UK Climate Chaos Newswire Archive
Bankers Guarantees needed off of UK Coal plc
07-12-2010 10:10
MOPG's latest press release, PR 86 'Safeguarding the Community Benefits of the proposed Minorca Surface Mine' explaines why MOPG are asking all those local bodies with an interest in the Minorca Surface Mine Application, whether for or against the application to join with MOPG in asking for UK Coal to provide a Bankers Guarantee..9 activists sentenced in ongoing climate trial
06-12-2010 19:22
On Monday the 6th December the first trial will begin at Trafford Magistrates Court. In this trial the 11 activists who used tripods to blockade the World Freight Terminal preventing air freighted goods from being taken in and out will be tried on charges of obstruction of the highway. Mark and Amanda, who were on top of the tripods, are pleading not-guilty and local Hasty Lane resident Peter Johnson and local Lib Dem Councillor Martin Eakins will both give expert witness during the trial. The trial is expected to last 2 or 3 days.
1000 Cancuns: Solutions from the Grassroots!
06-12-2010 09:11
A celebration of Brixtons Radical Roots
12th December : 1pm-4pm: Windrush Square, Brixton
An afternoon and evening of activities including an informative locally-focused exhibition, Bash the Bankers piñata, speakers and films.
Ratcliffe Trial: Week 2
05-12-2010 00:26
Week 2 of the Ratcliffe Trial saw the defence open their case, giving some of the defendants an opportunity to explain why they took the actions they did. Among the witnesses called was NASA scientist James Hansen, former MP for Notttingham South Alan Simpson and Green Party MP Caroline Lucas.
The Manchester Airport Trial will begin next week, with 11 defendants facing charges of obstruction of the highway, for shutting off the World Freight Centre of Manchester Airport in May this year.
Newswire: Ratcliffe Trial Day 8 – Defence Calls MP's | Day 8 – Leader of the UK Green Party | Day 8 – Alan Simpson | Ratcliffe Trial Day 6 – The Defence Continues | Climate change protesters' anger was justifiable | Ratcliffe Trial Day 5 – Defence case opens | Ratcliffe Day 5 - Hansens says govt lie on climate | Ratcliffe Trial Day 5 - Cheryl Cole gets props
Previous coverage: Ratcliffe Trial: Prosecution Opens | Ratcliffe Conspiracy Trial Begins | Mass Arrest of 114 Climate Activists in Raid
The defence has called an impressive array of witnesses. James Hansen is a prominent climatologist, his testimony on climate change to congressional committees in 1988 helped raise awareness of global warming. Caroline Lucas is a former Green MEP from 1999 – 2010, and current MP for Brighton Pavilion. Alan Simpson was MP for Nottingham South from 1992 until May 2010 when he "decided to resign my seat in order to devote my time to work on climate change and renewable energy policies."
All spoke about the seriousness of the threat from climate change, the coming "tipping points" which would take the global climate to a point of no return, possibly as early as 2013-15. They also discussed the "democratic deficit" which leaves individuals unable to impress upon government the severity of the problem and allows energy companies to wield disproportionate influence.
Simpson stated “There is, in my opinion, an indisputable democratic deficit in [government] having power, but refusing to use it, even to require power stations to audit their annual carbon emissions and the energy efficiency of each power station. It is simply not coherent to argue that any of the governments commitments amount to a coherent plan for carbon emission reductions. This is particularly true within the timescale in which emissions reductions have to be made. Climate change protesters are in my view, absolutely right to argue that we cannot continue with a ‘business as usual’ approach to UK carbon emissions, without threatening the very prospects of existence for future generations."
Miss Felicity Gerry for the prosecution has sought to argue that alternative "democratic" methods of protest would be more effective, citing Paul McCartney and Coldplay’s Chris Martin as examples of effective environmentalism, through their involvement with ‘Meat Free Mondays’. Instead of closing down power stations, she suggested that the defendants would be better off searching for celebrity endorsements for the likes of ‘Turn-off Tuesdays” or “Switch-Off Sundays.” She even suggested that the money that was spent on the action would have been better off hiring Cheryl Cole to model second hand fashions.
The case continues.
Manchester Airport on Trial - call out for court support - Mon. 6th December
04-12-2010 12:25
The seventeen defendants face two trials at Trafford Magistrates Court (M33 7NR). Come to court to show your support. Climate defence is not an offence
Trial 1 – Monday 6th December – Meet at 9am outside court.
Machines Sabotaged at Mainshill
04-12-2010 12:24
In the last week of November machines at Mainshill were sabotaged. Twelve machines had hydraulics and electrics cut, these included dumper trucks, fuel tanks, a digger and bulldozers.
Ratcliffe Trial Day 8 – Defence Calls MP'st
04-12-2010 00:24
Mr Edward Rees QC for the defence, calls the first witness of the day. He is Alan Simpson, former MP for Nottingham South between 1992 to this last election 2010.
During this time, he campaigned for a more serious response to climate change issues, by the UK government. He didn’t contest the last election in May 2010 wanting to devote his time on climate change and renewable energy policies. He remains pessimistic in bringing about required changes through his previous post. He is now the renewable energy policy advisor, to the Friends of the Earth. He does however, continue to have parliamentary contact, advising the coalition government on the consequences of runaway climate change, and the required shift to renewable sources.
