Art Gallery patrons left in the dark – #Manchester #climate #toptrumps

Manchester City Council’s buildings emissions went up last year. They don’t seem particularly bothered by this, of course. Number 8 of the so-called “actions” in the so-called carbon reduction plan, basically is a promise that they didn’t bother to keep last year.  Not the first and not the last this has happened.  And stay tuned next week for a real bombshell about this wretched “plan”.

What it says
toptrump0084.23 “Galleries and Museums (5% of building emissions)
Manchester Art Gallery will continue their energy management trials and research to reduce consumption in the building, and will install a new revolving door to allow better control of conditions. LEDs will be installed in the final six galleries.”

What was said last year (direct quote from 2012/13 plan
5.2.4.7 Galleries/museums (6% of building emissions)
Manchester Art Gallery will complete its roll-out of LED lighting in the remaining 18 of its 20 galleries by October 2012, which will save 116 tonnes CO2 and £23,000 this year.

MCFly’s verdict (Is it ambitious enough, is it likely to happen, is this meaningless gibberish/stuff that they were already doing designed to pad out a thin plan, what questions about this “action” are yet to be answered etc etc)

If they can’t get the small things right, and be HONEST when they haven’t gotten them right, how can they ever be trusted on the substantive stuff?

What would a proper three year plan around this item look like? Finding out what ideas people in the building have. Switching off the lights every night – “Every Day is Earth Day”, for instance…

How can culture be shifted around this item?
Every visitor to the library gets a one page fact sheet about what they can do to decrease their carbon footprint and increase their political footprint.

What else should the Council be doing around this item?

Other info n/a

Phone numbers and emails of the organisations n/a
http://www.manchestergalleries.org/
Manchester Art Gallery, Mosley Street, Manchester M2 3JL
Tel: 0161 235 8888
Fax: 0161 274 7146
Textphone: 0161 235 8893

********************
Twice a week, on “Annual Plan Tuesdays” and “Annual Plan Thursdays” we will be asking a few straightforward questions about each item. And to illustrate each post, we (Marc Hudson and Marc Roberts) are devising “Top Trump” cards for all of these actions. At two a week it will take you until December or so to collect the whole set… So far can’t give you a percentage on the 2005 figure, since the Council has been going off its 2009/10 baseline, in direct contradiction of its own plan.

And throughout all of this, we are asking YOU, the reader, and council tax payer (probably), what YOU think the Council should REALLY be doing… Because next year the council moves to a “three year plan.” And given what we already know of the low quality of the carbon plans and their implementation so far, we, the citizens, will be complicit if we remain silent…

Posted in Climate Change Action Plan, Democratic deficit, Manchester City Council | Tagged | Leave a comment

Shanghai yes, Nantes, no; Richard Leese will NOT go to major #Climate Conference for Mayors

What a difference four years makes.  In 2009 Manchester City Council actually got off its backside and briefly grasped the nettle that is climate change.  After wasting two years of flubbing and flapping they worked with a wide-range of stakeholders to produce the “Manchester Climate Change Action Plan.”

And what made them do this?  Well, quite probably the fact that there was a no-longer-moveable-deadline.  Sir Richard Leese, leader of Manchester City Council since 1996,  wanted to be at the Climate Conference for Mayors being held in December 2009 in Copenhagen.  And he needed to be there with something in his hand.  Thanks to the Council’s adoption of a working-group format that had been pioneered by activists, he was able to go (he flew, naturally)  proudly brandishing the “Manchester: A Certain Future” document.

Well, there’s another World Mayors Summit on Climate Change happening in September, even closer than Copenhagen, in Nantes.  And will Sir Richard be attending, perhaps brandishing the laughably ‘refreshed’ MACF?

No.

Could it be that after four years of talking (and not even very much of that), Manchester has very little to show for its ‘efforts’?

Is anyone else from Greater Manchester going?  No.

Are the leaders of any of the other Core Cities intending to travel there? We’ve asked, but not yet heard. Even if none of them is, that would hardly excuse Manchester. It’s a “leading” city, don’t you know.

