Who’s responsibility is it to question and answer the ever-changing problems of the world? Traditionally it has fallen to the artists of civilisation to raise these never ending questions and invite us, the spectators, to participate and think. However, one thing has remained the same: there is no clear or set solution: no straight line.

And as science, technology and industry have reached their own contemporary boundaries, pushing these limits together and individually, they too have asked the same questions with their very own specific languages. So what is it that the arts have to offer to, what seems like, a question only a synthesis of the latter three can answer?

Never before have we seen such a direct and clear acknowledgment that planet Earth is under threat. Headline after headline reinforces these troubled times in waves. Climate change too has become quite a colloquialism, and one that, unfortunately, has become part of the mis-understood idiom of the 21st century. Rain forests are in decline, the O-zone layer is deteriorating and ice-caps are shrinking back into the sea. The only things that seem to be on the increase are pollution levels and the general sense of overwhelming bewilderment that all this information can weigh upon one mind alone.

Is there any hope or solution? A collection of exhibitions, talks and seminars held at the Royal Academy of Arts are inviting the public to respond to these very issues. Earth: Art of a changing world is one example of how art today attempts to grasp the discursive questions relating to climate change and the environment. Through the eyes of contemporary artists, looking to address topical, environmental issues, present time old questions in today’s more than relevant situation. The Royal Academy of Art explains:

“‘Earth: Art of a changing world’ brings together the work of over thirty leading contemporary artists in order to show how art can help us to explore and debate the issues surrounding climate change. Many works in the exhibition highlight both the beauty and fragility of the natural world, leading us to think about our own impact on the environment

As the title of the exhibition suggests, our planet is already experiencing change and the exhibition also invites us to consider the cultural as well as environmental consequences of rising temperatures.”

The success of this exhibition and exhibitions just like it being held around the country depend on its participating spectators. That being said, the very concept of this kiln of art exhibition begins to works its way into the imagination before even setting foot into a gallery. If art, artists and their spectators are to help ‘save’ the world, it seems highly significant that what must be done in order to achieve its result, is to hold a public exhibit: one where anyone is invited to simply turn up, look, and begin to question. Whatever those questions may be.

It’s true to say that everyone has a different interpretation, a unique way of understanding the possible meaning of a single piece of art, but whatever the maxim ‘seeing is believing’ may mean to you, the Royal Academy of Arts, regional galleries and artists up and down the country, are hoping to open your eyes, whichever way they can.

Posted under Articles, Climate, Events

During this month’s UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen it has been leaked that a plan to create and build an offshore wind power supergrid in the North and North West seas. Dubbed the “North Seas’ Countries Offshore Grid Initiative” the action has been signed by a conglomerate of European countries, including; Denmark, Germany, France, Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Ireland.

In essence, the plan has been devised to unite and link individual ‘national’ power generation to a broader and less localised market of energy. For instance, the offshore wind parks throughout the various countries signed to the initiative will all be linked via a power network; therefore the power generated in Germany can be brought, sold and used in, say, Denmark or France – and vice versa. The idea behind this agreement is to breakdown any threats of potential energy ‘races’, where countries compete industrially and economically for the energy available to the Earth.

This action eliminates some of the concerns that UN countries would attempt to monopolise aspects of renewable energy, which might potentially create rifts within the United Nations, and instead allow a hospitable market – encouraging further participants to join.

Similar initiatives exist to help support the production and infrastructure of renewable energy within the UN but have predominantly been prescribed to unite a small number of countries. The ”North Seas’ Countries Offshore Grid Initiative”, however,  looks to expand on this reciprocal relationship throughout renewable markets and the countries involved. 

Ireland’s Department of Communications, announced in a press release earlier this month that the initiative will allow Irish wind farms to “connect directly to Europe, not only securing our energy supply but allowing us to sell the electricity produced on a wider market.”