At a total of 39% of all carbon emissions produced by the UK, coal is by far the biggest single contributor. This must not remain so and measures need to be taken.
Mr Rees asks him “is there a democratic deficit?” Mr Simpson insists yes there is, absolutely!!
During the Labour government, what was their attitude to the projected tipping points? Ed Miliband, the then Energy Secretary, pioneered the Climate Change Act 2008. This was world leading legislation. Together with the current coalition government, there is a virtual cross party agreement on the need to reduce global CO2 emissions. This act and a number of other important steps have been taken by government. But none however match the scale of the problems that we face. The future threats to life and our wellbeing are posed to future generations.
There is again agreement in the need to at least remain under a 2degC increase in temperatures. He refers to Dr Hansen of NASA research on these issues and the possible climate tipping points that can be predicted to occur between 2013 – 2015 if nothing is done. At this threshold, there could be the start of massive changes, for example once the Arctic tundra ice gives up methane on its melting, beyond that point it is clear we will not be able to do anything about it. Many climate protestors legitimately question whether there is anything in current government action plans that would see UK annual carbon emissions declining by this point in time.
Mr Rees takes Alan Simpson back to the Climate Change Act. He says the object was to change the relationship of individuals and communities to attempt to contribute to solutions. Thus, since the Act came into force in April this year, people and communities who are able to generate electric power by wind turbine, or solar panels etc can contribute to the grid. It should no longer be a one-way system. However the energy companies opposed and campaigned against such moves. E-on lobbied against such similar changes in Germany. They object claiming ‘intrusion into trade’. The European Union eventually found against the company on enquiry.
Simpson says there are six big energy companies and they do have a disproportionate influence in opposing any measures they disapprove of. The ideas behind the passing of the act had cross-party support. But, at the administration bit of the process were the legislation gets poured over by committees and civil servants, the levels of the caps proposed were obstructed at a variety of stages. The energy companies were able to lobby decision makers at various levels. It’s an unequal process. Their money means they can open offices near to government, they can employ research and lobbying companies to put a shine in their case. They can find ‘experts’ to argue to keep operations as they are for maximum profits and dividends for shareholders. Further to frighten politicians with job losses.
They are wrong. In Germany for example, they have created more that 300,000 jobs in renewable industries, more than those lost in older industries. The UK efforts are lamentable. Mr Rees asks him about Vestas a company that used to operate on the Isle of Wight and left the UK because the market wasn’t sufficient for their turbine blade products. Mr Simpson sites another example of ineffectual policy. There are large wind farm of the Scottish coast, that cannot have their outputs connected to the grid for another 10 years!! This is because of energy companies negotiating with government to give traditional generation priority for connection to the grid, over these renewable sources. Because they operate exclusively on their profit motive.
Energy companies are not even required to record and report power station emissions themselves. They are not doing this, because they are aware of possible public concerns. Mr Simpson says that governments aren’t insisting on such recording, even though there is an existing legal frameworks requiring them to do so. The Secretary of State for Energy now says he is intending to insist on reporting emission levels on new power stations. But … this is no good since nearly 40% of carbon emissions are produced from the existing old coal-burning stations
On another issue, he says there were four carbon capture projects being considered in the UK. Now that’s down to one and that has a question mark over it. E-on had pulled out as it being uneconomic to operate.
Mr Simpson says he was trying to get parliament to understand that it is government that should set standards and expect industry to follow them. Currently, things are the other way round. Further we must move to a statutory duty for companied to comply with regulations and for the public to have a right to know.
Mr Rees in finishing his examination asks, is there a shortfall on what is needed and what is done? Yes, it’s why I stepped down from parliament. Government are not taking the measures required to protect us, our children or our grandchildren.
Miss Garry cross-examines. Referring to the Climate Change Act and Energy Acts 2008 & 2009, they set targets. Thus the various science committees and parliament ‘got it right’ in that session? Yes, it was trailblazing legislation and these and other measures were looked at by other governments, as examples of good practice. But, the starting point of the UK was from the bottom, not much better than our position in the Eurovision Song Contest.
Can you say in terms of what individuals can do? I have built an eco-house and produce more energy than I consume. Of course, this is beyond the capacity of many of us. Mr Simpson then goes onto site the example of the Meadows estate in Nottingham. Saying that as a community, we helped to organise collectively to fit solar panels on roofs of houses and then selling power back to the grid.
Miss Gerry again seeks to point out that Mr Simpson took the community ‘with him’ through public consultation and engagement through organising many meetings. Her effort seems to be to seek to draw a distinction between these democratic methods and the direct action engaged in by the defendants. The Meadows community had to organise to overcome opposition and obstacles to achieve progress by engaging people in the locality, within their abilities.
Mr Simpson says that we have lots of information available to us, however, if we were on the Titanic, the main info we need is how to get off the boat. What people could do individually, just doesn’t match the 40% of emissions that power companies are creating.
