ffinlo's Green Columns from Manx Tails appear below. The most recent appears first.
To go back to the current Green Columns page - click here
Featured (in order below):
February '08 - Forget fluoridation - let's think about teeth
January '08 - It's 11.59 for the planet
December '07 - Digging up the depths
November '07 - Travels with Steam Packet
October '07 - If not Archallegan - then where?
September '07 - Wanted: breath of fresh air
August '07 - Nuclear power - yes please!
July '07 - The whole truth
June '07 - Stamping my carbon footprint
Forget fluoridation – let’s think about teeth (Jan 08)
I’ve resisted writing a column on fluoridation because I don’t trust the selective science of either side of the argument. But, the truth is that if decision makers on the Isle of Man care about teeth, they’ll forget the nonsense over whether to fluoridate or not – and get on with targeting the dental health of children.
Frankly I couldn’t care less about the statistics – there are perfectly good reasons to oppose fluoridation, without resorting to complex and contestable “science”.
The first is that mass medication it is the least effective way of targeting anyone with anything. It’s like when the US army scatters leaflets from helicopters warning of imminent cluster bomb strikes in the deserts of Afghanistan (yes, this actually happens), hoping that an illiterate peasant will stop diving for cover, have a cup of mint tea, and then pass on the thoughts of the Allied Forces to other peasant colleagues. The villagers subsequently die – and the Army says, “Hell, but we gave ‘em the leaflet. What else could we do?”
Mass medication targets everyone with low enough doses to be “safe” – but which are equally too low to have any serious effect on those who actually needed it in the first place.
So why do it? Easy! It’s cheap, and means the Health Minister can tick a box. The department says that it cares passionately about the dental health of children. So do I – that’s why I think fluoridation is not just daft – but negligent - because it creates a false sense of having actually done something useful.
What’s the alternative? Targeted health care, delivered to those who need it, is the only way to improve children’s dental health. It’s more expensive – but it works. The evidence is all around us.
Now let’s be clear. This isn’t the seventies, where British teeth were ridiculed across the Western world. Most parents are exceptionally good at listening to health advice and acting on it. But there is a clear minority of parents who don’t have the interest, energy or resources to adequately care for their kids’ without society’s help.
Sure Start centres in the UK have created a revolution in health care and health education for the most under privileged children and their parents. These are schemes that provide assistance (including grants) to expectant parents, new parents, parents of toddlers – schemes that advise and assist in the health of children from the moment they are conceived until their 16th birthdays.
If we care about kids’ teeth why not bring back free school milk? Calcium is essential to the development of teeth, and all bones. By funding more health visitors we can identify families and children in need, assist them to better health, or ensure further action is taken if neglect is deliberate and sustained.
By funding dental health workshops at schools and playgroups we can ensure the best toothpastes (which are often fluoridated anyway) are used, we can ensure brushing is adequate, we can inform parents about the harm done by junk food and fizzy drinks, and we can get mouths checked for the early identification of oral problems. (Schools are vastly under-used resources – large government buildings in the heart of communities – often closed during evenings and weekends, which could be used to help address health issues such as this.)
By adequately funding NHS dentists we can ensure that both children and adults learn to respect their teeth, value their gums and get treatment as soon as it becomes necessary.
These are just a few ideas – each would be more effective than fluoridation, but each costs money.
But there are other issues to consider too. It’s against the spirit of human rights to mass medicate whole populations. In a democracy we should be providing people with choices and information rather than forcing them to ingest chemicals. And there’s the animal health issue. Vets tell me an amount that’s safe for a human is much less safe for a cow or a horse or a dog or a cat. Island farmers are working hard to build export brands based around the unspoiled nature and unpolluted virtue of the Isle of Man. Fluoridation could damage this work.
So, while I commend the Department of Health for wanting to address the issue of dental health – I urge the Minister to invest in improving children’s teeth – rather than just pretending he cares, and writing off the subject through the fluoridation of our water.