 

UPDATE 8th Sept – What I didn’t know at the time I wrote this was that OGL flew off to Sao Paolo in 2011 for a “C40” junke… meeting.  http://www.manchester.gov.uk/news/article/5972/manchester_leader_at_global_climate_conference

Posted in Manchester City Council | 1 Comment

#Fracking perfectly safe claims local expert in #Balcombe

This, from newsthump, is very very funny. (I haven’t screengrabbed the whole article. It gets funnier…)
newsthump

Posted in humour | Tagged | Leave a comment

Town Hall “transformation” – #Manchester #climate #toptrumps

Manchester City Council’s buildings emissions went up last year. They don’t seem particularly bothered by this, of course. Number 7 of the so-called “actions” in the so-called carbon reduction plan, and we’re already into things that any reasonable human being would think of as very basic stuff.*

toptrump007What it says
4.22 Municipal (9% of building emissions)

The Town Hall Complex Transformation Programme will be completed in 2013/14, with crucial refinement works being undertaken to ensure the building operates as efficiently as planned, along with energy information on staff computers to enable them to take personal action to reduce energy use.

What was said last year (direct quote from 2012/13 plan

3.2.2 The implementation of the Town Hall Complex Transformation Programme will continue throughout 2012/13, with staff then relocating to the refurbished, energy efficient Town Hall Extension next year.

MCFly’s verdict (Is it ambitious enough, is it likely to happen, is this meaningless gibberish/stuff that they were already doing designed to pad out a thin plan, what questions about this “action” are yet to be answered etc etc)

Remember, the Town Hall refurb was one of those actions announced in the dismal London-written document ‘Call to Action’ document (2009) as somehow ‘catalytic‘.  Remember also, buildings are only as “green” as their users.  Already people in Manchester City Centre of a night-time have been treated to the inspiring sight of lights blazing in the Town Hall Extension…

What would a proper three year plan around this item look like? Finding out what ideas people in the building have. Switching off the lights every night – “Every Day is Earth Day”, for instance…

How can culture be shifted around this item? Have environmental awarenes as a standing item on all agendas

What else should the Council be doing around this item?Telling everyone exactly what it owns and what it intends to dispose of

Other info n/a

Phone numbers and emails of the organisations n/a

In 2012 Manchester City Council aimed for a 10% reduction in its own emissions. In July 2013 it claimed a 7% reduction. It was able to do this because responsibility for traffic lights moved from its books. Looking at everything else (buildings, transport) emissions went … UP by 1.8%.
So, building on that extremely strong base, the Council’s bureaucrats have proposed a series of actions to help them hit a new “7%” target. You can see the complete list here. Manchester Climate Monthly is going to take a closer look at each and every one of these 44 “actions.”

Twice a week, on “Annual Plan Tuesdays” and “Annual Plan Thursdays” we will be asking a few straightforward questions about each item. And to illustrate each post, we (Marc Hudson and Marc Roberts) are devising “Top Trump” cards for all of these actions. At two a week it will take you until December or so to collect the whole set… So far can’t give you a percentage on the 2005 figure, since the Council has been going off its 2009/10 baseline, in direct contradiction of its own plan.

And throughout all of this, we are asking YOU, the reader, and council tax payer (probably), what YOU think the Council should REALLY be doing… Because next year the council moves to a “three year plan.” And given what we already know of the low quality of the carbon plans and their implementation so far, we, the citizens, will be complicit if we remain silent…

Posted in Climate Change Action Plan, Democratic deficit, Manchester City Council | Leave a comment

Volunteer opportunity: harvest #organic #food for #Manchester Fri 23rd and 30th August

SAMSUNG DIGITAL CAMERAHi all,

We have a couple of Land Army dates coming up this month –

On Friday 23rd August we’ll be heading to Glebelands in Sale. Jobs will be confirmed closer to the time, but there’s always a good mix of jobs to do at Glebelands.