She gets Simpson to agree that most of these efforts were achieved by knocking on lots of peoples’ doors. A team to canvas to communicate any message and to hold constituency meeting, surgeries etc… He insists however, that people are so limited in what they can do individually, without parliament and government creating a framework that they can be effective within. It is so unequal. Energy companies are so much bigger and more able in lobbying than any individual or community group could handle. It is clear that to successfully lobby on an issue, people need to organise travel to London [sometime Europe], obtain science facts from experts, much time on research and parliamentary meetings. It is beyond the capacity of the ordinary individual. He sites the Suffragette movement and their campaign to get parliament to take measures on the wrong that needed to be put right.
Not responding to this point, Miss Gerry tries a few more examples to get Mr Simpson to agree that public engagement is best. He replies yes, it is best. But since politics sometimes ignores them and their concerns, people need to protest as well !!!
Mr Rees re-examines: What CO2 emission reduction have power companies actually made? None, to very little. There was some reduction because of the loss of manufacturing, the older industries. More recently, the recession means a reduction in the manufacturing output and this can expect to lead to a reduction also. But not, due to any intervention by the energy companies. Because of European Union directives, some of the older power stations may be forcibly closed, but this may result in a ‘dash for gas’.
Mr Rees asks Alan Simpson: Nothing personal … but in your experience do politicians do what they say they’ll do? Do they sometimes lie? Grins all round Its obvious that so many times, targets and policy remain politically aspirational, not what they’ll actually do.
Concluding with this witness, Mr Rees asks: will knocking on doors, really change any opinions of the power companies. No, of course not.
He made a statement in finishing:
“There is, in my opinion, an indisputable democratic deficit in [government] having power, but refusing to use it, even to require power stations to audit their annual carbon emissions and the energy efficiency of each power station. It is simply not coherent to argue that any of the governments commitments amount to a coherent plan for carbon emission reductions. This is particularly true within the timescale in which emissions reductions have to be made. Climate change protestors are in my view, absolutely right to argue that we cannot continue with a ‘business as usual’ approach to UK carbon emissions, without threatening the very prospects of existence for future generations”.
Alan Simpson [former MP, Nottingham South] http://www.alansimpson.org
Friends of the Earth http://www.foe.co.uk
++
After lunch, a live video link is established from the Crown Court to the House of Commons. Mr Rees for the defence then introduces Caroline Lucas MP for Brighton and Leader of the Green Party of England and Wales.
She is a member of the all party Environmental Audit Committee, responsible for evaluating governments operations in meeting its objectives.
Prior to the UK elections in May 2010, between 1999 - 2010 was a Member of the European Parliament, Green MEP for The South East Region. She is also the Green Coordinator on the Climate Change Committee to reduce the impact of the aviation industry on the environment
Mr Rees get her to confirm that there is no serious challenge by elected members in either the UK or European Community that climate change is happening and that it is human driven. But, there is a huge difference between what politicians say and what actually happens. He asks are the targets that are set, commensurate with the perceived threat by emissions and the need for reductions. She says no. We know of the need to keep well within the 2 degC rise beyond which a tipping point will be reached. However, with businesses desire to maintain their activities, there is now no prospect of this if ‘business as usual’ continues.
Rees asks Ms Lucas, in Europe through its political structures, is it easy or difficult to get policy changes? Very difficult she says, it is a very unequal battle. Large companies lobby successfully and have such privileged access to committees and the European Parliament, than individuals or groups, and even the UK parliament gets.
Renewables and cleaner alternatives are currently more expensive and money is sometimes even found coming from a countries aid budgets. Further, sometimes doesn’t even arrive after being pledged.
Moving on to the emission trading schemes. These operate by making allocations to different industrial sectors. In practice these are open to much abuse since a rich company can buy their way out of their agreed obligations. Credits bought from poorer countries. When the European Union require a reduction in emission by X%, much of that will be bought from developing countries, all resulting as ‘business as usual’.
Ms Lucas is asked: Are there penalties for exceeding agreed targets? No, such plans have never had a sufficient majority in the European Parliament and such ideas have always been defeated.
She moves onto describing the situation about Vestas, a company making wind turbine blades, that was based on the Isle of Wight and closed. The company couldn’t make a viable return on selling their product. There was simply a lack of a market for turbine blade in the UK. This of course is symbolic of government efforts in encouraging alternatives. A comparison in the use of renewables in other countries demonstrate out inadequate response. Further, the National Grid is centralised and makes it so difficult for renewable alternatives to adequately contribute.
Kyoto agreements are about to expire and there is no architecture in place to replace it. Without the United States on-board, any proposals will be ineffective. Copenhagen was very disappointing, there was a complete absence of any binding agreement and will not deal with emission reductions within the required timescale. With regard to Cancún, Mexico happening now, expectations are rock-bottom. Agreements to reduce emissions are not even on the agenda, simply not on the table.
Mr Rees asks about current political interest. Lucas says that at a recent UK parliamentary debate, 12 MP’s attended. She is disparaging about this. No politics seems to be taking notice of these immediate tipping points and demonstrates a national complacency on such issues.
