30/06/08

EcoTeams

Last Monday we launched the results of our EcoTeams project to local authorities. The headline figures showed that households participating in EcoTeams were able to save £148 per annum and cut carbon emissions by 16% These savings were achieved by households taking simple steps such as installing energy efficient lighting and turning off appliances.

What was interesting was the steps that people were unlikely to take such as switching to a green tariff. With the notable exception of Good Energy, I am increasingly sceptical about green tariffs. The drive towards more renewable energy is being driven by Government targets not consumer demand. People buying green tariffs are feathering the already comfortable nests of the utility companies and would be better off using their money to make their homes more energy efficient

No Hero

On Thursday I was chosen by the Chartered Management Institute to be their Management Hero. If I truly was a Management Hero, I would have had the foresight not to have got drunk the night before giving a presentation in front of people eating cooked breakfast in the depths of a gently rocking boat on the Thames! Despite my nausea, there seemed to be a genuinely positive response to what I said. I am gradually developing a presentation that is a mixture of the science of climate change based around the slides of Al Gore and Sir David King coupled with examples of our practical and engaging initiatives.

Mori Poll

The presentation demonstrates that, when provided with the scientific facts, people are genuinely concerned about climate change. Given this, it was very discouraging to see a MORI poll last week showing that the majority of people believe that the problem is exaggerated in order to make money. This perception has to be largely driven by the leaden initiatives of our one-dimensional government. Gordon Brown is embedding the links between climate change and tax rises into the national psyche without explaining the reasoning or offering more compelling alternative incentives.

24/06/08

House of Commons event

If we were to believe our media, the streets are not safe with young people running riot in gangs. This is far removed from our experience of working with a vast number of schools - many in deprived inner-city London boroughs.

On Monday, we held a celebration event at the House of Commons for the schools who won our Climate Change Champions initiative. Three groups of young children gave emotive, confident and engaging presentations about their achievements. These were in stark contrast to the many power-point dominated talks given by pale, male and stale adults which are inflicted upon me at overly expensive environment conferences.

The presence of the children also enlivened the presentations given by Joan Ruddock, Jim Knight and Charles Clark who seemed able, without too many voters in the room, to give a more personalised view about the challenges we face than normal.

Ashden Award

On Thursday, we were selected as one of the winners of the Ashden Award presented by Sir David King. The achievements of the international winners were humbling. It is astonishing what people are able to achieve despite facing enormous hardships. I was particularly struck by a project being run in a refugee camp in Ethiopia that was helping to stop deforestation and improve the health of women. If only we in the UK had half as much practical determination and imagination we could be transforming our environment.

As part of the awards all the winners were taken to meet Prince Charles at Clarence House. The house is a green idyll in the middle of London with a surprisingly eclectic collection of furniture and paintings. The Prince was clearly particularly intrigued by the international projects aiming to reduce deforestation.

Greenhouse Gas reporting

A hidden gem appeared from DEFRA this week setting out guidelines for reporting Greenhouse Gas emissions. When it finally filters into the corporate mind-sets there will be a collective gulp. The cause will be DEFRA's stipulation that energy bought on a green tariff should use the same CO2 conversion factors as electricity on a standard tariff. This is because green tariffs rarely create any additional renewable energy rather they just allocate what is already there. As a result many companies will suddenly find the costs of their zero carbon or carbon neutrality claims soaring. This simple change will force many to look at carbon reduction as a more cost-effective way to support their green claims.

Sustainability

On Wednesday, I worked with one of the banks helping them to create their environmental tag-line. The conversation illustrated once again the paucity of environmental language. It either has associations with ill-fitting jumpers and yoghurt-knitting or has been co-opted by ‘corporate speak'. For example, can someone please tell me what a ‘sustainable airport' is?

13/06/08

I have been struck this week by how fragmented the debate around green issues has become. I was interviewed on Sky News responding to a report from a range of conservation organizations arguing against the proposed Severn Barrage. The points they raised are undoubtedly valid but you could come up with very similar reports arguing against nuclear, clean coal or wind energy. The simple fact is that if we are going to have enough energy to keep the lights on we are going to have to have some if not all of these things. The trick will be to get a balance which enables us to meet our climate change targets along with security of supply at an affordable price. It would be helpful if the conservation groups entered the debate at this level rather than headline grading attacks on individual projects.

