The Queen’s Speech in Parliament today, in which she set out the legislative agenda for the Government, was just 7 minutes long. This is far shorter than normal, and reflects the fact that there is very little parliamentary time between now and the next election for the passage of new Bills.

The speech did however still contain some proposals of note from an ecological perspective. A proposed ‘Energy Bill’ would support the construction of up to four Carbon Capture & Storage (CCS) demonstration schemes to reduce emissions from coal power plants, whilst a ‘Flooding & Water Management Bill’ would require sustainable drainage systems to be considered for new building developments and give water companies more power to control customers’ water usage during droughts. The Government will also respond to proposals on high-speed rail between England and Scotland.

One draft environmental bill proposed in June has been dropped however- the Antarctica Bill. This would have implemented a new annex to the Environmental Protocol to the Antarctic Treaty, introducing a ‘polluter-pays mechanism’ to act as a deterrent to irresponsible operators in the region. It would also have established a liability regime for environmental emergencies.

It remains to be seen how many of the proposals retained in the speech actually make it into law. For a comprehensive list of all the Bills proposed by the Government, please see here.

A group of scientists, led by Professor Corinne Le Quéré at the University of East Anglia, have called for urgent action at the UN climate change talks in Copenhagen to avert a catastrophic 6C rise in average global temperature. Professor Le Quéré and colleagues from the British Antarctic Survey published their results, part of the Global Carbon Project, in Nature Geoscience. The Guardian this morning describes the study as ‘the most comprehensive analysis to date of how economic changes and shifts in land use have affected carbon dioxide concentrations’.

The scientists suggest that the global trend, with emissions rising by 29% in the past decade, is towards 6C of warming before 2100. To limit a rise in temperature to 2C, a target favoured by policy-makers as necessary to avoid ‘dangerous climate change’, emissions would have to peak between 2015 and 2020 and then fall to one tonne per capita globally by 2050. At present the average British citizen is responsible for approximately 9.3 tonnes of carbon emissions per annum. A firm agreement at the Copenhagen summit is therefore vital, they say.

The scientists estimated how much carbon dioxide is being absorbed by forests, oceans and soil. They conclude that these natural carbon sinks are becoming less effective; absorbing 55% of carbon emissions now, compared to 60% 50 years ago. These results are however disputed by Dr Wolfgang Knorr at the University of Bristol, who published an analysis of similar data in Geophysical Research Letters showing that carbon sinks had not noticeably changed. Professor Le Quéré suggests that her team’s data is more robust, using monthly, rather than annual data on carbon dioxide levels.

Both teams of scientists agree that an improved understanding of land and ocean carbon sinks is crucial, with sinks holding a major influence in determining links between man-made greenhouse gas emissions and the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide.

Original article: Global temperatures will rise by 6C by the end of the century, say scientists

With less than three weeks to go until the start of climate negotiations in Copenhagen, British officials are anxious to dispel concerns that the talks will be a mere ‘photo opportunity’, producing just yet more ‘warm words’. Both David and Ed Milliband, Foreign Secretary and Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change respectively. yesterday emphasised the importance of the negotiations and stressed that Copenhagen could still deliver a “comprehensive” and “ambitious” agreement.

On Sunday, US President Barack Obama acknowledged that achieveing a legally binding deal at Copenhagen would be impossible. Obama needs the US senate to pass a climate change bill before he can commit to an international agreement.

Yesterday Achim Steiner, the UN Environment chief, warned of the high cost of delaying action on climate change and expressed concern that a lack of momentum would increase the risks of harm to both people and planet. Steiner commented: “”I believe that a deal [in Copenhagen] is still do-able. But any delay has real cost implications in economic, social and human terms and those implications must be at the forefront of the people’s minds as they go to Copenhagen.”

President Obama has expressed support for a Danish plan to delay an international agreement until mid 2010. The climate change talks could still be seen as a success if a politically-binding agreement is achieved, with a clear roadmap – and signals of rapid progress towards – an international, legally binding commitment.

