Click on the headline (link) for the full text.

Many more articles are available through the Energy Bulletin homepage

Blueprint for a green economy
Conservative Party (UK)
The Quality of Life Policy Group, chaired by John Gummer and vice-chaired by Zac Goldsmith, released their final report on Thursday morning.

The Group have spent 18 months developing an agenda to make Britain a world leader on green growth by:

- Using markets to help create positive change
- Helping individuals change their behaviour
- Making industry use resources more efficiently

They have outlined a series of proposals to reduce pollution and improve the wider environment and quality of life.

Launching the report, John Gummer said, "If we are to create a way of living that can sustain, then water, waste, transport and energy, as well as farming, food, fishing and the built environment, have to be thought of as a whole."

Zac Goldsmith added, "This is the most thorough review of environmental policies ever conducted by a political Party. It is radical but practical, pioneering but realistic, and shows how the next Conservative government can deliver the change we need."

David Cameron set up six policy groups to make recommendations to the Shadow Cabinet, and the Quality of Life group are the final one to report back. The Party will now discuss and debate the proposals, before deciding which recommendations will become firm policies.
(13 September 2007)
The PDF for the 549-page report can be downloaded from a link at the original at bottom of the page.

UK Conservatives' Blueprint for a Green Economy
Alex Steffen, WorldChanging
The U.K. Conservative Party released its Blueprint for a Green Economy this morning, and it is groundbreaking, indeed, yes, worldchanging political work. [Download the 3.4 MB PDF from the party web site.]

The tone of the report is somehow bit off -- like bankers at Burning Man -- but the content is phenomenal. The authors don't pull any punches here, bandying around phrases like "One Planet Conservatism," arguing for redefining progress away from purely economic measurements of well-being, advocating smart growth and a roads moratorium, demanding "zero carbon" new home construction standards, even calling for stiff carbon pricing as "the most effective surrogate for environmental cost" for greening the economy ("It's time to cut taxes on families and increase taxes on pollution.")

Indeed, the Conservatives go farther than do most progressive North American politicians these days, calling for a recognition of absolute ecological limits and the demands they place on us for both radical innovation and societal change:

A fixation on the idea that the market can manage all things if ‘externalities' are ‘internalised' is wrong, firstly because of the scale and urgency of the challenge which means that we simply do not have time for the market to ‘adjust over time', and secondly, because we have a far from perfect understanding of the complex interactions between the climate, biosphere, soils and other elements which make up the delicate balance of the Earth. We know too little of the potential implications of the changes in sea p.h., temperature and salinity. We don't fully comprehend how these interact with climate or how climate impacts on sea life and the fish stocks upon which large sections of the global population rely. It is areas of debate such as this that it is clearly not possible to put a value and ‘price' on the natural world. Simply to ignore anything of which we are not certain would be irresponsible so we have to protect where we cannot be utterly certain.

If, however, our appetite for material goods continues on its current trajectory, it is unlikely that resource-use efficiency in and of itself will halt or reverse our impacts on the planet... Simply cleaning up existing lifestyles and patterns of economic growth will not take us far enough, not least if we are to achieve equitable global development within the natural limits of the planet. After all, if everyone on Earth equaled the resource consumption of our citizens here in the UK, it would take three planets to support us. If we all aspired to US patterns it would demand five planets.

The issue is not whether but when we recognize that fact. The current economic model, relying on universal cheap energy, is bust. There are sticking plaster solutions but, in the end we have to find an alternative way forward. Sensibly, we should do that before we damage the environment irreversibly. If we are stupid, we'll fail to act now and then seek the solution in extremis when, even if an answer is still possible, it will be immeasurably more difficult and infinitely more expensive. If society at large can shift its thinking away from ‘what can I buy?' to ‘what do I want from life?' or ‘what needs do I have?' then perhaps we can decouple economic growth from resource input. This is our challenge.

This is, honestly, the most sensible environmental rhetoric I've ever heard from an English-speaking political party.
(13 September 2007)

A quality report (Comment)
John Sauven, Guardian
The Conservative party's report on green policies carries one important underlying message: we need to dramatically change the way we live.
---
The Conservative party's quality of life report is generating - perhaps predictably - a typically robust response from the right. Commentators are reaching for their keyboards to condemn detailed policy announcements on green taxes, aviation, energy efficiency, waste and planning, within seconds of the report being leaked last night. But very few are attempting to look at the underlying points made by the report and the message it sends about the future direction of our society.

The quality of life report starts from the basic premise that humans across the planet are consuming too much given the realities of climate change and that the world needs to dramatically change its consumption patterns. It might be uncomfortable, but this is not a particularly radical point of view. Clearly a growing population, with increasing standards of living will demand more and more. Indeed, it might even be seen as a global right for every citizen given the west has enjoyed a high consumption lifestyle for years. But the reality of the science is that we can't carry on consuming like this. Not only the threat of climate change, but the scarcity of water, arable land and fish stocks, the destruction of forests and loss of biodiversity all point to a single conclusion: we humans need to change the way we live on this planet. How we do that globally in an environmentally responsible and socially just way is the defining question of the 21st century. The Gummer/Goldsmith report is an attempt to respond to this.

In essence, it is trying to change the mentality of world economics by decoupling economic growth from resource input; to break the link that the only way for people to improve their lot in life is to earn more, own more and consume more. It is radical stuff; but vitally important especially for a world already confronted by resource-conflicts and the impacts of climate change.

At this point I think we can draw an analogy with the global economic changes under monetarism. The postwar economic consensus on Keynesian economics was running out of steam through the 1970s. The economists answered by concentrating on money supply. In the UK, that meant Thatcherism with all its attendant changes and stresses. The new economic theory - lead by politicians on the centre-right - rolled out across the world and had a profound effect on the way we lead our lives.

Society needs a shift of equal magnitude now: a fundamental change in the way we think about ourselves, our wellbeing and our planet; measures of success that aren't linked to ever-increasing consumption. The quality of life report is attempting to show how that might work in an advanced western economy. When viewed in this context, the micro policy proposals make sense. Intelligent commentators should recognise this and enter into the really serious debate on the future of our planet and our fellow citizens.

John Sauven is director of Greenpeace.
(13 September 2007)
Related coverage of the new Conservative report from the Guardian:
Tory report backs increased taxes on flights and cars
Cameron pledges to adopt 'much' of green report

Green groups attack Labour, Tories and Lib Dems on environment
Haroon Siddique and agencies, Guardian
All three of the major political parties are falling short in their response to the threats facing the environment, according to a study released today.

A group of leading environmental organisations assessed the green credentials of the Tories, Labour and the Liberal Democrats and found them all wanting.

The report praised David Cameron, the Conservative leader, for raising the profile of green issues, but found a "stark" gap between the rhetoric of his party and its policy commitments on the environment since the 2005 election.
(12 September 2007)