Heathrow Expansion: What About the Climate?

After spending the last couple days wandering through airports on an overseas journey from Toronto to Stockholm I decided that tackling a spicy issue out of England invovling the further expansion of London Heathrow airport would be a fitting post-holiday return to the blogosphere.

The plan is to construct a third runway at London Heathrow which, proponents say, would be an economic boon for the Brits, and would allow the airport to increase the number of flights using Heathrow from 480 000 anually to 702 000 by 2030.

Ministers are expected to pass the strongly protested bill tomorrow all but ensuring the construction of the third runway, which Friends of the Earth director Andy Atkins is saying “…would shatter the government's international reputation on climate change.”
What Atkins is referring to is Britain’s goal of cutting carbon emissions by 80% before 2050; a goal which will likely be impossible of reaching if the plan for the third runway goes ahead.

Ultimately it comes down to a battle between politicians who see the economic positives of jobs being created as well as maintaining Britain’s image as a world hub and environmentalists who see Britain re-neging on their commitment to fighting climate change.

In this argument one only needs to go as far as looking at the stances the opposing sides are taking to see who has a better grip on reality.

The politicians are saying things like “We sincerely believe that Heathrow’s modernization is the only way to reduce aircraft emissions and cut disruption” and “Heathrow’s status as a global hub is at stake.” I think if these statements were re-worded to say something like “We sincerely believe that the only way we’ll get approval for this plan is by somehow making it appear green” or “We’re losing money fast” they would give a more accurate description of what is really going on.

Environmentalists are calling attention to the political propaganda that uses the current economic situation to overplay the benefits such as the creation of jobs while almost completely ignoring the environmental risks as well as the construction the new runway will require the demolishing of over 700 homes.

This technique, a common one in advertising, is playing off the emotions of people that are facing job-loss or struggling to make ends meet and points to a major problem, one that I discussed in the blog “How We are All Destroying the Rainforest in Borneo.”

The problem is that environmental concerns clash with the sustainability of the economy. If we are to slow progress, people will lose jobs, but if we don’t slow progress, we will destroy the planet. This is a paradox however that must be solved. We need a long term solution that helps people meet their daily needs while maintaining quality of life for both ourselves and the planet.

In this case, the truth is that expanding Heathrow airport is a short-term solution to a long-term problem. Building a new runway will create new jobs under the period it is being built but does little to help the economy long term while blatantly ignoring the environmental side of the equation.

It seems that when a problem arises that conflicts with environmental concerns it is rarely the environment that wins (and this project will almost certainly be approved tomorrow.)

I don’t want to be one of those doomdayers but Sir Issac Newton once said: “To every action there is always opposed an equal reaction” and I maintain the politicians that continuously sacrifice the environment on the insatiable altar of economics are catalysts pushing us towards a great collapse.

Will Grassby

How We Are All Destroying the Rainforest in Borneo

In yesterday’s (Nov.23rd) Svenska Dagbladet (“The Swedish Daily Paper” in English) there was an extremely interesting and discomforting article discussing the ravaging of the rainforest on the island of Borneo.

The island of Borneo is governmentally divided between the countries of Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei and is the third largest island in the world. As of today over three quarters of the lowland rainforest, a major source of biodiversity as well as endemic species, have been destroyed through logging, fire and the replacement planting of oil palms.

Mattias Klum, the source behind the aforementioned article and one of the world’s leading nature photographers, has traveled to Borneo a total of 35 times documenting and researching into the destruction of the rainforest. He paints a bleak picture and does not hold any punches titling his article “The Nightmare on Borneo.”

The problem is the ongoing replacement of rainforest by oil palms, trees that provide masses of valuable palm oil, a commodity that can be found in almost anything from shampoo and soap to chocolate, margarine and chips. These trees provide a needed fiscal shot in the arm for the economically challenged economies of Indonesia and Malaysia but also, as Mattias Klum reports, hold massive environmental and ecological consequences.

Klum describes the brutal and devastating way the rainforest is set ablaze, releasing over 1652 tonnes of carbon dioxide into the air for each hectare burnt. Multiply that by an area Klum says is equivalent to the size of Switzerland and you have what he calls “One of the world’s biggest environmental problems.”

In the case of the Borneo rainforest it is, as usual, difficult to simply intervene and say “No…Bad!” The problem is that the people have come to rely on palm oil and forestry and would be jobless and living under extreme poverty if it weren’t for the jobs provided by these industries.

Does the reliance on consumption and the consequential environmental destruction necessitated sound in any way familiar? This is in no way isolated to developing countries. Our dependence on the destruction of the environment has become conventionalized and is engrained in the daily lives of people around the world.

The situation on the island of Borneo eerily mirrors the worries presented to the industrialized nations of the world in the recent so called finance crisis. Jobs will no doubt be lost and people will struggle to keeps their homes and maintain the now cliché status quo we call “quality of life.”
In this crisis has anyone stopped to re-think this seemingly universally accepted truism? Scientists have for years beat around the term “sustainable development” and warned that current levels of consumption are not possible to maintain. In a lot of ways the current financial crisis looks like it might act to force us into more sustainable practices. One almost has to wonder if there is a genius environmental activist pulling the strings.

When it comes to the rainforest in Borneo it is not just factory owners and dubious governments that are to blame. Unsustainable consumption and lack of regulation in developed nations is directly fueling the palm oil industry. Despite laws against destructive de-forestation there is, as of now, no way for consumers or manufacturers to know if the oil they are receiving comes from legal, government approved producers or illegal ones.

It is easy to pinpoint problems such as consumption and lack of regulatory bodies, but in what way can this message be relayed to the public and the people who actually have the power to make change?

Weeks after vast brown clouds of pollution settled themselves over parts of Asia providing visual confirmation of the atmospheric suicide we are committing one has to wonder what it will take to bring about change. Is there anyone capable of prompting the type of change needed to make a difference?

It is easy to reject responsibility while issues remain invisible and theoretical, but when these same things become visible they become for many actualized. We are all doubting Thomases and yes, seeing is still believing. In the same way that these perceptible brown clouds brought international attention back to the urgency for change, the pictures taken by Mattias Klum speak an indescribable story.

If we truly want the public and governments to take climate change and environmental problems seriously we need to make them visible for people and Klum does us all a service in this respect.

Once again here is the link to his report and pictures (in Swedish):

http://www.svd.se/nyheter/utrikes/artikel_2083765.svd