having a small town car to do the school run if necessary? Why the monster truck to drop the little darlings off at school? If I ever got a lift to or from school i'd think it were my birthday. It used to take me a good 40 minutes to get home from school by foot all year round. Anyway going back on topic if people were to consider using more economic cars then maybe fuel emissions would indeed come down and start to make a massive difference.

In my opinion I feel that I am being economical in the way I drive and what I actually drive. I mean I don't have my car on campus as I live in halls, I use the bus to get into town and to other various places. When at home I don't drive to excessive speeds, gentle on the old gears and accelerator. Lets have some figures and pictures to liven things up.

Now don't laugh please this is what I drive (same color but not exact car). 1.2 Litre Fiat Panda. It does 50 miles per gallon (MPG) combined and is only a band 3 in tax which is pretty reasonable.

Compared to

The Range Rover TDV6HSE which is a 2.7 Litre Diesel Turbo which does 27.2 MPG combined

So in the scheme of things I believe I am helping to get emission levels down by what and how I drive. For instance even though the range rover is a diesel it still only does half of the MPG mine does. Can you imagine what it would do if it were petrol and less economical?

Another aspect to which i've thought quite a bit about is that perhaps our driving habits as a society need to change. How many of us have sat in traffic jams whereby we've all sat with our engines on polluting the environment and wasting precious fuel? Not enough people car share and when looking around in jams you can see many people sat in cars on their own. Just think if every single occupant shared with someone else perhaps that traffic jam wouldn't exist? If that traffic jam didn't exist then would emissions be lower? Also if rush hour was staggered and less people had to be at work during the rush hour periods would that again cause emissions to be lower?

To conclude I think it is a good choice to include private cars into the strategy. I believe we do have a problem in terms of several factors such as the number of cars we have on the road, the amount of emissions they produce and ultimately the decision on which cars we drive. By having the private car indicator in the strategy it could be a wake up call for someone looking at it to think that perhaps they should downsize or is that journey really worth it or could I use other forms of transport? I believe that there hasn't been much progress in this area as many people are not willing to change their habits. In my opinion I feel that people ignore the issues happening around them in terms of emissions, global warming etc and think it will never happen to them. Also people are too busy in their lives to take time out to think about these issues and what effects they are having in the world.

I think over time emissions may go down in that we are now switching to more environmentally better ways of travel such as eco cars and those which run on alternative fuels. With the economy the way it is people are perhaps downsizing to more cheaper cars and cars which are cheaper to run.

By including private cars in the strategy it is the first step to lowering emissions in many ways. If it works only time will tell.