Duplicate map detected! GMap does not support multiplexing maps onto one MapID! GMap MapID: getactive_map_post

Blogposts tagged 'Green New Deal'

Which party will deliver the 'Green New Deal' the country, and climate, needs?

Posted by louise - 26 April 2010 at 3:45pm - 4 Comments
Offshore wind farm © Ian Bramham

Ever since the economy, and public sector investment, hit the buffers in late 2008, our call for government to invest heavily in new clean energy industries has become more important. What's needed is a Green New Deal - a strong green stimulus combined with an active industrial strategy - to create thousands of skilled jobs, secure energy supplies and secure Britain's place in the global clean energy race.

And it's an idea that's very popular with the electorate. A new poll by YouGov for Greenpeace shows a 65% of people demanding increased government investment in new clean energy industries. That figure rises to over 70% in the North East, where many of the jobs would be based.

But will we get it?

 

Darling's budget: green shoots but only a little green growth

Posted by jossc - 25 March 2010 at 3:06pm - 0 Comments

The chancellor promises £1bn for clean energy projects, but much more will be needed

Although heavily trailed by the chancellor’s supporters as an environmental budget, in the end it turned out to be a lot less than a comprehensive green win.

Despite Mr Darling’s assurances that he gets the need for tougher carbon reduction targets, he backed away from raising fuel duty and found more money for motorways under pressure from road lobbyists.

Planet Earth: Too Big to Fail

Posted by jossc - 29 April 2009 at 11:18am - 0 Comments

New Greenpeace USA Director Phil Radford has only been in post for three days, but already he's been arrested for taking action against climate polluters - he's one of the climbers in this banner hang outside the US State Department in Washington on Monday. 

The last budget before Copenhagen

Posted by christian - 21 April 2009 at 4:12pm - 0 Comments

stern

Nicholas Stern - panning Kingsnorth, Heathrow and now the budget?
CC Thiago Karrapatoso

I never thought I'd feel particularly warmly towards an economist. But then, Lord Stern of Brentford (as he's known to his friends), has a special place in the hearts of many climate change policy wonks.

He's responsible for the Stern report - an attempt, back in 2006, to figure out exactly what tackling climate change would cost. The full report ran to 700 pages, but the top line was this: 1% of global GDP a year would hold greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere to 550 ppmv, 3% of global GDP would hold it to 450 ppmv - gettting closer to limiting temperature rise to 2 degrees. But if we don't start spend that now, climate change will end up costing us 20% of global GDP. In other words, make significant but realistic investment now (the global military budget is about 2.5% of GDP, after all), or destabilise the climate and break the economy permanently. He basically took the environmental debate around addressing climate change and put it into the language of economics.

17 years later, world leaders haven't moved on when it comes to the climate

Posted by christian - 2 April 2009 at 5:12pm - 6 Comments

World leaders at the G20

Stability, growth, jobs all good - but where's the climate leadership? CC Image from London Summit on Flickr

Well, there we go. After the media circus, the protests, and a conference so exclusive that even some NGO participants were banned at the last minute, the G20 have pronounced, and it turns out that their environmental leadership is... er... down at the bottom of the document somewhere.

It's nice to believe that for one beautiful moment there was the chance to extract ourselves from the economic mess we've stumbled into, and at the same time create the foundations for the difficult but necessary tasks of addressing climate change.

Like helping China and India find a model for development which doesn't go hand in hand with rapidly rising carbon emissions, for example, or restructuring the way we ‘do business as usual' in the UK and taking advantage of our relative wealth to harness wind, wave and solar power (along with a whole heap of other clean technologies).

But it turns out that our leaders have dropped the ball completely.

(Small) Video: 'Yes You Can' at the G20

Posted by christian - 2 April 2009 at 12:33pm - 5 Comments

Yes you can

As the assembled G20 world leaders take a break from negotiations at the ExCel centre today - maybe have a few drinks, regard the lovely vistas of the Thames, and wonder to themselves how they can be as cool as Barack Obama - perhaps the words "Yes You Can" fluttering by at 45 mph will remind them that sorting out the global financial system to make it more equitable and sustainable is not some impossible dream, it's the only thing that's going to actually work.

That's because it's not only the economy which is in trouble, the climate is facing its own ecological-credit crunch. There's not much point fixing the finance system if we're going to ignore the climate crunch that threatens much bigger problems for the world.

The case for including energy efficiency investment in the fiscal stimulus package

Publication date:  30 March, 2009
Bold investment in energy efficiency measures now could provide tangible short-term and long-term benefits to our economy - boosting employment, reducing the problems of fuel poverty, and delivering substantial carbon savings. This investment must be made as an integral part of the government's planned fiscal stimulus package.
Download the report:

Government 'Green new deal' delays carbon build-up by only 6 hours

Posted by christian - 30 March 2009 at 11:26am - 4 Comments

Bank of England

Greenpeace climbers scale the Bank of England. Green, not greed - well, it's a nice idea.

It's a cliché, but these are troubled economic times. And so it was that with great fanfare the government's pre-budget report announced a £50 billion recovery plan for the British economy.

Even better for those of us with an interest in the relative green-ness of our economy, Gordon Brown declared that about 10 per cent of the money would go to "environmentally important technologies and potentially jobs in the green industries". Sounds good. One MP said that the £50 billion was going to be used in "greening our economy as a whole".

Isn't it disappointing when something that sounds good turns out to be an illusion? According to a report we commissioned from the New Economics Foundation, any shoots of recovery from the recovery plan aren't going to be particularly green, because behind some creative accounting the government is only stumping up peanuts for the environment. It's not so much a 'green new deal' as a 'greenwashed new deal'.

Green Stimulus Or Simulus?

Publication date:  30 March, 2009

What is the government doing that is new and additional to stimulate the economy by spending on the environment? This report by the New Economics Foundation shows that new funding for greening the economy amounts to just 0.6 per cent of the UK’s total stimulus package. Gordon Brown recently claimed to the House of Commons liaison committee that around 10 per cent of the UK package was directed towards "environmentally important technologies".

Download the report:

How deep are the shifts in politics?

Posted by John Sauven - 2 March 2009 at 2:47pm - 0 Comments

Our executive director John Sauven is writing today about green investment and starting the office off on a spring blog relay. Over the next couple months we'll be asking different Greenpeace staff and volunteers to write for our blog each day so that you can find out a bit more about the many different people, ideas and roles behind our campaigns.

Since the 'big crunch', world leaders have been forced to think the unthinkable.

Even Peter Mandelson, who once said he was "intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich", now questions New Labour's unbridled, unregulated capitalism.

He recently explained: "Partly through our need to reassure that we were no longer the 1980s Labour party, partly because there was a new economic orthodoxy prevailing in the economy, we emphasised or played up our belief in markets, profits, even privatisation as a model."

Syndicate content