Miss Gerry cross-examines [well I think that’s what it was, she seemed to me to reinforce this last point]. She opens in pointing out that the Prime Minister David Cameron, David Beckham and Princes William are all in Zurich, Switzerland, presenting the British bid for a football match, instead of being in Cancún, Mexico. Newspapers and television are full of Zurich and not Cancún. She says that more of the public interest appears to be on football, rather than on climate change. Lucas explains that people feel a remoteness, in that individuals ability to influence European policy processes
Caroline Lucas MP, Leader of the Green Party http://www.carolinelucas.com
Green Party http://www.greenparty.org.uk
UK Parliament Environmental Audit Committee
http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-archive/environmental-audit-committee/eacom
Snowing much outside, court rises a little early. [14:45]
++
2010 Nottingham Ratcliffe Conspiracy Trial Begins [Feature]
http://notts.indymedia.org.uk/articles/701
2010 Nottingham Ratcliffe conspiracy to trespass trial opens today
http://notts.indymedia.org.uk/articles/693
2010 Nottingham Ratcliffe Trial Day 2 - Prosecution’s Opening
http://notts.indymedia.org.uk/articles/702
2010 Nottingham Ratcliffe Trial Day 3 - Prosecution case continues
http://notts.indymedia.org.uk/articles/710
2010 Nottingham Ratcliffe Trial: Prosecution Opens [Feature 2]
http://notts.indymedia.org.uk/articles/714
2010 Nottingham Ratcliffe Trial Day 4 - Prosecution case concludes
http://notts.indymedia.org.uk/articles/716
2010 Nottingham Ratcliffe Trial Day 5 – Defence case opens
http://notts.indymedia.org.uk/articles/735
2010 Nottingham Ratcliffe Trial Day 6 – The Defence Continues
http://notts.indymedia.org.uk/articles/744
Ratcliffe on Trial Blog http://ratcliffeontrial.org/blog
Onwards ... >
____________________________________________
ALAN LODGE
Photographer - Media: One Eye on the Road. Nottingham. UK
Email: tash@indymedia.org
Web: http://digitaljournalist.eu
Member of the National Union of Journalists [NUJ]
____________________________________________
"It is not enough to curse the darkness.
It is also necessary to light a lamp!!"
___________________________________________
<ends>
Anti-nuclear campaigners brand Government energy view a 'fantasy'
03-12-2010 22:05
West country members of the Stop Nuclear Power Network, have slammed a government consultation on the future of the UK’s energy supply - held on Monday (29 November) in Bristol - as ‘trying to sell a fantasy’. And activists attending the public meeting, held by the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), interrupted this afternoon’s event to read out their own ‘cautionary tale’ - which outlines the nightmare future that could be created if a new generation of nuclear power stations is given the go-ahead.
Ecoshock: Surviving Now and Then
03-12-2010 17:32
News on Coal Use which Deserves Publicity
03-12-2010 10:58
This provides a link to an article which reviews the increasing use of Biomass in UK Electricity Production'Nothing' snapped up by Oxford street shoppers
02-12-2010 21:59
were distracted by the launch of London Rising Tide's sales and advertising
team's new product, Nothing(c).
Cruelty-Free Xmas Fair, Sat 18 Dec in Kings Heath, Birmingham
01-12-2010 15:38
Free entry, all welcome.
http://www.veganmidlands.org.uk/events/kingsheath10.html Ratcliffe Trial Day 6 – The Defence Continues
01-12-2010 00:23
30 November 2010 Nottingham Crown Court
Snowing much today, resulting a couple of jury members being late to court. We eventually start after a couple of hours delay.
Edward Rees QC for the defence calls another defendant to the witness box. Mr SC.
After introductions he reminds us of the prosecutions remark yesterday Miss Gerry “suggested that the money that was spent on the action would have been better off hiring Cheryl Cole to model second hand fashions”. SC standing in the witness box and looking quite dapper, he says that his tweed suit and all his cloths were in fact purchased from second hard charity shops.
SC has worked as an freelance environmental researcher for the last 10 years. He had also been on the Greenpeace employed staff for 2 years. He has a degree in Applied Biology. Additionally, he has served as a Parish Counsellor in Bradwell in the Peak District, Derbyshire for 4 years. He has been speaking on environmental issues to schools and public meetings. To Mr Rees’ surprise he says he also had organised tree planting weekends. Explaining, he said Treesponsibility provided a hands-on community involvement to take practical action on an environment matter. Trees help bind soil and help prevent erosion and assist in minimising flooding. There are intense pressures on the Peak District, with the volume of visitors and had worked on public transport issues there.
While working with Greenpeace, during 4 -5 years, he had been concerned with and researched energy generation employing different fuels and supplies to the National Grid. Mr Rees asks, what do you conclude from your research? SC says that he believes that we are close to a number of the tipping points that Dr Hansen had described yesterday, accelerating climate changes. The consequences? Well unless we take measures to reduce CO2 emissions we will reach such tipping points.
SC says having been at the very first COP in Berlin in 1995 [United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change]. All conferences were doing was people simply engaging in an ‘on-going process’ without end. Moving onto Kyoto, there were no binding agreements achieved and did not include USA and China. President Bush would not ratify any such agreements. SC says that unless big emitters like the USA etc join in, then all efforts will fail to achieve any of the required effects. From Kyoto to Copenhagen, he explained that his experience of the COP process had left him disillusioned with its effectiveness, and how when the Ratcliffe occupation had been planned in the run up to the Copenhagen summit, the activists already had a very pessimistic outlook on the likelihood of it achieving much. This pessimism was unfortunately proven to be well-placed.