It’s 11.59 for the planet (Jan 08)
I love America, and I love Leo de Caprio. No, it’s not just Titanic – although that doomed ship, the one they said would never sink, is a great metaphor for our planet: It’s big! It’s bold! It’s going down! No… it’s that he’s one of the new eco-stars… US screen gods who’ve decided they want to use their fame to save the planet. Leo’s new movie The 11th Hour is coming soon!
The film follows in the footsteps of An Inconvenient Truth (which bagged former US Vice-President Al Gore an Oscar). It’s a documentary about Peak Oil. And if that sounds dry: check out the clips on YouTube. It has all the thrills and spills of the best Hollywood flicks, but the twist is – it’s all real! As one voice in the film says, “Not only is it the 11th hour for planet earth – it’s 11.59.”
This movie is about the “Conflict between human society, and nature.” A movie that says clearly, “The environment is going to survive – its human kind that may not.”
Peak Oil is the point at which maximum oil production is reached. At this time, regardless of the demand for crude oil and petrol, the supply of oil will plateau and then fall. Once oil supply begins to fall, it’s likely to fall pretty quickly. But - our consumption of oil is still escalating. We now use around 86 million barrels of oil every day, to make everything from food to houses. Demand is predicted to rise to 118 million barrels a day by 2030. Yet we could reach Peak Oil next year, or at any time within the next half-generation. When Peak Oil is reached, prices, which are already the highest they’ve ever been, will shoot up not just sky high, but way up into space. According to Reuters, the CEO of Total is already questioning mainstream forecasts for supply, suggesting the plateau era is nearer than many in the oil business have admitted.
Unless we dramatically address world consumption our civilisation is likely to implode. This isn’t to be overly dramatic. Civilisations have imploded before: the Ancient Greeks, the Romans… the difference is that this time it won’t be a regional implosion, but a global one.
There is good news. We can change. Many people in the US, and elsewhere, are rapidly innovating new technologies: “re-designing design itself.” The movie shows aeroplanes with solar panels on their wings, wind turbines, clean and efficient public transport systems that run on renewable energy – and apartment blocks insulated with soil and grass that can also be used to grow food. (This last idea isn’t even new. The Austrian artist and architect Hundertwasser, was designing buildings like this in the 60s.)
While there’s always concern about the costs of re-designing civil society’s relationship with the environment, it should be remembered that the Stern Report said that the cost of acting now would be around 1% of GDP – but within 30 years it could have risen to 15% of GDP – the cost of a market crash resulting from a world war.
The time has come to start making visions a reality – and yes, that means us too! Perhaps the DTI will put up a prize for environmental innovation; perhaps Tony Brown could suggest it, having benefited from an environmental epiphany following my last column… On that note, I’m hoping that the next issue of Manx Tails will feature an interview with Tony Brown and John Shimmin. I’ve offered to meet them to find out just exactly what the Government is up to in terms of the environment. Watch this space to see whether they respond!
On another topic – Flybe have introduced eco-labelling of their planes. While this could be seen simply as green-wash by a heavily polluting industry (and there are those who’ve said just this) I’ve been impressed by the airline’s attempts to bring more transparency into travel emissions. I’ve addressed this issue extensively in February’s Money Media (copies can be picked up at Ronaldsway and around the Island), and have found that while flying has the worst reputation by far, travelling to the UK by Seacat may produce even more CO2 per person. Until the Steam Packet publishes a similar eco-label we’re unlikely to know for sure.
I leave you this month with this thought – again a quote from The 11th Hour – that “consumer decisions are like votes in the market place.” Almost everything we consume is made using fossil fuels. Oil is the main driver of the world’s economy. In a market democracy, such as ours, every time you reach a checkout you are placing a vote that affects the future. Choose well.
Digging up the depths (Dec 07)
Marine. Dredging. Imagine broken sunlight glancing on fish swimming in bright shoals as they glide and dart among the seaweed. Then, imagine mud, mining, and the destruction of natural ocean habitats. Marine dredging, it seems, is coming to the Island.