On Friday 30th August we’re off to Moss Brook Growers to support Nona while Rob and Stu are away. Again, I can let you know what the jobs are likely to be closer to the time, but there will certainly be some harvesting! On our last trip we harvested kale, beetroot and spinach.

Hope to see some of you on these dates, as ever this is a busy time for the growers and any help is greatly appreciated! Veggie lunch, refreshments, tools and gloves are provided.

Email me to book your place,

Corrina

<chloe@kindling.org.uk>

Posted in Food, volunteer opportunity | Tagged | Leave a comment

“Ministers blitzed on biomass” (Press Release from #Trafford Breathe Clean Air Group)

Press release*:

Over 500 letters have been sent to Government Ministers and Agency Chairman in the Breathe Clean Air Group’s summer campaign of protest about Biomass burning and the Barton Renewable Energy Plant in Davyhulme, Greater Manchester.

“Our campaign has told the decision makers in London, that the people of Trafford do not want a biomass incinerator on their doorstep and that biomass burning is bad news for air quality in the whole of the UK” said Pete Kilvert, Chairman of the Breathe Clean Air Group.

“Burning biomass produces toxic chemicals and gases as well as masses of tiny Particulate Matter that will have serious ill-health impacts, such as asthma, COPD, heart attacks, strokes, cancer and premature death,” added Mr Kilvert.

In a seven week campaign, BCAG members and supporters targeted Prime Minister David Cameron, Secretary of State at DECC Ed Davey, Minister for Energy Michael Fallon, Minister for Climate Change Gregory Barker, Secretary of State at DEFRA Owen Paterson, Chairman of the Environment Energy Lord Smith and Chief Executive of Public Health England Duncan Selbie.

“Some of the responses received from Ministers show a complete lack of concern about the health of the public, and put complete faith in the Environment Agency,” said Mr Kilvert. “They did not comment on the fact that the Environment Agency has never turned down an application for an incinerator or biomass plant. They also told us that the Environment Agency carries out unannounced monitoring inspections of such plants, when the EA has admitted that all visits are arranged with the plant operator prior to the visit.”

The Breathe Clean Air Group wants the Government to change its policy on burning biomass for a number of sound reasons including health impacts, destruction of forests and their native communities and wildlife; global warming and re-using valuable resources not destroying them. The group also supports safe energy generation such as solar, wind, tidal, wave and hydro.

For further information about the campaign to stop the Barton Renewable Energy
Plant and stop burning biomass please contact  www.BreatheCleanAirGroup.co.uk.

* This – reprinting press releases – is not how MCFly would have liked to cover things. But there’s been a 50% in staffing at MCFly recently, and given that the project terminates in December, it’s a bit late to be training new folk up… So it goes…

UPDATE 26th August 2013 : We did try to get a comment out of the Environment Agency about whether unannounced visits were indeed unannounced. They have, so far, ignored the question.

Posted in Campaign Update, Energy | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Action for Sustainable Living? Maybe. Action for Sustainable Change? Not so much… #Manchester #climate

Action for Sustainable Living, the “award-winning” charity, has refused to answer basic questions about how it will take action for sustainable… democracy.

In July this year it took over the “secretariat” function for the “Steering Group,” the largely invisible and secretive group that is supposed to be, well, “steering” climate action in Manchester. The group meets behind closed doors, has never held the elections it promised to and hasn’t updated the “upcoming events” page on its website for over a year.

You might have hoped or expected that AfSL had both ambitions and plans to make the Group more democratic, less useless and less secretive.  It’s early days, but the signs are not promising.
On July 25 we asked AfSL’s chair two simple questions –

a) what do you understand by the bullet point “Managing the 2013/14 Steering Group election process?”  [This is a quote from the tender document put out by Manchester City Council] Could you unpack that for us please? When will elections be held? For what roles? How?

b) what do you think of Groundwork’s legacy with “maintaining and updating the MACF website” – given that as of July 25th 2013 the “events page” refers to upcoming events  in August… 2012.  Will you be doing better?

eventsscreenshot

I look forward to AFSL’s reply

No reply was forthcoming. We sent it again six days later, ccing in someone who told us (rightly) that it wasn’t her department. Other than that, no reply.
Finally, on August 15 we sent the same questions a third time.