Still in its fledgling stage, the agreement is set to undergo improvements and advancements in order to secure the integrity of the pact. At this stage, the countries involved are still predominantly unsure of the net costs involved in such an expedition; furthermore, it is still unclear whom it is that will be assigned the megalith production and tasking services, such as maintenance and security of the plants. The wind farms and transmission lines are also still relatively immature at this stage.

However, seeing that the initiative goes ahead and to plan, the “North Seas’ Countries Offshore Grid Initiative” will undoubtedly make a significant impact in helping Europe reach its target of generating 20% of its power from renewable sources by 2020 – perhaps the cornerstone of the Copenhagen Climate Change Conferences.

Posted under Articles, Climate

Today is the day that world leaders join the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference, and where talk will focus on emissions cuts, carbon trading schemes, the green ambitions for the US and China, it could easily be forgotten that the key to long term development lies in green resources.

Understandably, the conference and the lead up to it focused on the respective positions of the US, India, China and the European nations on immediate emissions cuts and CO2 emissions limits. Across the media the summit has been relayed as a ‘make or break’ fortnight in climate change policy and global warming politics; it must deal first with snap decisions, with catalysts and triggers – with the immediate problem – before it can discuss future development and sustainability.

In doing so, though, it risks losing sight of the climate change problem at its most problematic level: that of future generations. Certainly at current the Copenhagen Climate Change Summit is looking to safeguard future generations by curbing the behaviour of current times, but it must also look to the development of a climate change policy that reflects a continued effort at keeping CO2 emissions.

Green resources are the key to that effort.

Green Resources Develop Continued Low Carbon Economies

In developing a long term goal for low carbon emissions and climate change policy, though, it is imperative that world leaders and environment ministers settle on some framework for green resources – renewable energy, potentially nuclear, and also carbon capture and storage (CCS) – so that any emissions limits put in place at Copenhagen can be sustained and developed.

Whilst green resources are implicit in any emissions cuts at the conference, it must also be remember that – much like the arguments about binding or non-binding emissions targets – green resources can only develop globally with a binding framework. If there’s no binding framework on development and implementation of green resources, then their inclusion and their development is only tacit.

And if their development is only tacit, then their development is slower. And if their development is slower, then the growth of green resources that will help major nation’s transition to low carbon economies is stunted.

Green Resources Must Grow as Part of a Binding Framework

Alongside pledges for emissions cuts at Copenhagen, then, should come a commitment to developing green resources across nations, as a means for achieving low carbon transition and CO2 emissions reductions.

Creating a framework for sustainability and further development too, it ensures that where Copenhagen addresses the needs of the short-term, it also safeguards longer term goals for climate change policy and global warming politics, in years to come.

Let us see then, whether the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference can set such long-term goals, as it struggles to set the short-term ones.

Posted under Articles, Climate

Now, it’s fair to say that most of us enjoy a good tree. Sound weird to you? It also wouldn’t be too far from the truth if we admitted to nudging someone close by so we could point and say “Look at that; that’s a beautiful tree”. Even stranger? It’s a funny thing to think about when isolated like that, but in today’s society, we live, recognise and at once forget the critical importance of our luscious leafy lovables. So here at EcoSwitch we’ve compiled a refreshing reminder to help us once again see…Why All The Fuss About Trees?

Why are Trees for Me?

Hopefully it doesn’t need to be mentioned again, but trees actually give us LIFE! Literally, if we didn’t have trees then we wouldn’t be here. Their responsibility to and for us forms part of the Earth’s glorious ecological balance. Without them we wouldn’t even be able to take a breath of oxygen to say “goodbye” with.
The balance is crucial and fundamental to human existence on Earth: as part of the photosynthesis process, trees “take in” CO2 from the air, separating the carbon from the oxygen molecules; the carbon is then absorbed by the tree, releasing the oxygen molecules into the atmosphere, as a waste product, for us to breathe in, and return the favour. It’s a bit like a biological see-saw.