The case “for” is compelling… 1/5 of all housing in Britain is built using marine aggregate (sand and gravel from the sea bed), so if we want new houses we need stuff to build them from…
But the case against is pretty compelling too. Dredging can lead to significant coastal erosion, the destruction of great swathes of the spawning and nursery grounds essential to the fishing industry, and the decimation of habitats that nurture life at the very base of the marine food chain.
In the future our shoreline is going to come under increased attack from the forces of nature as global warming begins to bite harder. Storms and rising sea levels will make it ever tougher to fight the ocean. It shouldn’t take a PhD to work out that ‘strip-mining’ the seabed will aid this assault. If you dig a hole under the sea, it gets refilled – if you remove thousands of tonnes of sand and gravel (a very big hole), the tides and currents will conspire to put them back – having pinched the replacement aggregate from other places including the coastlines of adjacent land. Many once sandy beaches around Eastern England have been stripped to the pebbles following nearby marine dredging.
Think about a 2,500 tonne hole (the amount carried by an average dredger) in the middle of Port Erin beach. As the tide goes in and out the hole will gradually get refilled, but by that time the undermined promenade would have fallen in, the surf shop would be riding the waves, and customers of The Bay would be enjoying a different kind of drink. Marine dredging happens further away from land, so the replacement sand and gravel is drawn from a greater area, but over time the effects are similar. In eastern and southern England land and houses have fallen into the sea, and many believe that marine dredging speeded the erosion.
Of course, I say marine dredging happens further away… but one of the proposed areas is only 2 kilometres from the coast between Jurby and the Point of Ayre. That hole will be 137 square kilometres. Hmm.
If that wasn’t bad enough by itself, the assault on marine and fishing habitats can be devastating too. Many on the Isle of Man still rely on fishing for their livelihoods, and visitors would rather eat Manx fish to cod and herring that we’ve imported from across. Boat trips to watch whales and dolphins are also an important part of our tourist appeal.
Dredging destroys the marine food chain by killing the worms, shrimps and small shellfish at its base. Spawning can’t take place in dredged areas either, and nursery zones are displaced. Our scallop beds have already been pillaged this year; the last thing fishermen need is another assault on their industry. The Marine Aggregate Producers’ Association may tell us the seabed recovers in 3 – 5 years, but the experience on the ground is quite different. A Suffolk fisherman recently told me that an 8-mile square area where he used to fish is still devoid of life. The dredging in that zone finished 15 years ago.
But it’s all very well complaining. If we need the aggregate – what’s the alternative?
Planning. Firstly, we don’t need thousands of additional houses on the Island. We do need some – and we need around 50 tonnes of aggregate per house. A strategy to recycle waste aggregate: demolished buildings, bricks, and glass, could provide much of what we need. Beyond that it may be necessary to dredge for a small amount of new sand and gravel – but we must ensure this is just for our own use and not for export (the Netherlands for example has recently legislated to dredge only for its own use).
To try and profit from a trade in our own precious resources, at the cost of our marine environment and natural coastal defences, would be extreme folly.
Instead, by managing the resources we already have, we can prepare for the next generation - without creating a nightmare for future administrations to sort out.
On a lighter note – It’s Christmas! (Hooray!)
I’d like to recommend a couple of shops on my own Christmas shopping itinerary: 7th Wave – the surf shop just off Port Erin prom does a great range in ‘howies’ outdoor organic clothing (Tel. 836366). Shakti Man in Ramsey is the living embodiment of a fair trade Christmas stocking, with a fabulous range of under-the-tree presents too (Tel. 815060).
Interested in marine dredging?
www.marinet.org.uk
To register your concern you may like to write to Trade and Industry Minister, David Cretney: David.Cretney@gov.im or at Hamilton House, Peel Road, Douglas, IM1 5EP.
Travels with Steam Packet (Nov 07)
As an environmentalist I do try and use the Steam Packet rather than fly if at all possible. Of course there are times when this isn’t convenient, but if the trip is leisure rather than business, or to the north of England rather than the south, then I give it a go.
