The UK’s in the fast lane for high carbon transport

Transport is a major contributor to most people’s carbon footprint, and it accounts for nearly a third of the UK’s CO2 emissions. So as well as cutting back on the amount of energy we use in our homes, reducing our transport emissions is key to a low carbon lifestyle. Frustratingly, that’s not always as easy as it should be.

I don’t have a car – in fact I can’t even drive – and living in London it’s easy to get around on public transport and my beloved folding bike. But people are always telling me that it’s much trickier to get around in low carbon ways outside the capital.

This week dramatic new evidence backs up their complaint. New Department of Transport statistics show that over the past 30 years, car travel has become far cheaper, falling by 10%, while the price of bus and train travel (among the most expensive in the world) has soared by more than 50%.

The media, environmental groups and political parties are all pointing out that this really discourages people from choosing environmentally friendly forms of travel. Over the past 10 years Britain’s car travel has continued to soar, with motorists clocking up almost 400 billion kilometres (270 billion miles) a year. This is bad good news for a Government that aims to lead the world in the battle against climate change.

So what can we do? Firstly, as individuals we simply have to drive less. Get your bike out of the garage and make the most of the summer by walking and cycling short journeys. Put on a mac if it’s raining. Share lifts if you need to drive. Book early so that you get the best deals on coaches and trains.

We also need to support moves to improve public transport – and bite the bullet to make driving relatively more expensive – if we’re to tackle this problem head-on. Much of continental Europe has clean, cheap and efficient buses and trains. Why can’t we?

America’s battles over super-sized cars

Car culture has hit the headlines even more dramatically in America this week, where the media is full of shocked reports of an ‘eco-terrorism’ incident in suburban Washington DC, where masked men attacked an enormous Hummer parked in a quiet residential neighbourhood and scrawled “for the enviro” on its side.

Americans love their big cars, but are beginning to realise they’re causing major problems. But they’re not great at matching their concerns about climate change with their actions - while opinion polls show that three-quarters of Americans say they want much more fuel efficient cars, they’re actually buying more and more gas-guzzling Hummers, Cadillacs and monster pickup trucks. As the New Yorker magazine put it: "We buy gas guzzlers, but we vote for gas sipping."

The attack on the Hummer has triggered an outpouring of rage across the country on both sides of the big car vs climate change divide. Many people seem to feel it’s ridiculous to be driving a Hummer, but even so are shocked and angered by the violence. Others however are apparently unsympathetic. "One in five people who come by have that 'you-got-what-you-deserve' look," said a friend of the Hummer owner.

The owner of the smashed-up vehicle has been mystified by people’s responses. Apparently he didn’t give the environment a moment’s thought before buying the seven-foot high car. Caught in the middle of a media storm, I imagine he is now...

The carrier bag saga continues

Carrier bags barely seem to have been out of the news this year. Although they make a relatively minor contribution to most people’s environmental impact, they’re obviously not an essential part of life. And since we throw out somewhere between 10 and 13 billion a year in the UK their impact quickly adds up.

In response to the coverage surrounding the success of Anya Hindmarsh’s cotton eco bag this spring, reusable bags have become fashionable, and many supermarkets have introduces schemes to encourage shoppers to reuse or recycle bags. But a group of London councils want to go a step further, with supermarkets in the capital to either be banned from giving out plastic carrier bags or charge customers 10p a bag, with the money generated used to fund recycling schemes for residents.

Plastic bags have carried a 10p tax for the last five years in Ireland, and people there use 90% fewer. Seems like a no-brainer to me!

Meat production has beefy emissions

Following on from last week’s widespread coverage of the eco-impacts of cows’ diets, New Scientist magazine has published more evidence into the impact of meat production on climate change.

The Japanese study found that producing 1kg of beef results in more CO2 emissions than going for a three-hour drive while leaving all the lights on at home.

Most of the greenhouse gas emissions are emitted in the form of methane from belching cattle, but the meat production process also releases fertilising compounds that can wreak havoc in river and lake ecosystems. Managing farm equipment and transporting the meat then produce further emissions.

Whilst the meat industry may be able to reduce its carbon footprint through better waste management and adjustments to animals’ diets, the fact remains that meat production is a very energy- and resource-intensive way of feeding ourselves.

Going totally veggie might be too drastic for many people, but research like this suggests that cutting out meat a few times a week is key for anyone serious about a low carb(on) diet.

A carbon-lite life is a happier life!

Some people worry that living a low-carbon life involves turning the clocks back – a bit like living in a cave with the TV switched off – and think we need more and more stuff (and therefore a bigger and bigger carbon footprint) to make us happy.

But a new study suggests that having a large carbon footprint is no passport to contentment.

The New Economics Foundation’s (un)Happy Planet Index compared 30 European countries’ carbon use with their citizens’ physical and emotional well-being since the 60s. They found that despite having ever more energy-intensive consumer goods, bigger cars, imported exotic food and cheaper foreign travel, people are barely more contented than they were 40 years ago, and in some countries happiness has actually fallen.

In the UK our carbon footprint per person has doubled since 1961, making us the fourth biggest polluter in the study. But we apparently rate ourselves as about 6% less happy than in the 60s, and are ranked 21st in the league table behind Scandinavia, most of Western Europe and even Poland and Romania.

Over the last few decades technological advances have undoubtedly improved standards of living. But compared with the rest of the world, Europe was already doing pretty well even in the 60s, and much of the material gains we’ve had since have been the 'icing on the cake' rather than fundamental improvements in welfare, and they’ve come at an unsustainably high environmental price.

No-one’s suggesting a return to the Stone Age, but studies like this suggest we need to look harder at how we can make the most of our know-how to live more efficiently, rather than just chasing our tails for more and more of everything. We could learn a lesson or two from Scandinavia, which leads the happiness league table. The study found that their move away from dependence on fossil fuels has given them super contented lives.

The Eurovision Song Contest’s looking rather dated these days. Could the European Carbon-Lite Happiness Contest be the 21st century replacement...?