But, apart from giving us a critical element of life, they can do much more! Trees have provided foodstuffs, such as nuts and fruits; supported homes for a vast majority of ecological species and eco-systems; provide the shade and shelter necessary for life to cultivate and evolve (just think, if we didn’t have rain forests, what life forms we’d be without); produce herbs and primary resources for a lot of medicines and pharmaceuticals; they’re helping us combat climate change (trees absorb pollutants such as sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide) and supporting us by enriching the soils, preventing floods, and, well, basically, keeping the shades of the globe Green.

The list goes on; but our ecological support worker has been developing and evolving its life affirming techniques over millions of years. And now, if falls within our reaches to see (or stop) the depletion of forestation and cycles of the ever-helpful, ever-Green – tree. So what are we to do about it?

“Hug” a tree. It is as simple as that. Go out into the big wide world and do what it is you can to help support the life of trees.

So, I Should Go Hug A Tree Now?

Well, in a word – yes! Why not? How great would it be if thousands-upon-thousands of office workers, business men, nurses, mums, dads, who-evers, suddenly burst out their door and hugged the first tree they found? Would this be the sort of action the eyes at 10 Downing Street might need to see? Perhaps.

Okay, that’s not exactly what “Hug” a tree really means here. Instead, it is more a thought of “support”. Think about how you, in the best way available, can help support the growth (as opposed to the depletion) of trees. Ask yourself “What am I doing to help?” or “What is it I can do?”

And if you’re really stuck, we’ve outlined a few simple solutions to help encourage those bigger changes, until they’re ready to stand on their own.

• Planting Trees – a great way to tip the scales back in the tree’s favour, is to donate trees overseas (click here to find out more)
• Lifestyle Changes – recycling, using recycled paper products and looking out for the FSC logo
• Help out a Tree Charity – there’re a loads out there; trees for cities is a great start

Posted under Articles, Climate

Hydrogen is a hotly touted energy source for many, and a form of energy to be cautioned away from for others. It is, however, the focus of quite substantial current development and spending. Hydrogen also has a unique place in the public imagination following its place in the futurism schematics of past decades; put forward as a fuel for for cars and transportation machines, many of us will remember the story of the hydrogen powered car that ‘the corporations won’t let us have’.

Hydrogen (H) is produced from water (H20); when the hydrogen is combined with oxygen (O), it produces energy.

The hydrogen must first be produced from water, then, before it can be used as a fuel. Electrolosis of water is one method of ‘getting the hydrogen out’ of the water; it is paramount that the energy used for the electrolosis process is kept at a low level in order for the whole enterprise to be worthwhile (i.e., so that it isn’t the case that more energy is spent than is gained); the energy used for this electrolosis should also be of a renewable kind, from a green source. Hydrogen, produced in this way, could then be a viable alternative to fossil fuels. But done wrongly, more energy will be spent producing the hydrogen than is gained when the hydrogen is eventually used as a fuel; and if the energy used to produce the hydrogen is from ‘dirty’ fossil fuels, then the whole enterprise starts to look pretty un-green.

Those who wish to promote hydrogen as a fuel of choice in a future green energy economy point to its ‘clean’ nature when used a fuel for cars or engines; there is no volatile, noxeous or pollutive gases in its exhaust, and instead, only water vapour is released. The controversy arises instead from the energy used in its creation and transportation as a fuel- this is where the current development process needs to iron out the problems. One possible option to aleviate carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in the production of hydrogen is to have carbon capture or carbon sequestration used where the hydrogen is produced: carbon capture, however, is a controversial issue in many people’s books, and hasn’t been resolved satifactorily for everyone. It seems rather a bad and wasteful idea to pump out CO2 willy nilly, with the hope of this gas being ‘captured’.