From an ecological point of view holidaying in Britain is much better than flying to Spain – and encouraging people from Britain to holiday on the Isle of Man is great for both the environment and the Manx economy.
Recently, however, I was reminded of just how awful Steam Packet’s customer service is when things go wrong – and why so many people would choose avoid them. If we’re to encourage return trips from UK visitors we urgently need to address our most basic form of transportation across the Irish Sea.
I arrived in Liverpool on a Monday for the 11.15am sailing. One of the Steam Packet staff said there was a mechanical problem with the Sea Cat, which was still in Douglas. Okay. I was feeling philosophical. No problem. People were being coached to Heysham so we’d still get home. But by the time I arrived at the check-in desk the Heysham boat was full and I, and many customers behind me, were told we’d have to wait for the evening sailing… Are you sure the Sea Cat will be here tonight, I asked? “Dunno,” came the reply. What if it isn’t? “Dunno, s’pose we’ll send you to Heysham.” And if the Heysham boat’s full again? “Dunno. You’ll have to wait.”
Okay… I could feel my blood pressure rising… but I dealt politely with the situation. I asked if Steam Packet would be providing somewhere for passengers to leave baggage, facilities for the kids, or refreshments? “No,” I was told simply.
I suggested they think more carefully about their answers, but the girl behind the desk got very defensive, “S’not my fault, it’s the weather!” I glanced at the blue sky and shielded my eyes from the sun and tried to retain my smile before continuing - not ‘mechanical problems’ then? “No. It’s the weather…” I flashed my Press Card and asked to see a manager, at which point another chap agreed to provide tea and coffee for passengers – but apparently their ‘spokesperson’ was ill.
In the end I gave up. But half an hour later I was phoned from Douglas by a manager, who yelled at me for daring to speak to her staff, told me it wasn’t mechanical problems and slammed the phone down on me. Whoever put this woman in charge of public relations deserves a pay rise. But, interestingly a mechanical problem had developed the previous Friday... I also spoke with colleagues on the Island who said that while the sea was rough later that day, at 7am when the Sea Cat was cancelled, all was calm on the water.
Most people abused by fortune that day didn’t arrive home until midnight. I was lucky. Having spoken very sweetly to Euromanx I got home much more quickly and cheaply than expected (and yes, I did offset my emissions).
But, I didn’t want to fly! And what pains me is the message that we as an Island send to visitors. I spoke to a couple in Liverpool who were trying to visit the Island for the first time. Having wasted the first day of their week long holiday, I wonder if they’ll bother again?
A Tynwald subcommittee is currently investigating Steam Packet’s customer service record – I offer this article as evidence.
The DTL’s budget is directly linked to the number of visitors arriving on our shores - so it’s surprising they don’t spend more time insisting that Steam Packet train their customer service staff not to act like vipers.
Perhaps then we’ll get more people to visit our Island: to sample the delights of our beautiful coastline, our glens and mountains, our heritage, the ever-improving quality of our restaurants… and perhaps… the average carbon footprint of the British holidaymaker will start to diminish.
If not Archallegan – then where? (Oct 07)
This time I’m going to leave the MEA alone, because I’m sure they’re feeling abused, and so instead, let’s move onto something much less contentious: the Archallegan tip!
Isle of Man Friends of the Earth is against the new land-rise tip at Archallegan. No question; no surprise…
But FoE doesn’t want to just sound negative: against things, anti-change and anti-development. So, how do I make a positive statement while wanting to say “no”?
The Archallegan tip is a problem for us. FoE is against creating unnecessary rubbish, but understands that some rubbish will always need dumping. FoE is against the destruction of beauty spots but recognises that rubbish dumps have to go somewhere. FoE is in favour of communities taking responsibility for their own rubbish, and is against just shipping waste to other countries.