We got back

“Dear Marc,
My response would be “no comment”.
Best wishes,”

The first line of AfSL’s very long “values” statement reads as follows –

“AfSL covers all sustainability issues because we believe that the journey towards a sustainable lifestyle involves attitudinal change in almost everything we do, as well as behavioural change in specialised areas.”

The key word in all of that is “almost.”

Marc Hudson
mcmonthly@gmail.com

MCFly says: This is really disappointing and a little bit surprising. Action for Sustainable Living made a bid to take on the “secretariat” function for the Steering Group. Presumably not just for the money, but in order to Do It Better than Groundwork had done it. You’d think that would be easy, given just how atrocious Groundwork had been over the past years. But AfSL has, so far, not done nothing to reverse the rot.

None of this would matter that all that much if the Steering Group were actually GETTING STUFF DONE.  Does anyone think that it is? Really? Or has MCFly just not seen the memo where everyone agreed that the group just be a talking shop and a schmoozing opportunity?

This is not action, it does not help anyone be sustainable and should scare the living daylights out of anyone who cares about the future of this city.

A note to any commenters;

Before you start telling me that my tone is wrong, read this
http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Tone_argument
And before you start telling me that I am “harming the community,” read this
http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Harming_the_community

Posted in Manchester City Council | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

Book Review: Hard Change by Dawn Reeves

HardChange_cover_front150BOOK REVIEW: Hard Change by Dawn Reeves
Shared Press 2013
331 pages
http://www.hardchange.com/

A Council that’s hell-bent on attracting inward investment, regardless of the long-term consequences for the city.  Politicians at loggerheads with each other, but with an Almighty (?) Leader. Officers of different calibres, some climbing the greasy pole while others struggle to Do the Right Thing.  Scrutiny Committees that sometimes bite, and sometimes well, bite.  This novel is not set in Manchester, and has alcohol abuse as its theme rather than climate change (there is one funny/knowing reference to carbon dioxide reductions). It is, however, well-worth the time of any climate/environment activist who wants to get a handle on municipal politics.

The novel follows three well-meaning people – a policewoman, a senior council officer and a public health officer – as they untangle a web of crimes and corruption.  They are all-too-human, with different strengths and weaknesses, and different abilities to play the games that need playing to get anything done.  The author is particularly good on how the micro-politics of alliance-building, and how a focus on facts and “shoulds” can lead to the opposite outcomes to those that, ahem, “should” be happening.

But forget the “worthy” reasons you should read it;  it’s ALSO a perfectly good read!   The characters are well-drawn, their thoughts and actions believable, the descriptions of the quiet menace of a drunken town on a Saturday night unsettlingly familiar.  The chapters (dated and timed and  usually following – one of the three main characters) are short and pointed. There’s thrills enough (believe it or not – the whole idea of a “Town Hall thriller” seems odd, I know); the “political” climax is rousing and thought-provoking, the “woman in jeopardy” climax also extremely well done.  Dawn Reeves is definitely an author to watch.

Marc Hudson

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Book launch: “Industrial Revolution” #Manchester in ruins, Chorlton, Tues 20th August

IR_poster_smallThis from those tax-dodging blighters at Amazon; “Industrial Revolution is Robert Cutforth’s epic post-apocalyptic work based in Manchester, England-home of the original Industrial Revolution. Industrial Revolution is dramatic and dangerous, a novel that will please fans of both hard and soft science fiction. Realism is at its core and readers should liken the novel more to The Drowned World or The Stand, rather than to a novel like World War Z. Industrial Revolution is a work of adult fiction that will please fans of the masters, Stephen King and Haruki Murakami. The main protagonist of the novel is Seth, an American, who wakes up in the destroyed city, reliant only on the words of a sadistic doctor and a little girl long dead for clues to why the world is gone. Seth’s mind is blank except for a grotesque machine and a burning need to find it. Seth will need to recover his memory and survive a dead world full of brutal and battle-scarred killers long enough to find the machine. Lovers of the science fiction genre will adore the twists and turns throughout Industrial Revolution. The compelling plot will keep the pages turning until the very last one, and have you hungering for more.”