We are now at the point with a conference meeting again at Cancum, Mexico. But politics remains impotent. With such intransigent s, nothing is going to happen at least for another 2 years to the next presidential election
When Mr Rees asked why he had attempted to shut the station down. He responded, “to achieve the largest savings in emissions that we physically could”. He referred to the Stern review figure of the damage of one tonne of carbon at £50 and that therefore if they managed to stop 150,000 tonnes of carbon, it would amount to savings of £7.5 million. He didn’t see what else he could do to effect this much of a saving. 150,000 toms might not be much when compared globally, but it is a significant amount none the less.
Mr Rees turns to the police raid on the Iona School. SC saying that even though on their arrival, the police were offered access and keys, they continued to batter at outside and the inside doors causing damage. He had earlier given a briefing to the groups, reassuring them that the action will have little effect on the total grid. The lights will remain on.
The plan was to split into groups. He describes the operation of the coal conveyors, taking coal to the plants for crushing and pulverising and onto its storage in hoppers. There is held there about 6 – 8 hours of coal burning capacity. This would therefore allow for the controlled shutdown of the plant ,rather than having it bought to a crashing stop. There was no intention to do that.
The conveyors were to be stopped and people would be locked onto the equipment using the tubes. Climbers would also mount plant. Another group would also have gone to the control room to explain the action to staff. All groups would have the relevant safety equipment, hard hats, hi-vis vests and the rest, and all had received an appropriate safety briefing.
After court returned from lunch, Mr Rees asks SC about what it means that the Ratcliffe Power Station had a ‘black start’ capacity. That it had a small power station adjacent to start the main station in the event of a complete failure of the National Grid.
Cross-examining, Miss Gerry asks if closed down the station, would that not have an influence on the grid? A minor loss in scale, the light would remain on. If that was the case, Miss Gerry suggests that it would not have saved the 150,000 tons claimed. All that would happen would that another station would be fired up to replace lost generation, also creating yet more emissions. SC claimed that it would be reasonable to expect the replacing stations to be gas fired, since as coal would be cheaper in generation, those stations would already be running.
Moving onto the press release, Miss Gerry keeps trying to suggest that shutting down a ‘black start’ facility was alarming to the public if they had known about it. This was not mentioned in the press release. SC says there are many other such stations, so grid security was maintained.
When the police arrested and questioned you, why not tell them more of your motives and background that you have told us today? He says we had all received legal briefing to make ‘no comment’ to questions in interview.
Gerry then refers to SC previous experience with campaigning about open cast coal mining. She implies this was a model of reasonable behaviour in public engagement on an issue. But, that this Ratcliffe action was conducted in secret and certainly wasn’t reasonable.
With more snow falling outside and travel chaos assured … the court rises early
The case continues a bit more …….. etc
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
http://unfccc.int
Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/sternreview_index.htm
++
2010 Nottingham Ratcliffe Conspiracy Trial Begins [Feature] http://notts.indymedia.org.uk/articles/701
2010 Nottingham Ratcliffe conspiracy to trespass trial opens today http://notts.indymedia.org.uk/articles/693
2010 Nottingham Ratcliffe Trial Day 2 - Prosecution’s Opening http://notts.indymedia.org.uk/articles/702
2010 Nottingham Ratcliffe Trial Day 3 - Prosecution case continues http://notts.indymedia.org.uk/articles/710
2010 Nottingham Ratcliffe Trial: Prosecution Opens [Feature 2]
http://notts.indymedia.org.uk/articles/714
2010 Nottingham Ratcliffe Trial Day 4 - Prosecution case concludes
http://notts.indymedia.org.uk/articles/716
2010 Nottingham Ratcliffe Trial Day 5 – Defence case opens
http://notts.indymedia.org.uk/articles/735
Ratcliffe on Trial Blog http://ratcliffeontrial.org/blog
Onwards ... >
____________________________________________
ALAN LODGE
Photographer - Media: One Eye on the Road. Nottingham. UK
Email: tash@indymedia.org
Web: http://digitaljournalist.eu
Member of the National Union of Journalists [NUJ]
____________________________________________
"It is not enough to curse the darkness.
It is also necessary to light a lamp!!"
___________________________________________
<ends>
Ratcliffe Trial Day 5 – Defence case opens
30-11-2010 01:23
At 11.00am defence barrister, Mr Edward Rees QC opens the case for the defence.
He calls the first witness, one of the defendants SS.
She has been employed by Greenpeace for 8 years, although, this was not an ‘official’ Greenpeace action. In fact she took a short holiday in order to do it. Money had been raised by an assortment of donations. She said that her attitudes about climate change had developed over the last 10 years but her involvement with Greenpeace and other influences. She sited a pamphlet she remembered reading in 2001 titled ‘Millions at Risk’ that was one of her first awakenings about the nature of the likely consequences of climate change.
SS mentions Dr. James Hansen as another influence and an earlier publication ‘Climate Change and Trace Gases’ as impressing on the need for change.
She says she was part of a team that presented climate change issues to political party conferences, sometimes including the head of the Meteorological Office.