The use of renewable energy to produce hydrogen from water is a way out of the fossil fuel method of production. A hybrid of hydrogen power with wind or solar is a hopeful option- in this way, the wind (freely available and renewable) can be used not only to create power for the grid, but also to electrolise water and gain hydrogen; the hydrogen is thus made without damaging the atmosphere with fossil fuel pollutants and CO2, and the hydrgoen thus gained can be used as an alternative power source when wind or sunlight is not strong. The energy sources thus bolster each other. The use of excessive energy to store the hydrogen (a very delicate substance), however, would still need to be reversed.

The main argument against using hydrogen as an alternative fuel, then, is that it isn’t freely available (like wind) and needs energy to ‘create’ it- and this use of energy in hydrogen’s production can also have the side effect of producing harmful greenhouse gases and pollutants.
Amongst other issues is the fact that hydrogen is a gas at most temperatures, which requires energy to store and maintain.

Motorised vehicles, for which hydrogen has been historically linked in an optimistic manner, are generally being converted to electricity instead; Ford have dropped all plans to make hydrogen powered cars, and are instead planning only to electrify their vehicles.

Despite these issues and concerns, hydrogen production is nevertheless a large expanding indistry. According to the Chemical Economics Handbook, SRI, July 2001, it is estimated that 50 million tons of hydrogen were produced globally in 2004, next to 170 million tonnes of oil. According to the University of Leeds, the growth rate of hydrogen, worldwide, is around 10 per cent per year

At present, the figures show that barely any of the hydrogen being produced is coming from renewable sources- figures seem to agree on about 5%. The rest is from dirty fuels. The Chemical Economics Handbook puts the percentages of energy methods for procuding hydrogen at 48% natural gas, 30% oil, and 18% coal, water electrolysis 4%- a miserable figure from a green perspective.

Let us hope, then, that if this form of energy will continued to be used in such large quantities, a severe reversal happens in how it is produced; and if not, then other sources of energy are quickly found to replace it.

Posted under Climate, Electricity Generation, Gas & Electricity, Renewable Energy

PLANT A TREE – A GREAT ECO-FRIENDLY GIFT FOR ANY OCCASION!

What types of trees do EcoSwitch plant?

We plant a variety of trees including Mango, Apple or Indigenous Trees (such as the Mvule tree) to help offset CO2 emissions and assist local communities.

Indigenous trees are vital to communities and you can learn about the Mvule tree here. Fruit trees are particularly helpful to local communities because they retain water and each tree can produce £75 or $125 of fruit produce per year.

All trees are grown in the nursery between June-December each year, before being planted in the monsoon season between January and March.

How you can support the Tree planting programme?

To support the tree planting programme, please select a tree you wish to plant below. If you are buying 10 or more trees for someone’s birthday or Christmas present, we will plant 2 extra trees for you and you can request for us to forward you an e-mail or paper certificate in the notes section of the checkout.

	Mango Tree(s) @ £5.00 (inc VAT) each
	Apple Tree(s) @ £5.00 (inc VAT) each
	Indigenous Tree (s) @ £5.00 (inc VAT) each

What is the United Nations Billion Tree Campaign all about?

All trees planted by EcoSwitch are registered with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). UNEP have launched a ‘Billion Tree Campaign‘ in an effort to soak up escalating CO2 levels around the world. Trees are still known to be the most effective means of absorbing CO2 in the atmosphere; a gas linked by Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change (IPCC) scientists to the phenomenon of Global Warming and Climate Change.

What are the sceptics saying?

Whilst sceptics say that Tree Planting does nothing to address the human beings consumption and reliance on Fossil Fuels, Nasa and the Kyoto Protocol accept that the average tree planted will absorb 1 ton of CO2 in its lifetime. Trees are still often overlooked as a Carbon Offset solution, but they are the most natural and cost effective means of absorbing CO2. They also offer a host of other benefits to communities.

What do the United Nations want you to do?