At Friends of the Earth many of our views are instinctive, ideological and academic. We’re unpaid and get involved because we care – and quite often our views are less highly valued than those of expensive consultancy firms… DoLGE’s spent around a million quid working out that Archallegan is the right place for the land-rise tip – so who are we to say otherwise?
Well in the first instance – we are people, people who want to conserve the beauty, natural grace, and health of the Island, and we’re proud Manx citizens, voters, and taxpayers… And we think that sticking a land-rise dump for semi-dangerous waste at the top of a hill, above water sources is, frankly, pretty daft. And I won’t even charge DoLGE a penny for that assessment.
On the other hand… hmmm? Where are we going to put it then?
I asked the guy next door if he’d have it his back yard, and he said “no”. I asked a chap from Peel: he said “no”. I asked a bloke from Onchan: he said “no”. A woman from Kirk Michael considered the idea: but said “no”. I asked a computer. The computer said “no”. Then I asked a child. And the child said, “Why don’t you just stop making so much rubbish in the first place?” Of course, he was just a child – so he didn’t know what he was talking about...
…And it was only as I lay in bed contemplating the ceiling that night that I suddenly thought. “Hey, that child’s got a point! If there was less packaging in supermarkets, if we made sure we finished the paint in every pot, if we used our cars until they got a bit older… then maybe we wouldn’t have so much stuff to tip…”
And it seemed like a revolution… Until I remembered my trip to India, and my time in Morocco, and in Cambodia, and in lots of other developing countries where nothing is thrown away until it is absolutely used and used and reused and recycled and repaired and used again. It’s not rocket science – it’s just a lack of wealth. We’ve all got so much cash floating around us now that we can afford to waste and fritter our resources. We don’t live on $2 a day so we can afford the luxury of rubbish.
Now don’t get me wrong. I’m not suggesting that we should all suddenly become poor again. It’s great that we have a booming economy – and long may it stay that way. I like watching a DVD as much as the next person. But just because we can be excessive doesn’t mean we should be. And if we were less excessive, maybe we’d create less waste.
But there’s still going to be some!
So, what do we do with the chemicals we use, the oil that’s been spilled, and the bottom ash from the incinerator? Well, until now we’ve been filling up other holes that are now full, and, apparently, shipping some of the toxic stuff to Spain.
So. Do we need another dump? Yes.
But if the answer’s to stick it at Archallegan – I wonder what on earth the question was?
Wanted: breath of fresh air (Sept 07)
Wouldn’t it be great to have small wind turbines outside each of the Island’s schools generating electricity in a clean, green manner – a sort of living embodiment of teaching and learning about renewable energy? I’m not talking giant turbines here – not the kind of things that ought to power the Titanic – just ones that are big enough to catch a breeze, create electricity, and seriously lower the carbon footprint of the Isle of Man.
Not only that, but – and here’s a notion – because these turbines would be generating electricity even when it’s not needed – at night or during holidays – what about getting the schools to sell extra units back to the National Grid to make a bit of a profit to contribute to school funds…
Wow. Revolution. I’ve been chatting to MHKs, ministers, teachers and parents about this in the last week or two – and the general view is – yeah – wouldn’t it be great!
Cool – let’s crack on… but… oh… I’ve just spotted a catch…
Last month I moaned about the MEA’s monopoly. And, to be fair, I thought that having moaned I’d get it out of my system. But sadly my frustration with the anti-competitive nature of electricity supply on the Isle of Man is welling up again as I despair that the MEA is leaving us standing in the lay-by of life while the rest of the world is rushing by…
Enough. Note to self: be rational: address the issue in a systematic way; no one likes a ranter…
There are lots of reasons for individuals and communities to move to renewable energy production – climate change, pollution and self-reliance to name but a few - but if we were in the UK there would also be economic reasons for doing this.
A school in England can have its own wind turbine and continue buying energy from, for example, Npower, on a green tariff, for the occasions when the wind isn’t blowing. When there is a breeze they generate their own supply for free – and if they generate more than they can use – they can “sell us back the excess electricity for the same amount as the standard tariff.” In other words - at exactly the same rate Npower would sell it to them.