The level of confusion was also highlighted at a debate run by the Advertising Standards Association. Complaints about corporate ‘Greenwash' rose 500% last year. Many of the complaints were made against companies using terms such as carbon neutrality and zero carbon without adequate supporting evidence. The debate highlighted the alarming lack of environmental knowledge amongst the advertising sector leading to some of the more dubious adverts. It did also illustrate the potential the advertising industry has for changing behaviour with the campaign to encourage people to wash clothes at a lower temperature being particularly successful.

A confused public makes it harder to get acceptance for valid solutions. This was highlighted in a consumer research report commissioned by the Sustainable Development Commission. The research assessed the public response to a range of options for promoting energy efficiency. One option was to have a different approach for charging for electricity. At the moment most electricity tariffs offer one price for the first 100 units of electricity used and then a lower price for any units used over that amount. The proposal was to flip this around meaning low electricity use would result in lower costs, whereas high use would result in higher costs. To me this seems eminently sensible but the research illustrated concerns that it was another way for the utility companies to make even more money.

Amongst all the confusion there are some rays of hope. I went to a meeting consisting of some of the UK's leading companies who are getting together to try to standardize and improve the quality of the environmental questions they are asking of their supply chain. This is one important step to bring a level of cohesion and consistency to an overly complicated debate.

06/06/08

One of the interesting things about my job is that I get a chance to meet with people from companies, Government and community groups.  This week has been no exception. 

Change in Government

On Thursday, I chaired DEFRA's Compact group.  The Compact is Government's attempt to build closer and stronger relationships with the Third Sector.  The principles of the Compact are incredibly strong and there are parts of DEFRA that are genuinely committed to implementing them.  Working on the Compact Group has been a mixture of frustration and hope.  The frustration is caused by the fact that change in Government Departments happens as fast as a lethargic sloth walking through treacle. Hope is generated by seeing DEFRA heading in the right direction.  If they were just given some adequate resource and proper control over their wayward agencies genuinely strong relationships between Government and the Third Sector would be built.

Sustainable Communities Award

Thursday evening saw me spending over an hour trying to do up my bow tie as we were a finalist for the Creating Sustainable Communities award.  You always know when you haven't won the top award when you find yourself sitting closer to the toilets than the main stage.  The ceremony was the usual mixture of inspiration - this time provided by some young London poets - and somewhat nauseating self-congratulation.   Whilst we didn't win, I was delighted that our work in schools had been short-listed down to the final four.

Meeting our Energy Needs

On Tuesday, I went to a policy discussion led by one of the world's largest energy companies.  I left wondering who in their right mind would want to be the boss of any energy company.  They are faced with the triple challenge of guaranteeing that we have the energy we need, at an affordable price and ensuring it is produced less carbon intensively.

Most utility companies are currently deciding where to invest billions of pounds replacing our old nuclear and coal power plants.   Their ultimate decisions will have a profound impact on all our lives and you would have thought there would be a healthy informed debate around the subject. There isn't.

Instead of a discussion around all the possible options, the public is only getting a snap-shot of the debate usually driven by pressure groups with a particular axe to grind over nuclear or coal or the fuel poverty lobby who frequently disregard the implications of climate change.  Government is dithering and the EU is imposing targets which many feel are not helpful. 

The consequence of this muddle is that energy companies are not willing to invest.  The longer they leave it the more expensive and short term their decisions will inevitably become and the more dependent we will be on Putin's gas power.  This reliance is likely to be provide us with energy that is not affordable, is insecure and is not low carbon. 

What is required is a clear, honest and impartial presentation of all our energy options enabling us to make an informed decision about future investments - and we need it soon.

The recession and the environment

I attended a discussion asking whether the recession will cause a significant drop off in concern for the environment.  This is certainly the view being portrayed in the media and is the perceived wisdom amongst politicians.  The evidence provided by three compelling presentations was that whilst economic uncertainties will remove it from people's immediate priorities the underlying interest and concern will remain strong.

Interestingly the higher fuel prices are beginning to have an impact.  Sales of the gas guzzling Hummer have dropped by 29% and the US has just seen its biggest ever monthly decrease in car travel.   People are definitely starting to adjust their lifestyle because of the new financial pressures use of the Free-cycle web site is soaring as is membership of car pooling schemes. 

02/06/08

How Green is Brown?