The United Nations have therefore called upon each of the 7 Billion people on the planet to plant a minimum of 1 tree. 4.1 Billion have been planted so far. The number you should plant really depends upon what the total CO2 emissions are of your country, divided by the population. This computes a ‘tons of CO2′ figure per person, which then identifies the number of trees that need to be planted by each individual. A Tree calculator will shortly be available but in the meantime, if you are from Britain, each individual needs to plant 12 trees; each individual from the US needs to plant 18 trees.

What do EcoSwitch want you to do?

EcoSwitch are encouraging each individual to firstly switch to a greener energy tariff if you haven’t already done so and we’ll plant a tree for free for you (to get the ball rolling). All trees planted by EcoSwitch are registered with the United Nations tree planting programme. Once you have switched, if you are interested in planting more, based upon the amount specified in the Tree Calculator, you can purchase them below and they only cost £5.00 each in Africa compared to typical prices of £10-£15 in Europe and North America. You get more trees for your money abroad and we plant them in the Tropics (Uganda) because trees there are known to absorb up to 3 times more CO2 compared to those planted in Northern Hemispheres. It is important to plant as many trees as possible and get as much return in CO2 absorption.

Our Ugandan Nursery and tree planting operation

The Ugandan nursery is overseen by Theresa Komugisha Kabombora who holds an MSc in Seed Technology from Edinburgh University. She is based in Entebbe, Uganda.

Posted under Articles, Climate, Gardening & Outdoors

In the Spring of this year, writer and scientist, James Lovelock, creator of the Gaia hypothesis of the Earth as a self-regulating organism, wrote an article to be published in The Indpenedent which brought, amongst other ecological debate, the question of nuclear power as a viable and sensible ‘green solution’ to the growing threats of climate change into the public eye. Lovelock does underline numerous far-sighted ecological forecasts, and their subsequent ramifications, which are set to take hold of the Earth and human civilisation within the next few decades. But, one must ask, have we really seen the true potential of a green future under nuclear power?

Lovelock has taken a clear and level-headed approach to the quandaries of climate change that face, not only international governments, politics, boards and committees, but also the six billion humans that inhabit the Earth as a home. In fact, this is one geographical factor Lovelock centres on: when previous cycles of climate change – and it is a cyclical pattern – have threaten the balance of human civilisation, the statistical factors were in our favour. For instance, Lovelock states:

“When, in the 18th century, only one billion people lived on Earth, their impact was small enough for it not to matter what energy source they used…But with six billion, and growing, few options remain; we can not continue drawing energy from fossil fuels and there is no chance that the renewables, wind, tide and water power can provide enough energy in time.”

He continues, “If we had 50 years or more we might make these our main sources. But we do not have 50 years; the Earth is already so disabled by insidious poison of greenhouse gases that even if we stop all fossil fuel burning immediately, the consequences of what we have done will last for 1,000 years. Every year that we continue burning carbon makes it worse for our descendants and for civilisation.”

It is here that we can join him in stance and see the severity of our situation. Lovelock also chides the current governmental approaches to climate change and the ‘political embarrasment’ of what he feels has been an inability to act. The scientist come writer is, of course, attempting to achieve a tone of relevance and bring climate change into the public eye as not solely a study for scientists, but also a tool to use and remove a state of ‘ignorance’ that he believes society has kept itself secure withfrom the pure facts. And in support of his criticism, this term ‘ignorance’ is shorthand for a more complex relationship ecologists have with helping people see the Earth as a separate organism, as apposed to not seeing the Earth at all, with the life of society occluding any trace of harmony.

However, Lovelock’s beliefs belong to a niche. And it is important to put his ideas into a broader framework. His view that nuclear power is the only ‘realistic’ option for the human race to use in order to combat the imminent effects of climate change is not unheard of; but still, they have been received through negative press:

“Opposition to nuclear energy is based on irrational fear fed by Hollywood-style fiction, the Green lobbies and the media. These fears are unjustified, and nuclear energy from its start in 1952 has proved to be the safest of all energy sources. We must stop fretting over the minute statistical risks of cancer from chemicals and radiation. Nearly one third of us will die of cancer anyway, mainly because we breathe air laden with that all pervasive carcinogen, oxygen. If we fail to concentrate our minds on the real danger, which is global warming, we may die even sooner, as did more than 20, 000 unfortunates from overheating in Europe last summer.”