Original article: UN environment chief Achim Steiner warns of high cost of climate delays. Guardian online, Monday 16 November

The latest report of the TEEB study was released on Friday, 13 November. ‘The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity for National and International Policy Makers 2009′ follows the TEEB Interim Report, released in May 2008. The next releases; ‘TEEB for Local Administrators’ and ‘TEEB for Business’ reports, will be released in summer 2010, whilst the final TEEB synthesis report will be published in time for the 10th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in autumn next year.

The latest document is intended to highlight the relevance of the TEEB study to mainstream policy-making, providing evidence to support a strong case for policy action; concrete examples of ways to make policies work (from removing subsidies to payments for ecosystem services) and practical guidance for managing the transition during policy reform.

TEEB is built around the central point that the lack of market prices for ecosystem services and biodiversity means that the public benefits we derive from these goods are usually neglected or under-valued in decision-making. By failing to account for the value of ecosystems and biodiversity we will make the wrong choices in responding to the global challenges of climate change, food, water and energy security. Making the benefits of biodiversity and ecosystem services visible to economies and society is necessary to pave the way for more efficient policy responses.

Download the full report and the executive summary.

Access the TEEB website.

The Guardian today reports on the Conservatives’ plans for new ‘conservation banks’, from which developers would be asked to buy credits as a condition of being granted permission to build. The Conservatives would use the money generated to lead to the creation of new woodlands, wetlands and wildlife corridors.

Many wildlife groups have greeted the proposals, from shadow environment secretary Nick Herbert, with caution. There is concern that the plans could offer a license to developers to destroy habitats, with the promise of compensatory ecological benefits elsewhere. Groups are also worried that the scheme could mean the end of public funding for nature conservation and a reliance on markets and private investment.

The ‘conservation banks’ could be run by local communities, voluntary groups or companies. In an interview with the Guardian, Nick Herbert said that “the existing bureaucratic, regulatory approach has failed to halt biodiversity loss. We need radical new thinking to reverse the decline. Our natural ecosystems and the services they provide like carbon storage, water storage, habitat for wildlife are worth billions of pounds. We have to find a way to unlock this value”. He stressed that the scheme would not weaken existing protection for endangered species or sites.

Original article: Tories reveal plams for conservation banks, 16 November

The Natural Capital Initiative will be represented at an Earthwatch debate this week; ‘From Tsunami to Drought’. Professor Paul Leonard, Environment Consultant and a member of the NCI steering group will join a panel of four other speakers tasked with pitching ideas to a panel of experts in a ‘Dragon’s Den’ style contest. The speakers will each outline their solutions to the looming crisis of drought, predicted under climate change scenarios to become a more frequent occurance and which may drive neighbouring states into conflict over increasingly scarce water resources. The proposals will be assessed by the panel of ‘Dragons’ and the winner will receive a (fictitious) cheque for $1 billion to put their ideas into practice.

The event is taking place on Thursday, 19th November, from 7-9pm at the Royal Geographical Society, London. The Guardian will be covering the debate with a live blog and it will be recorded by the BBC, for broadcast on Radio 4 on New Year’s Day.

The Natural Capital Initiative is a partnership between the Society of Biology, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology and the British Ecological Society. The NCI aims to identify gaps in research and policy, facilitating an ecosystem approach to policy-making becoming a reality across governments.

The UK Marine and Coastal Access Bill was granted Royal Assent yesterday (12th November), meaning that it has now become law. It has taken many years of work by the ecological and environmental community, but a network of Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs) will now be created in UK seas. We would like to thank all our members who contributed their considerable scientific expertise and advice to our work on this Bill.

Looking forwards, much work is now underway to identify where MCZs should be located. To coincide with the Bill’s enactment, the Marine Conservation Society has launched a new website with an interactive map showing the location and characteristics of 73 sites which they believe merit full protection. Members of the public are invited to vote for the sites which they believe should become reserves; the results will be presented to the regional bodies charged with making recommendations to the Government. Readers with marine expertise may also be interested in the facility which allows them to nominate their own sites for protection.

To vote for the protection of specific marine areas, visit: http://www.yourseasyourvoice.com/mpa/

If you would like to read a review of all the changes which have been made to the Bill during its passage through Parliament, please visit here.