For her, there is little doubt that there is a link between different amounts of carbon in the atmosphere and the resultant climatic changes. Another work sited to illustrate these concerns: Mark Lynas - Six Degrees: Our Future on a Hotter Planet.
Mr Rees asks her, what are climate changes causes?
The emitting of far to much CO2 by burning fossil fuels since the industrial revolution. Coal IS the biggest contributor to these changes and the most polluting. The resulting CO2 causes changes in the composition of the atmosphere. Interacting with the CO2, the suns rays then create a ‘greenhouse effect’ as more heat is absorbed.
SS goes on to explain the additional concern of ‘tipping points’. These are thresholds beyond which climate change spirals out of control. Instead of linear relationships, conditions change beyond predictions and control. Reductions in carbon emissions are thus required now. We could be within 10 years of tipping points being reached before irreversibility. Within the 8 years with Greenpeace as a climate campaign assistant, she has been a political advisor to politicians of all parties. Greenpeace however is non-political and supports no particular parties.
She goes onto to explain meeting with groups like the Environmental Audit Committee and party conferences. Mr Rees is showing that SS had engaged in the political process and not engaged in the ‘bit of the jolly’ the prosecution were trying to suggest. SS had previously met with environment ministers, Gordon Brown, the then Chancellor. Members of the European Parliament MEP’s in meetings about European Environmental Targets, and the attempts to influence politicians to engage in CO2 limiting processes. But as far as she could see, little change was affected. She now works as a forest campaigner dealing with issues of de-forestation.
Mr Rees asks what has that got to do with climate change? Forests by absorbing CO2 assist in keeping the balance. Forest burning contributes to CO2 emissions and a ‘domino effect’ is brought about. Trees store and absorb carbon, thus less trees = less CO2 absorbed. Half of all species in the world are to be found in the Amazon. Effects of climate changes would be unknown in the region.
SS says she is also aware of frightening projections in the reduced scale of the ice caps, perhaps in her lifetime. Again, there is a potential tipping point. The ice will thus reflect less heat. The resultant ‘darker oceans’ will absorb more heat, accelerating the process of further melting. The consequences are unknown, of the excessive heating of the oceans. The collective processes are leading to organisms ‘soaking up’ less carbon.
Climate change is leading to an increase in flooding worldwide. She has had some personal experience of this. The burning of coal and the resulting carbon emitted is causally linked to this increase in flooding. It is an alarming prospect and it is necessary to think about alternatives like, wind and solar power.
E-on are burning coal because it’s cheaper. When dealing with politicians she is very pessimistic about their political will to bring about the required changes. Going on to the Kyoto Treaty, the international agreement to limit greenhouse gases., she points out that it has not bought about the required restrictions. With limited ratifications, the USA had watered down meaningful requirements and politicians remained intransient. SS says this had made her very pessimistic about the ability of politicians to affect change. On to the Copenhagen Conference, there is still no optimism in setting target or agreements of the required changes that are needed.
The proposed Ratcliffe action occurred before Copenhagen but she was aware of limitations on the build up to the Conference. Of course the conference didn’t result in any agreement on targets. To this day, this remains the case. She says politics is clearly hopeless in bringing about changes and she remains pessimistic about bring about the required changes by political argument. Politicians are ‘carrying on’ without view to the consequences.
Thus, she takes direct action. She did so to save 150,000 tons in carbon, that Ratcliffe emits a week. Every ton counts towards effects and deaths. Thus stopping emission even for this short time, will saves lives, species, flooding, peoples’ livelihoods and property. Dealing with the proposed action, SS was part of the planning. Since Mid January 2009 to their arrest in April planning continued with the associated timeline. Later, she gives a briefing at the Iona School, in the lagal system and advice on arrest. This is based on the Climate Camp ‘bust card’ with advice to remain silent on questioning. The defendant followed this advice.
On the day, people were to split into groups, some would lock onto the coal conveyors, some to climb a chimney. Entrance was to be achieved by simply driving through the front gate, only minimal opposition was to be expected since this would have been on the Bank Holiday weekend.
The Black team were to head for the conveyor, press the emergency stop button and occupy that plant.
Green team would climb a chimney, SS said she was part of that team. The object was to prevent the re-starting of the station. She said her main object was to stop emissions but realised ther would be press interest and would make the most of it.
Orange group to occupy the gates.
Silver group to surround the chimney.
Gold group to go to the control room and to explain action to staff. With a view to advising on safety measures.
Mr Rees takes her back to the school and the police action. The police broke in casing the damage previously described to the school. Those present caused none of the resulting damage. Police would not let supporting groups back into the school to clean up after events. Preferring that the owners claimed on the insurance, adding to the costs of the operation of course.
Miss Felicity Gerry for the prosecution starts her cross examination. Confirming SS was involved in elements of the planning of the operations. Agreeing she was and confirming she was conspiring to close down the power station. She seeks to divide the defendants into ‘chiefs and indians’ but this wasn’t accepted.
Miss Geery went on to the ‘Ecological Show Stoppers’ Leaflet. This document was a complete sham. A cover to assemble the group. Just going to a workshop if challenged. Some people knew what they were going to without specifics, others were curious.