Despite Lovelock’s somewhat inflamed argument, he does consider nuclear energy with a new mindset. Imagine, for instance, the infrastructure and industry involved in establishing a energy source able to supply power to the world based on solely renewables. Can the human race afford such carbon debts at this late stage? Can the Earth? It is difficult to discern the fact from the fiction when it comes to what we, as a society, can actually do to prevent further damage to the Earth. But, one thing’s for sure, we need to act ‘realistically’, and act today.

Posted under Articles, Climate

Wind power is something that most of us are by now familiar with. Wind power- the energy of the raw winds, used to turn mills, whose drive then transfers the energy to a more handy form for us humans- is now so widespread that windfarms are a common sight, and are steadily multiplying across the face of the earth.

But while wind power continues to be a popular form of renewable energy in both the public’s mind and in the policies of politicians and in government acts, a criticism of the medium persists: the intermittent nature of wind power. Coal, as long as it is abundant or easily bought on the market from elsewhere, can always be burnt. Wind, however, is not always so passive and malleable- wind farms consist of giant mills rooted deep into the ground, and are thus at the mercy of the climate and weather, which ultimately produces the aerial currents which are its ‘fuel’.
Wind farms cannot move elsewhere in order to get a better hit of wind, like a surfer who wants to find the best waves, and winds cannot be imported or moved in bulk.

One potential solution that has been proposed is a hybrid of wind power and stored hydrogen. Put simply, the hybrid system works like this: power is harnessed from the wind through mills, and this power is used for the grid (where it heats our homes, lights our buildings, etc) as well as for the additional purpose of electrolysis water, which creates hydrogen- this hydrogen is ‘bottled up’ and stored, and on those days when the wind is lagging, the hydrogen is ‘unbottled’ and used to create electricity and power- either through fuel cell technology or through a combustion engine linked to an electrical generator.

There are many issues that have arisen in the discussion and early attempts at realising wind hydrogen hybrid technology- one major issue is the storage of the hydrogen itself. Underground storage has been investigated, and is often seen as the favoured method in a possible wind-hydrogen hybrid system. Hydrogen storage is tricky because, for one thing, it requires very large tanks to hold it. Increasing the pressure for these tanks would make them smaller, but also denser. Compressed hydrogen takes up a lot of energy for the compression process, making it inefficient; hydrogen can also be kept as a liquid (think the liquid nitrogen of Hollywood films that freezes what it touches). The thing about liquefaction is that the hydrogen has to be kept very, very cold to keep it a liquid- hydrogen boils at -252.882 degrees celsius, so it has to be kept at a lower temperature than that, which takes up a hell of a lot of energy. The delicate insulation for the appropriate storage tanks is also very expensive.

Underground storage, which many would like to see as the main way of keeping hydrogen ready for power creation when the wind is running weak, would involve depleted gas and oil fields, underground caverns, or salt domes- according to Wikipedia, the chemical manufacturing giant ICI has stored gaseous hydrogen in underground caverns for years without any problems.

The Australian company WHL Energy Limited is a key player in the development of this hybrid system, and according to its website ‘is actively pursuing a regional expansion strategy in Latin America and China, in addition to the UK and Australia’. Wikipedia states that test sites for the company’s wind hydrogen system exist across Canada, Denmark, North America, Argentina, Scotland, Greece, and Norway.

A wind-hydrogen hybrid, then, looks like a positive step towards smoothing out the problems with the renewable and freely available energy that can be gained from wind- whether the difficulties of hydrogen storage can be overcome will depend upon the limits of our technology and the unfolding of time.