I’ve been looking into this here on the Island.
Firstly you have to pay around £250 a year for the privilege of generating your own power (then a £200 administration charge for the first year). But – and this is the real killer – the rate the MEA will buy your excess power is set at 3.62p/unit – but you still have to pay 12.44p/unit to buy it from them.
In the year 2000 we laid “the world’s longest AC subsea cable in the world” to the UK so that we could buy electricity from them because, as an Island, we couldn’t any longer be self-sufficient. This was supposed to be a great wheeze to guarantee supply and reduce costs.
Yet, our bills have shot through the roof (and will for the next ten years); individuals can’t take advantage of the cable to buy energy from alternate suppliers (like everyone can in the UK); and we continue to be economically discouraged from generating or own renewable electricity at home.
I’m ranting again… But having listened to the recent justifications of MEA executives over the latest penal price rises it’s hard to understand why they expect anyone on the Isle of Man to listen to their woes, when they continue to sustain a very powerful monopoly, get massive subsidy, and fail to provide the basic range of service provision one would expect elsewhere in the civilised world.
So who exactly is benefiting? Answers on a postcard, please.
As a consumer and a Manx citizen – I’d like the chance to choose to buy renewable electricity from a Manx based competitor company. I’d like my local school to be able to benefit from generating it’s own power; I’d like the option of generating my own electricity at home… oh… and, I’d like lower bills. Strangely – most other people in Britain have these options. Isn’t it time we did here?
Nuclear power – yes please? (Aug 07)
I hate to be controversial, but… nuclear power…? Is this the only way we can bring down our CO2 emissions fast enough to avert the worst excesses of man-made climate change? I, like many other environmentalists, am now finding myself drawn towards this conclusion…
Hang on a minute though – surely there’re other ways we can tackle our energy consumption quickly without just creating a massive legacy of radioactive waste for our kids…?
I’ve been heartened by recent conversations about the future of the Island’s energy supply – including leasing a section of our seabed to an outside wind energy company. If handled properly a future off-shore contract could include energy being injected back into the Manx grid. We should also be looking at building wind turbines on the Island itself. John Shimmin, DoLGE minister, recently told me, “I think they look beautiful. I’d love to see wind farms on and off-shore on the Isle of Man to have a level of recognition that the Isle of Man needs to change, and that we can do things better.”
These are positive ideas - but before we can modernise we must first address the Manx Electricity Authority.
A recent poll on manxherald.com, asked if Islanders were prepared to see the MEA privatised. This misses the point. Who owns the MEA is irrelevant. More importantly, the MEA’s monopoly must be removed. It was deregulation (the introduction of competition) that led to an energy supply revolution in the UK.
Competition here could have an incredible impact in terms of both inspiring environmental innovation, and in creating real economic benefits for individuals and communities. That said – privatisation must be a part of that process.
Before returning to the Island I lived in Cambridgeshire. There I bought wind energy directly from the supplier. If I’d had a farm, a factory, or a care home I could have bought my own wind turbine - controlled my own energy supply - and sold the excess back to the National Grid at a competitive price. Consumer choice was a major driver in creating this green energy revolution.
Privatisation and deregulation should not be seen as simply benefiting big companies. With the right DoLGE development policies in place individuals would be able to purchase and generate their own electricity efficiently, and local authorities would also be able to participate. Across Britain a vast amount of thought is going into the localisation of energy supply – many believe it’s only when we take charge of our own production that we’ll seriously consider our individual, household and community rate of consumption. But how do we create this change?
A lot of time has been put into persuading politicians to sign up to a new Climate Change bill. Those who know me will not be surprised to hear that I’m much more interested in action than I am in devising an opportunity for Tynwald to talk about something for years until it can agree.