New Labour gets an absolute pummelling in the elections and the debate starts raging about Gordon Brown's leadership qualities. I got a first-hand chance to see our PM in action at a Mayday event hosted by Prince Charles. The contrast between the presentations given by the Prince and Gordon Brown was stark. Despite his rather shambolic style there is no doubting the genuine commitment and passion that Prince Charles brings to the climate change debate. Gordon Brown on the other hand gave a slick rat-a-tat speech brimful of new initiatives and commitments but somehow lacking belief. What he was saying didn't seem consistent with his underlying values.

This lack of consistency has become starkly apparent in the aftermath of the elections. Brown's response to the debacle has been to hint at a gradual unwinding of the few green commitments contained in the budget such as the already delayed fuel levy, the proposed new car tax bands and even the pay as you throw waste scheme. I think the response highlights the opportunities that New Labour missed in the supposedly green budget.

Economically we are starting to face the realities of living beyond our environmental means. Fuel prices are rising due to the enormous demands created by growth in China and India. Food prices are similarly rising due to growing population and pressures on land use partly driven by the rush to bio-fuels. These trends are unlikely to be reversed in the foreseeable future. Food and energy security issues are charging up the agenda. A far-sighted Government would have been seeking to create an economic framework that would enable us to better cope with this new reality.

A truly low carbon budget would have provided green incentives such as increasing the amount of money people are paid for selling energy that they generate through micro-generation back into the grid. It could also have created more incentives for producing locally sourced food and placed further direct pressure on manufacturers to create energy efficient products. We got none of these; instead the Government placed an increased tax burden on petrol, a commodity whose underlying cost is increasing. The impact is disproportionately negative on those living on a low income or in rural areas without any counter-balancing incentives. This short-sighted policy gives people a false impression of the role of green taxation and doesn't help transform the UK into a low carbon economy.

Corporate Leadership

The themes of leadership and consistency were also prominent at a business event I attended. There was an excellent presentation from Shell setting out how they believe international energy policies need to evolve to become less carbon intensive. The validity of their position was immediately challenged by the first question which asked why they had pulled their investment from the London Array renewable energy project - a decision which has jeopardised the future of this project.

Their response was that they will be making the same level of investment in renewable energy but it will be in the US where the economic incentives for such investments are more favourable. This answer provoked two questions in my mind. The first was that, if it is true, why the Government's position was not scrutinised more closely to see if they are providing insufficient encouragement to renewable energy development. The second question is, if Shell is so truly committed to a lower carbon future shouldn't they make the investment anyway - their coffers are hardly bare at the moment!

These questions lead into the wider debate as to the role that companies should be playing in the fight against climate change. Are they solely acting on the needs of their shareholders which is clearly the line that Shell has taken on this issue or should they look at the wider social and environmental agenda? An example of the latter is B&Q who decided at the start of the year to phase out the sale of patio heaters just as the demand for this product was soaring due to the ban on smoking. B&Q's decision will clearly hit their bottom line and was made due to wider moral considerations. Few other companies have been brave enough to follow this sort of stance, which is one of the reasons why there is such a healthy debate around the validity of many corporate social responsibility statements.

In the beginning...

In 1993, I set up Global Action Plan with the belief that most people are willing to do their bit for the environment providing they know that their actions will make a difference and they are given sufficient support and encouragement to enable them to make changes in their busy lives.

Fifteen years on, the need to engage people in environmental change has soared up the agenda as the scientific evidence about the impact of climate change has become increasingly robust. Global Action Plan has always been actively involved in this debate seeking to innovate and challenge wherever possible. The result has been a roller-coaster ride of successes and disasters which has ended up with us being uniquely placed to play a significant role in creating the change that is required.

For me personally, I have seen us grow from being just me and the amazing Sacha Workman who volunteered her time and front-room to help get Global Action Plan started through to an organisation employing over 55 people. It is this transformation that has lead to ‘Trewin Says'. Whilst I would be quite happy carrying on doing my job relatively quietly and spending most of my creative energies on ensuring there is at least one bad football joke in every speech I give, Sally Horrox, my Marketing Director, thought that I should share my dishevelled, rambling thoughts with the wider world. So here goes...

Every week, I will write a few short pieces based upon the people I have met, stuff in the news or things I have seen. Please let me know whether you think it is worthwhile or whether I should just stick to the bad jokes.