Posted under Articles, Climate, Electricity Generation, Gas & Electricity, Renewable Energy

The government of India is to set up a ‘national environment protection authority’- designed to implement and monitor green laws- within two months, the Indian minister of environment and forests, Jairam Ram, has confirmed.

A “whole new direction” is being promised for the government by the minister, and the creation of this authority will be discussed at a meeting of all Indian states being held on November 26.

Ram said that the failure of the executive government to act on environmental issues- despite India’s progressive laws- had resulted in dirty cities, saying that “If a Nobel Prize is given for dirt and filth, India would win it hands down”. The new authority is hoping to push forward the implementation of these existing and new laws in the face of an executive which has “abdicated its responsibility” of governance in terms of green sustainability.

The minister made a bold move forward by saying that instead of the traditional GDP (gross domestic product) figure, a green domestic product figure should be calculated, one which takes into account the costs of environmental degradation; this has apparently been initiated, and India will take environmental issues into account for GDP figures, according to the minister, by 2015.

Ramesh has stated that he wants the maintenance of forest management to be conducted by the public sector and government primarily- saying that the “private sector is interested in plantations, while I am interested in forests”. He also believes that beef should cease to be eaten, in order to reduce the CO2 that is emitted in producing animal feed and in the transportation of meat.

Good news for India, and hopefully a strategy that will, in its boldness, ensure that the large population of India (estimated at 1.17 billion in July 2009) has the benefit of cleaner metropolises and a government that is a leading example in green legislation implementation.

Posted under Climate, Environmental News, News

The Ecotricity chief Dale Vince fancies himself for a bit of an ecowarrior, and has long been heavily involved in environmental lobbying and general political pressuring. Now he spends most of his time fronting the company that first brought the possibility of green electricity and green energy tariffs to the UK, but still takes a very active and influential role in encouraging the exposure that green energy gets.

Writing on the possibility for exposure of Ecotricity and companies like them at Copenhagen on his Zero Carbonista blog, Vince has commented as follows:

“I went to the UN conference in Kyoto, the one that put climate change on the map. A friend of mine got hold of some passes and we just turned up with no idea what to expect. Our plan was to talk anyone that would listen about the role that wind energy has to play in fighting climate change. The message went down well. Back then hardly anyone had heard of the concept of Climate Change and even fewer people held it to be true. It was more the territory of scientists and ‘hippies’. Actually, even back then, almost 2,000 of the world’s top scientists (the IPCC) had told the world’s political leaders ‘There is only one responsible choice – to act now.’

And Kyoto was a success. Not because the targets agreed were particularly ambitious but because targets were set at all. It was and still is an important moment in human history. The world had set its first carbon targets. Much has changed since then. Most people today have heard of climate change and more importantly accept that we urgently need to do something about it. It’s as rarely out of the news these days as it used to be rarely in the news a decade ago. T

The Kyoto accord played a vital part in this transformation, many people are hoping that a successor to Kyoto will emerge from Copenhagen. I hope so too. But Kyoto targets have not been met. So what use are another set of targets? We actually need deeds now not words. Targets are only a small part of the story, the easy part – hitting them will take real commitment“.

Can the Copenhagen summit bring further interest in green energy, then? Certainly, it can – and the exposure around the event, including talk on sustainable energy, has already done some of the work – but the question itself is something of a trick one; companies like Ecotricity are already doing the work that the green energy sector needs.

As Vince writes, words and deeds are not the same thing; hopefully politicians will match their words with deeds this time around, but in the increasingly like event it seems, that they don’t, companies like Ecotricity will keep ploughing away, offering green energy tariffs to whoever they can.

Perhaps the Copenhagen climate change summit can bring attention to such companies. It would do well to do so. If it doesn’t, though, one thing is certain: green electricity will keep gaining ground thanks to the efforts of companies like Ecotricity.

Posted under Articles, Climate