How much could you save?

This year, National liftshare Day (NLSD) takes place on Tuesday 9 June. The popular event aims to raise the profile of car-sharing and encourage and enable more people give it a try.

And in view of the economic climate, the focus this year is on the many hundreds of pounds that regular car-sharers can save every year. How much could you save?

Read on for ideas and inspiration!

• Here's WHY companies, councils and organisations should get involved
• Here's WHY individuals should get involved
• Here's HOW companies, councils and organisations can get involved
• Here's HOW individuals can get involved

I have started this blog as a place for us to discuss the pros and cons of the proposed drilling for oil and gas at Coldharbour.  Below are the contents of the emails on the subject to date between GMF members.  I have copied them all to this blog to enable any visitor to the GMF site to join in.  I have edited the emails slightly for readability.
I suggest that this blog is not the place to discuss the impact of drilling on the local area.  The following website is the place to do that: http://www.thevirtualvillage.com.  The virtual village web site contains this statement: “All you need to know is 30 HGVs per day via Knoll Road”.  To my mind that illustrates the parochial mindset of many objectors.  Let’s use this blog to develop better arguments and think of more than just the immediate impact on local people.  This is definitely NOT all you need to know!
Derek Smith
----------------------------
As some of you may already know, plans are afoot for an oil well on Leith Hill. Bizarre as it may sound, a company has lodged a Planning Application to carry out some exploratory drillings. As you can imagine, a number of local residents and users of the area have got a bit upset by this, and have set up a campaign website here
 http://www.thevirtualvillage.com/oilwell.cfm,
 with details of the plans and how to object to the application. Not that we're trying to form your political opinions for you, in fact you may think it sounds like a super idea, in which case we'd recommend setting up a pro-oil well website before the protestors put a stop to it. If on the other hand, the idea of having this as a back drop to your Sunday morning ride doesn't sound great, then you may want to visit the website above and raise your objections.
Cheers, The Head For The Hills Team
Head For The Hills
43 West Street, Dorking, Surrey, RH4 1BU
----------------------------------------------------
Isn't this a tricky one? Should Transition Dorking support this since it might reduce dependence on non-local resources?
Matt
--------------------------------
Please ask your contacts to visit TheVirtualVillage.com to support the objectors to the oil and gas exploration application.
Paul
---------------------------------------------------
Matt is right this is difficult – I would argue that:
Transition Dorking exists to provide a framework for people to undertake projects to reduce dependency on fossil fuels, minimise our impact on the environment and create local resilience. I do not think Transition Dorking can have a position on an issue like this. We are a self selected, not a representative, group; we have no idea what the views of our mailing list supporters might be much less the wider local population. Individual members of Transition Dorking can no doubt express their views as individuals.
My view as an individual is I have to say deeply ambivalent. I find it hard to see the moral justification for objecting to something like this while continuing to use oil based products, which may well have originated in other parts of the world where many local environments, and communities, have been devastated. This is in order to provide us with a comfortable lifestyle in our own unspoilt environment.
Andy
---------------------------------------------------
I sent my email to GMF members, not to Transition Dorking and all I said was:
 “I'm sure you'll be interested in this bit of news and may well want to throw your oar in.  I will do a blog on it.”
The ‘you’ here are the various GMF members initially and then any GMF website visitor if they read the blog.  It seemed to me that our blog pages could provide a good forum to help people sort out the best response on this.  In fact, now I’ve had a look at TheVirtualVillage.com, I’m more convinced of this.  This web site already has lots of content, 100% from angry locals from what I can make out.  I noticed one ‘we don’t want to burn oil or gas because of climate change’ comment, but all the rest is NIMBY stuff.
My gut reaction is that I want UK to reduce its ghg emissions as fast as it realistically can – to zero in 20 years – and start now.  The rest of the world then follows suit and global oil and gas demand falls dramatically.  On this rosy scenario, we don’t need to discover any more new oil and gas fields.  We live on the existing ones until we don’t need them any more.  So we certainly don’t need to run the spoil some nice countryside for the possibility of a small new oil or gas find.
That’s what I’d like to happen but we have to live in the world as it is, not as we want it to be.  In reality the UK is likely to be importing oil and gas for a long time, and probably throughout the life of the Coldharbour field.  If it turns out to be a gas field, this will likely power a local electricity generator and feed into the grid.  Dorking could maybe set up a company to sell this to the grid and thus benefit the whole community.  Sounds quite good?  If it’s an oil field, it will be too small for a pipeline and so the oil will probably have to be sent by road tankers to the nearest refinery – Esso Fawley I imagine.  That does not look so attractive.   I imagine it’s more efficient overall for the oil to be imported in a small corner of a supertanker.
If this had arisen a year down the line with Transition Dorking well established, people would be expecting Transition Dorking to have view I think.  At first sight it looks illogical if TD on the one hand has a (local) energy descent plan, and on the other supports an increase in local energy supply. But there is no conflict really between Dorking reducing its energy demand and increasing its supply.
We could air these sorts of arguments on the GMF website, as they will get completely drowned out on TheVirtualVillage.com I suspect.
Derek
-----------------------------------------------------
Very interesting issue this.  I thought Andy's response was very helpful and Derek spells out the dilemma in more detail.  I was afraid most of the reaction locally would be of the NIMBY variety and it sounds like this is the case.  Like Derek I would like to see us cutting our dependence on oil and gas - or at least all the dependence which generates greenhouse gases which I suspect is nearly all the uses we currently make of it and like Andy I think we should accept that if we use oil or gas products we should not complain if their production impinges on our local amenities.  It would seem best to me to advocate checking the existence of the oil or gas and then registering it and saving it up for future use for essential needs locally, when technology has been found to use it without having to transport it miles for refining or whatever.  It could be a life saving local resource for the future inhabitants of the area.  We are currently profligate in our use of these resources and to ruin a beautiful landscape in order to get a bit more to waste seems wrong.
Anne
----------------------------------------------
I have also been asked if we would take position on this issue and help with the campaign so I think we definitely need to blog about it.
I share the ambivalence, first I was outraged at the destruction of yet another part of beautiful Surrey but the people of Surrey use a lot of the planet's resources... so it would be good to gently point that fact out and it might be an opportunity to invite people from the virtual village.com to join the CRAG.
Esther
----------------------------------------------
To Anne
You say “It would seem best to me to advocate checking the existence of the oil or gas and then registering it and saving it up for future use”.  Just to clarify, the present proposal is for a exploratory drilling only – ie checking for the existence of oil or gas and nothing more.  If they find it’s commercially exploitable, they will then have to apply separately for a licence to operate as a production field.  TheVirtualVillage.com blog says that the likelihood of it being exploitable is about 1 in 10.
Derek