More details from here.

“A dead world full of brutal and battle-scarred killers”?  So, the Council’s still functioning then…

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Guest post: Thinking the unthinkable #runawayclimate #nuclear #doomed

This is a guest post, with all the usual disclaimers.

Thinking the Unthinkable

Today we are standing at the edge of the abyss facing 2 existential threats, runway climate change and nuclear war.

These are the flip sides to the same coin, industrialisation.

150 years of industrialisation has caused atmospheric CO2 to exceed the safe limit to avoid runaway climate change. It is now increasing super exponentially and it is possible this could cause it to hit 450 ppm shortly after 2020, at best we have till 2035. Once this happens runaway climate change will be triggered. The only ecosystem we know of in the universe and which took billions of years to evolve will be destroyed.

Despite this emerging catastrophe and with the best science that mankind can throw at the problem, nothing is happening. 18 rounds of international climate change talks with all the best intentions have resulted in 18 failures. To think the 19th will succeed is naivety.

Industrialisation has also brought the military industrial complex. There is a symbiotic relationship between the two. You cannot have a military industrial complex without industrialisation and industrialising nations need a military industrial complex to secure resources and markets. The apex of this is the possession of nuclear weapons.

As the climate change caused by industrialisation destabilises our planet, governments around the world will seek and are seeking protection by nuclear weapons. Just as the climate change talks repeatedly collapse in failure, then so it is with the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The last round of talks broke up in acrimony. The United Nations Permanent 5 members refused to disarm claiming the threat was too great from new nuclear armed nations who in turn claim that they must have nuclear weapons to protect themselves against existing nuclear armed nations. The result; the momentum of proliferation is gathering pace.

This comes at a huge price. To build a credible nuclear threat a massive carbon intensive military industrial complex is needed. This must be funded by an exponentially expanding economy to raise the taxes and any nation at the receiving end is forced to respond in kind. The resulting race to build carbon intensive military industrial complexes and expanding economies are the antithesis of what is needed to tackle climate change and resource depletion. Building these increases the risk they are trying to protect against. It is the ultimate death spiral.

We have no choice. If we want to tackle climate change we must put nuclear weapons on the climate change negotiating tables. This will cause the most profound change in the history of humanity and challenge the structure of the nation-state framework. But we should not be surprised; climate change is humanities defining issue. To believe the current paradigms that climate change can be solved with agreements that maintain business as usual or through a few good willed citizens migrating to low carbon life styles is as pathetic as Neville Chamberlain proclaiming peace in our time. The only difference is that this time the stakes are very much greater.

And what happens if we decide not to link these two issues? The subconscious lurch to nationalism that is plaguing all of today’s nuclear weapons states will become an unstoppable tidal wave that will wash away all logic and reason. The longer we leave it the higher it becomes as nations are forced to sustain the unsustainable for their survival. Frightened democratic nations will elect nationalistic governments and dictatorships will seek legitimacy by guaranteeing national strength. Both are equally immoral and the finish line of the race they join will be war and ecological collapse. In 2050 the last survivors on the planet will be the nuclear submarines crews, assuming that they have not already destroyed it. It is a brutal irony that these are the same people tasked with its destruction. This is the unspoken strategic objective of the world’s most powerful economies. Trident and nuclear submarines are the modern dayEaster Island statues;massive statements of hubris built in the face of inevitable collapse.

Explicitly linking these issues is the only way the the deadlock in climate change and NPT talks can be broken. Doing this will not guarantee success in the fight against climate change, but failure to do so will guarantee failure.

To explore this issue further, to help research the project, to help edit the book the Vortex of Violence or to arrange a work shop contact kevinlister@nucli.biz or visit our web site www.nuicli.biz.

Posted in Guest post | Tagged | Leave a comment