The prosecution tries to suggest no carbon would in fact be saved ! SS replies that if they had been successful a gas-fired station might have been stated instead with less CO2 resulting. The object was also to highlight the proposed construction of the Kingsnorth Station. But the reason for going to Ratcliffe was because it was owned by E-on and the second largest emitter of CO2 in the UK.
Miss Geery then goes on to highlight efforts that people made in hiding laptops, sim cards phones etc, and trying to flush materials down the toilet. Defendants did all this because they knew their action were unreasonable.. Legal briefings were necessary because they knew they were committing a crime. SS responds that there is a difference between trespassing as against the crimes against the lives and conditions of millions of people.
Attempts to say activists were on the fringes of society and actions can result in disengaging the public. By taking such direct action, there is a risk of loosing public support for an issue. She seeks to marginalise their efforts.
The prosecution returns to criticising the defences argument of an existing ‘democratic deficit’. Miss Geery suggest all are remiss in not taking every opportunity in engaging with the public in argument in a variety of groupings.
The prosecution then went on to suggest a bizarre list of ways that the activists could better have spent their time.
• Woman’s Institute
• Scout Groups
• Police Federation
• School
• Universities
• Factories
• Trade Unions
• Conservative Party meetings
• Canvasing for politicians
• Bingo Halls
Establishing her own credentials Miss Geery does this by letting the jury know that she bought second hand clothes and had a compost toilet, before the judge told her that her personal life wasn’t relevant to the court case.
She cited Paul McCartney and Coldplay’s Chris Martin as examples of effective environmentalism, through their involvement with ‘Meat Free Mondays’. Instead of closing down power stations, she suggested that the defendants would be better off searching for celebrity endorsements for the likes of ‘Turn-off Tuesdays” or “Switch-Off Sundays.” Finally, she suggested that the money that was spent on the action would have been better off hiring Cheryl Cole to model second hand fashions!!!!!!!
SS does agree that people do need to take individual action in their own lives. But this is simply note enough, next to the size of the issues / probems.
For the defence, Mr Rees again get SS to reiterate the scale and magnitude of the required changes. That celebrity endorsement and action that people , just as individuals can make is not enough.
Witness SS stands down and court retires till after lunch.
IPCC Report: Millions At Risk Of Hunger And Water Stress In Asia Unless Global Greenhouse Emissions Cut
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070410134724.htm
James Hansen - National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
Goddard Institute for Space Studies
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abstracts/2007/Hansen_etal_2.html
Mark Lynas - Six Degrees: Our Future on a Hotter Planet
http://www.marklynas.org/books
From Cancún to Copenhagen: A year in climate change : As delegates from around the world descend on Cancún, Mexico, we reflect on 12 months of climate talks
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/gallery/2010/nov/29/cancun-climate-change-talks-copenhagen?CMP=twt_fd
In the afternoon, the defence calls Dr. James E. Hansen, Head of National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA’s Goddard Institute. Mr Rees takes the jury through his large number of accolades and his experience since 1977. He advised the Climate Task Force during the Bush administration on the role of humans in accelerating climate changes.
He published work titled ‘Storm of my Grandchildren’, Mr Rees asks about the reference to grandchildren? It takes decades for full effects of any changes to take place. But it’s put to him you can’t predict the weather a week ahead in Nottingham, so how on earth can we predict these climate effects decades ahead.
There are trends. For the planet to be in equilibrium, energy radiating would be equal to the energy received. Human processes have been upsetting this balance. CO2, methane and other gases absorb infra-red. There is little effect on the radiation coming in but it does prevent heat leaving at the same rate, acting like a blanket around the earth. That all is getting warmer, there is no significant challenge to these concepts.
Additionally, there is an amplifying feedback. As the planet becomes warmer, the ice surface diminishes. Thus the larger area of ‘darker oceans’ heats up faster. A slow change but inexorable and would take millennium to return to an equilibrium. As oceans become warmer, it gives up CO2 to the atmosphere, another amplifying feedback.
Mr Rees asks how we know this process is anything to do with human interventions. It is now clear that human influences far exceed natural changes. 10,000 times faster than changes before the industrial revolution. Referring to changes since the last ice age, there will of course be natural changes, but humans are contributing to these cycles.
Asked what if nothing is done, what’s the impact? Dr Hansen says disintegration of the ice sheets, extermination of species and taking tens of thousands of years to regenerate. Thus, our grandchildren will inherit a more desolate planet than we have inhabited. We are approaching tipping points when these processes will become alarming. There is disagreement about the rates of change, but, large agreement about it consequences. Being shown many maps, graphs and charts, Dr Hansen interprets ranges of effects leading to ocean rising levels. In Europe, there are higher human populations living next to coasts because of historical maritime commerce. There are of course grave effects awaiting the millions of Bangladesh and numerous islands. The IPCC says that ‘business as usual’ will result in catastrophic rises in ocean levels within this century.
Mr Rees says we now come to ‘King Coal’ why is this fuel significant? Dr Hansen say that it’s because the stocks are so much larger than oil and gas reserves in the earth. Further all resources are finite, with the approach of ‘peak oil’, oil and gas will become more expensive as it becomes more problematic to extract dwindling reserves. Burning coal is the dirtiest of fuels and should be left in the ground. We simply must phase out coal burning for energy generation.