Some people might like to support the WWF's Earth Hour on 28th March.  Their publicity states 'Join millions of WWF supporters worldwide.  Sign up and switch off your lights for one hour (from 8.30pm to 9.30pm) and send a powerful message to world leaders that you want positive action to halt climate change'.  You can sign up on wwf.org.uk/earthhour.  They suggest you have, for example, a candlelit party and invite Friends around to chat about the issue and raise awareness in a fun sort of way. During Earth Hour in 2008, some 50 million people in more than 370 cities and towns across the world switched off their lights; even the Eiffel Tower and the Sydney Harbour Bridge were dark for the hour.

There is some question as to whether this will, in practice, save any emissions as it is very difficult for power stations to reduce output in an economical way for one hour unless they have some idea from past experience how much the demand is going to drop by.  Maybe WWF is going to give them some idea by letting them know the numbers who have registered. However I think the main purpose of the action is to raise awareness and give WWF some figures to lobby governments with.

‘Ask your MP to support a strong 2020 climate target’

With the above slogan Friends of the Earth are asking people to press their MP to support a target of 42% in UK greenhouse gas emissions by 2020.  They say:
“The Committee on Climate Change (CCC), set up to advise the government, has produced two options for a 2020 target:
Interim target: 34% by 2020 - to be used before a global deal is agreed
Intended target: 42% by 2020 - to be adopted following a global deal on climate change
But really there is no choice. 
We must choose the intended target because it is what the science demands - at least 40% by 2020 says the Tyndall Centre."

You can read more on this here: http://www.foe.co.uk/campaigns/climate/press_for_change/climate_act_18161.html?ic_number=236662&m_sourcecode=CLONLINE&product=CLIMATEONLINE

Our MP in Mole Valley Sir Paul Beresford has told me that he is very concerned about climate change but will not make it one of his areas of interest.  He also never signs Early Day Motions which is what FoE wants MPs to do as part of this campaign.  He's unlikely to change unless he realises that many of his constituents are very concerned and want him to do more, and so I encourage you to write or meet him at one of his surgeries in Dorking or Leatherhead.  Ring 01306-883312 to make an appointment.

It's important to appreciate though that the target numbers quoted are influenced by the political question - what can we realistically expect the government to do?  They do not answer the question - what reductions are needed to avoid dangerous climate change (generally assumed to occur if the global average temperature rises more than 2 deg C) ?.  The Tyndall Centre says that to have a reasonable chance of achieving this, we need annual reductions of 9% per year, maintained year after year.