DoLGE’s energy officer believes new legalisation is unnecessary to create an energetic strategy for energy reduction. The DoLGE minister thinks a bill would be premature. “We’re not an efficient Island when it comes to environmental matters. There’re lots of easy targets: vehicle use, businesses and domestic use - I don’t want to see us going down the route of legislation when there’re so many low hanging fruit that we can just pick off easily and beneficially.”
I’m excited by Mr. Shimmin’s drive. His legacy could be well served if he were to empower Islanders by immediately seeking to deregulate energy supply. By developing a shared grid that rewards all suppliers (whether companies, individuals, or commissioners) we can create real energy democracy and see ecology in action.
By doing this now we might avoid the need for nuclear power - and also contribute to the Island’s continued economic development and independence.
Take part in this discussion – join the Manx Eco & Ethical Group at Facebook.com
The whole truth (July 07)
Recently I found myself in High Street Kensington at the high society launch of Whole Foods Market, the US ethical retail giant that has now opened it's flag-ship European store in London. I walked down the red carpet under the warm glow of the setting sun reflected from the windows of the Daily Mail offices, and winked with Manx-cockney charm at the sweaty paparazzi and the nubile ushers as I entered the hallowed marble interior of Kensington’s big new health food shop.
Whole Foods Market fills a fairly traded gap that Harrods and Fortnums have yet to conquer, and does it with style. The street level is a tapestry of British fruit, veg, condiments and fresh bread; the ground floor displays mountains of cheese, meat, teas and coffees, and there are more novelties, recycled gifts, and personal ethical grooming products than Santa's sleigh could carry. Upstairs there are hot-food stops and sushi bars for the weary to rest their feet and mingle with the glossy elite, the polished sloanes and yummy mummies, the celebrities and the powerful.
While to soak up the worthy glory and conspicuous compassion displayed by Whole Foods Market you’d have to go to High Street Ken - the good news is that you can also shop your caring heart out on ethical and Fairly Traded products here on the Isle of Man (even if you don’t get clicked by the paps or bump into supermodels on the way to the loo).
Shakti Man in Ramsey has made Fair Trade its mission and the Co-op’s major USP is its commitment to Fair Trade products such as tea, coffee and bananas. Farm shops, farmers’ markets, and many fresh food retailers provide quality local nosh lovingly purchased from Island producers. And if you want to buy a Fair Trade football (i.e. one that’s not been made by little kids who ought to be playing the game instead) then look no further than Oxfam.
Some people complain that Fair Trade costs more – which is why they won’t support it. At Whole Foods Market it’s fashionable not to display price tags – and equally fashionable for shoppers not to care… Whoops! A small punnet of cherries will set you back £7.50!
Thankfully price mark-ups on the Island pale by comparison – but of course Fair Trade costs a bit more – because no one’s been fleeced, cheated or exploited to bring the goods to your basket.
A colleague of mine recently visited Whole Foods Market coffee growers in Guatemala. He was genuinely impressed that they were paid 50% above the (insultingly low) market rate and that US WFM shop staff were encouraged to visit growers for 4 weeks each year (paid) to teach them English. This is to help growers fight exploitation by other companies. The official Fair Trade stamp is your personal global guarantee that those who’ve produced the goods you purchase have been reasonably paid – it means that the food you eat won’t leave the bitter taste of exploitation in your mouth!
Fair trade between farmers, retailers and customers is essential. Both at home and abroad it is ethically right to pay honest prices for the food we eat. So, if you go to London - take a trip to the Kensington world of Whole Foods Market – even if you don’t buy anything, it’s currently the hippest shop in town.
But here on the Isle of Man look out for Fair Trade retailers and the Fair Trade logo. You can also support local producers in Island retail outlets, farm shops and farmers markets.
One new chance to turn ethics into action is Saturday 7th July when the new Douglas Farmers' Market is opened by DAFF Minister, Phil Gawne, at the Villa Marina Colonnade at 10am.
Stamping my carbon footprint (June 07)
I’m going to India, on Wednesday. Wahey! In fact by the time you read this I fully expect to have met and married Shilpa Shetty’s younger prettier sister, and to have become a minor style sensation - a Bollywood Husband if you will - in “Hello India” magazine. Wahey again!