Why is urgent to take action now? It’s because it’s plain that we are approaching these tipping points, and we need to limit amounts of additional CO2 emissions or it wont be possible to avoid passing them. Thus causing distress to future generations. Resulting in imbalances in processes for a very long time. Current governmental target are meaningless without phasing out coal burning. ‘Business as Usual’, might lead to 5degC increase in this century and the planet wont look like it has for the last 10,000 years.
Dr Hansen says it is obvious that unless coal is not burnt, then governments are lying in what they say are their stated aims. I can see why young people are upset when faced with such deception. Referring to the fluctuations in climate described in the many graphs, charts and maps it is apparent humans are changing what is normal.
Miss Gerry cross-examines. Dr Hansen says he’s done his best to educate the public on shortcoming governments. They are mainly influenced in policy by fossil fuel industries. The public needs to be better informed to thus bring about political pressure. He appears pessimistic that governments are listening to peoples concerns.
If we shut all the power stations, and coal mines, what are the alternatives? At present, we don’t have an alternative. Simply improving energy efficiency is not enough. What can ordinary people do? Influence politicians. Burning materials slower wont do it. People see companies lobbying for ‘business as usual’ as having a disproportionate effect on policy. Deniers and contrarians are given equal weight, but they shouldn’t be since opinions are well out of proportions in numbers believing their is nothing to worry about.
He says the media is failing to give the public an explanation on these issues. Sometimes they are funded by corporations with their own agendas. The public cannot hold the politician to account if they are under informed.
Miss Gerry asks if we carry on, are we all going to die? Dr Hansen says yes, we are all going to die anyway. But during the lifetime of our children, there will be many changes to our planets distress.
Governments continue to ignore their responsibility to young people.
There was then a ripple of applause from the public and disapproving looks from court officials. You’re not supposed to do this in courts!
Dr. James E. Hansen : Storms of My Grandchildren:
The Truth About the Coming Climate Catastrophe and Our Last Chance to Save Humanity. ISBN-13: 978-1608192007
Dr. James E. Hansen, Head of National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA’s Goddard Institute http://www.giss.nasa.gov/staff/jhansen.html
The case continues a bit more …….. etc
____________________________________________
ALAN LODGE
Photographer - Media: One Eye on the Road. Nottingham. UK
Email: tash@indymedia.org
Web: http://digitaljournalist.eu
Member of the National Union of Journalists [NUJ]
____________________________________________
"It is not enough to curse the darkness.
It is also necessary to light a lamp!!"
___________________________________________
<ends>
Ratcliffe Trial: James Hansen says governments are lying on climate change
29-11-2010 18:39
National Climate March 2010 - this Saturday December 4th
29-11-2010 12:36
Climate Change: Avoiding Catastrophe
28-11-2010 14:37
The revelation that carbon dioxide emissions are set to increase this year by over 3 per cent, despite temporarily falling 1.3 per cent between 2008 and 2009 due to global recession, signals an urgent warning that current efforts on climate change have simply failed. Even while we are still in the midst of recession - where the recovery is so fragile that another bank bailout is being pushed through in hopes of preventing a full-blown eurozone crisis - fossil fuel emissions have never been higher, and are projected to accelerate in coming years.
No Day Off for Ratcliffe Emissions
26-11-2010 17:25
Ratcliffe Trial suspended for three days and The Power Station continues to contribute emissions.
I was in court on Wednesday, and visited Nottingham Castle today where I took this picture of The Power Station. The weather and atmospheric conditions are ideal to observe the steam and other emissions which continue to pollute the air. The judge and jury have three days off whilst Ratcliffe is 'full steam ahead!'
End of Week Ratcliffe Trial Update
26-11-2010 15:26
Update following the first week of the month long trial at Nottingham Crown Court.
Hello All!
Well, we've got to the end of the first week of the month long trial. The Prosecution wrapped up their case yesterday afternoon, and on Monday Morning the defence begins.
Firstly a massive thank you to everyone! Whether you've been out there spreading these blogs around the internet, or chopping vegetables for the defendants at the Sumac Centre, your help is greatly appreciated by all.
If you are wanting to help in other ways, pleae do check out the page on our website with some ideas as to what you can do. Donations are gratefully appreciated at this time.
While the Prosecution's case this week was rather dull and tedious at times as she read through every single digit of every single phone number found in the evidence, it did make clear just how sophisticated the plans to shut down Ratlciffe on Soar coal-fired power station were. Not only were they designed to be effective in stopping emissions, but they also placed the safety of participants and workers as a top priority. The jury have the seen the detailed safety briefings all partipants were equipped with, and witnessed the comprehensive set of safety equipment given out to participants with everything from gas detectors to ear defenders.
So what's coming next?
Having admitted that they did indeed plan to shut down Ratcliffe on Soar power station, the defendants will now explain that they were acting out of necessity to prevent carbon dioxide emissions that would cause catastrophic climate change.
Monday will see the first defendant give evidence, followed by expert witness and NASA scientist Jim Hansen.
Ed Rees QC, defending, set the tone the defence will take when he said:
"You're not going to hear about forlorn looking polar bears floating on dwindling ice sheets. This case, if anything, is about getting real."
Court begins 10am Monday. Supporters very welcome.