Derek Smith

The following is copied from the Greenpeace website at this address: http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/

"We've bought a piece of land slap bang in the middle of the proposed third runway site at Heathrow. We’re not going to let the runway get built and we need your help. The government plans to go ahead with airport expansion across the country even though this means we'll have no hope of meeting our climate emission targets. Tackling climate change means stopping airport expansion and we need you to join the plot.  We've bought the land with Oscar winning actress Emma Thompson, comedian Alistair McGowan and prospective Tory parliamentary candidate Zac Goldsmith. Sign up now to get your own piece of the plot. It's not a financial thing, but you will be included as an owner on the legal deed of trust."

You can sign up via the Greenpeace website and become a 'beneficial owner' of the land.  It is hoped that having thousands of such owners will help stop the runway being built.

I hope that many of you will want to support an electronic petition that simply says:

"We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to halt all further aiport expansion in the UK."

The closing date is 21 Jan 2009.

You can find the petition here:

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Airports2/

Good News (for a change)

Read our new article in our running series.

The Local Government Association, representing all the local councils in the UK, has called for an urgent nationwide programme to fit free loft and cavity wall insulation to all the homes that will benefit from them.  It is free because the LGA says that the big utility suppliers should fund this out of their profits.  You can read and download the LGA report from this address.

www.lga.gov.uk/lga/aio/971071.

At our Green Mole Forum meeting on 3 September, three of us decided to start a Transition Steering Group for Mole Valley and others said they wanted to help when they could.  We had our first meeting on 10 September and our next is on 6 October.  The following article explains more and appeals for more people to get involved. The Transition approach is quite different from traditional climate change campaigning.  Transition argues that such campaigning might lead some people to take action but will not have much effect on most people because: 

• many don’t relate to climate change as it’s seen to be a problem for the future, not now
• the message is too negative and depressing
• we’ve become addicted to cheap and plentiful oil.  It takes more than awareness to change the behaviour of an addict.

 The transition movement addresses these problems as follows.  Firstly it addresses Peak Oil as well as Climate Change.  You might not have heard of ‘Peak Oil’ but we are all starting to feel the effects. It is not about running out of oil in the ground, but reaching the end of easy to get, cheap oil. If the demand for energy keeps increasing whilst the supply declines it is inevitable that the price will soar.  Industry experts estimate the peak will occur over the next few years if it hasn’t occurred already. We don’t currently have systems in place to replace oil. The key elements of our society including food production, transport, medicines and manufacturing all rely on it.  When oil becomes scarce and expensive, the impact on our lives will be huge. Experts predict a recession which will be far worse than anything we’ve experienced before.

OK – that bit was depressing.  The positive part of the Transition approach is to think about what life could be like if we can make the transition to a low carbon society.  Many people find this creates a picture of a future so enticing that they instinctively feel drawn towards it.

Finally the transition movement is intended to be enjoyable.  It has has pioneered various ways of holding meeting and events that involve and galvanise people.  A typical transition event does not consist of a speaker followed by questions.

A community that takes up this challenge is called a Transition Town.  The nearest one to us is Horsham which is preparing for a big launch or ‘unleashing’ in 2009.  You can see what they’re doing and learn more about the transition movement generally on this website: http://www.transitionhorsham.org.uk/.  Here in Mole Valley we have just taken the first step of forming a Transition Steering Group and we’ll have had our first meeting when you read this.  If you want to get involved, please contact us via the Contact button on the Green Mole Forum website. 

Derek Smith,  Green Mole Forum 

Derek Smith and Margaret Hibbert met Sir Paul Beresford on 26 September 2008.  Our main purpose was to ask him to press for a better Climate Change Bill.  This will have its final report stage within a month or two when in theory any MP has a last chance to propose changes before the vote.  Sir Paul told that in practice he will not be given the opportunity to speak, but he said he would pass our concerns (copied below) to Peter Ainsworth, the Shadow DEFRA Minister.

We also told him of our coming Parity Projects meeting.  He seemed interested and said he may come.

We pointed out that according to his entry on the 'theyworkforyou' website, he has never made a speech or asked a parliamentary question on climate change.  As he agrees that this is a massive concern, we asked if he would start to do this.  He said no, as he has not the time to expand his present areas of interest.

The following summarises what we discussed with Sir Paul on the Climate Change Bill

Recent report by Tyndall Centre

* Realistically 450 ppm CO2 is the best we can do
* This means 70% prob of 2 deg C +, 50% prob of 3 deg C +
* 60 or 80% reduction target by 2050 has little relevance to meeting 2 deg C – what counts is the total tons emitted in the period
* UK needs to emit max of 4.8 Gt between 2000 and 2050: already emitted 1.2 bn in 2000-2006.  Used ¼ of budget in 6 years
* Present Climate Change Bill – 6 Gt emissions, 7.5 Gt if aviation included
* Need 9% ghg reduction per year to keep below 450 ppm

Implications for Climate Change Bill

* Need a cumulative emissions target
* Must include international aviation and shipping
* Should include net imported embodied carbon
* Need rapid reductions in early years