You can now receive updates from the Ecology and Policy Blog on Twitter.

Follow us

New research published in the journal Nature Geoscience shows that 73% of the world’s major river deltas, formed when rivers deposit sediment on their way out to sea, are sinking. This has major implications for the 500 million people who live in or near river deltas.

Results show that sediment delivery to the deltas has been reduced or eliminated at the majority of deltas, of which much can be attributed to upstream damming and a reduction in the number of distributory side channels. The creation of reservoirs, floodplain engineering and extractive activities are also factors, causing sediment compaction. The Po Delta in Italy, for example, subsided by 3.7 metres in the twentieth century, with 81% of this attributable to methane mining.

The reduction in sediment delivery is causing the deltas to sink, exacerbating the risk of flooding around the delta, caused by an increase in sea level rise under climate change. Population growth and development around the delta will also further exacerbate flood risk. Overall, the surface area of deltas vunerable to flooding could increase by 50% under the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) projections for sea level rise in the twenty first century.

Research paper: Syvitski, J.P.M., Kettner, A.J., Overeem, I. et al. (2009). Sinking deltas due to human activities. Nature Geoscience. Doi: 10.1038/NGE0629
Original source: Science for Environment Policy, European Commission

Prof. Bob Watson, Chief Scientific Advisor at DEFRA, last night delivered a fascinating presentation on ‘Using the Environmental Sciences for a Sustainable Future’; taking place as the annual Institution of Environmental Sciences ‘Burntwood Lecture’, held at the Royal Society.

Over the course of an hour Professor Watson delivered a wide-ranging overview of the major challenges facing humanity in the coming years, from climate change, to food production to biodiversity loss, water quality and human security, and offered his view on how society could tackle these. Prof. Watson criticised governments for treating environmental and social challenges in isolation, creating policy silos; climate change, biodiversity loss, food, water and energy security are all interrelated and should be viewed as such. Climate change needs to be integrated into all sectorial policies and into national economic development; without this, much of the aid provided to the developing world, for example, will fail.

Prof. Watson touched upon work he had led as Director of the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology (IAASTD). 40% of food harvested in developing countries never makes it to market whilst 40% of food in developed countries is wasted once it has reached the market. Reducing post-harvest lost must therefore be a priority for science and technology research. Yet Professor Watson said that we can solve today’s hunger problem, where 1 billion people go to sleep hungry each night, without major advances in science; citing Agroecology as a huge area for development and stating that many of the problems relate to disparity in distributions of food.

Prof. Watson’s talk was packed with information, far too much to do justice to here. However, it was very interesting to note his view on what needs to change in order to build a sustainable future; one where a 4 degree rise in temperature is unlikely. A price must be placed on carbon, combined with technology transformation and the mobiliation of behavioural change throughout society. Efficiency in enegy production and use will be important; a shift from coal to gas as fuel and, if coal is used, capturing and storing carbon emissions. Improving the supply of renewable energy; nuclear power and managing soils and forests more efficiently will also have key roles to play.

Prof. Watson showed a very interesting diagram towards the end of his presentation outlining how society is segmented in relation to climate change and environmental issues. Dealing with the ‘honestly disengaged’, who recognise the issues but aren’t prepared to change their own behaviour in any way, for example, requires legislation, whilst those already engaged with the issues need to be supported in their efforts. Unless policy-makers understand how society is divided, they will lack an understanding of the policy responses to use to deal with these groups.

Overall Prof. Watson highlighted the importance of good governance in mitigating and adapting to the effects of climate change. Political will and moral leadership is needed; the UK has in some respects led the way, with the development of the world’s first ‘Climate Change Act’, but Prof. Watson said more is needed; the USA in particular needs to show leadership, bringing China and India on board with a global agreement. Technological innovation is also necessary. Finally, in a call to the scientific community Prof. Watson urged scientists to communicate with the public; engaging with their local councils, local MPs and local media, to convey key messages about the dangers of climate change and environmental degradation. People must understand, through science communicators, what the science is telling us, and what the future implications are of policy decisions to tackle these global challenges.