But enough of my predicted pleasures, and back to moaning about CO2 emissions and you lot out there with your 4x4s acting as if climate change doesn’t exist… oops…!
Er, hang on… I’ve just noticed a slight anomaly. I’m supposed to be writing an article complaining about the Isle of Man’s attitude to global warming (i.e. that 2080 might result in a few more decent days at the seaside - rather than the possibility of our climate going to Hell in a handcart) …and now I’ve gone and admitted that I’m going to be responsible for pumping 2 tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere as I fly out for my well-earned winter break to Mumbai…
My hypocrisy astounds even me… I must eat my hair shirt with a fine wine before the night is through…
Or should I?
In fact, while I should seriously investigate the joys of travelling overland in the future I have at least taken the trouble to offset my carbon emissions this time. In other words - I’ve acknowledged the potential damage of my actions and found a way to invest in lowering carbon emissions elsewhere.
The organisation I’ve used is Climate Care (www.climatecare.org) - and for the last four or five years I’ve made regular contributions through them to offset the impact of my energy usage at home, in the car, in the air, and in other one off projects. The current cost of offsetting is around £7.50 a tonne. The 2 tonnes of CO2 I will create by flying to Mumbai have cost £15.22 to offset.
But is it all just a great big con?
There’s been a lot of talk in the press recently about the ineffectiveness of offsetting. A lot of projects, it is said, just plant random trees that take years to grow and suck up a bit of carbon, but eventually fill up, rather like a pint glass, and then overflow and release the CO2 back out through their roots. This was, perhaps, fair criticism in the past, but our understanding of carbon offsetting has changed dramatically over the last few years and now there are few reputable offset schemes that invest in simple tree planting - and they can be avoided!
The best way to check whether a scheme is legit or not is to check out their offset policies on-line - or just talk to them! I’ve done this - and that’s why I’m so confident in promoting climatecare.org
Here are a couple of examples of projects they fund:
Lighting in Kazakhstan creates an average of 1.2kgs of CO2 per kilowatt-hour. In Britain it’s 0.43kgs/KWh. By funding the purchasing and distribution of energy saving light bulbs in Kazakhstan, and by assisting with investment in renewable energy sources I’m contributing to a serious and measurable reduction in CO2 emissions as the average carbon cost of lighting in that country decreases.
In northern India farmers usually get one harvest following the monsoon. They then have to leave home to work in the city for the off-season, or pay for diesel to fuel irrigation pumps. Climate Care has worked with local people (using carbon offset donations) and funded development of simple human-powered treadle pumps so that farmers can draw water from below ground for irrigation without causing pollution. CO2 emissions have reduced, and farmers now get two or three harvests each year. What a fabulously simple scheme.
A criticism of carbon offsetting is that it fails to change behaviour, and instead offers a placebo to those with a half developed conscience, such as myself.
Hogwash!
Through offsetting my emissions I’ve become more aware of my actual carbon impact. Now that I know I create an average of 10 tonnes of CO2 each year I’m able to set myself targets for reducing my personal carbon footprint. While acting personally to reduce my carbon dependency I can also pay groups like Climate Care to balance out my impact on the planet by funding schemes that promote energy efficiency elsewhere in the world.
If in the near future we can, through carbon offsetting, find a way of balancing the scales so that, as a planet we stop increasing our global CO2 emissions, then perhaps in the future we will be able to start actually reducing them again.
So, I’m off to India on Wednesday - Wahey! - But I’ve traded my CO2 emissions - so if I do meet Shilpa Shetty’s younger prettier sister - then hopefully I’ll be wearing something more attractive than a hair shirt, after all.
If you want earlier columns - please get in touch.
ffinlo Costain, Thie Yuan, Fistard, Isle of Man, IM9 5PQ
Mob: 07624 400 193 E-mail: ffinlo@ffinlo.org