Kelvin Beer-Jones suggests there is more to sustainability than just targets and urges Quakers not to reinvent the wheel

Target setting

Kelvin Beer-Jones suggests there is more to sustainability than just targets and urges Quakers not to reinvent the wheel

by Kelvin Beer-Jones 19th August 2011

It was terrific to hear so many Friends ‘call to action’ at Canterbury in support of a lower carbon economy; but I was disappointed at the apocalyptic approach of many Friends there. I think this did more to harm, rather than support, the ‘call to action’.   Britain Yearly Meeting seemed to have already forgotten the 2009 testimony to the earth and the environment when the clerk kindly reminded the Meeting of it on Thursday morning. Importantly, at no time during our ‘threshing’ on this crucially important issue did I hear any mention of the UK government’s current work in this area.


For instance, are Friends aware that the UK government already has in place a fully developed Carbon Management Plan which is legally binding? (http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/emissions/carbon_budgets/carbon_budgets.aspx)

The national plan is also underpinned by legislation. This legislation requires the UK to fully meet science based, necessary carbon reductions (http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/legislation/cc_act_08/cc_act_08.aspx).
 
Last year I voluntarily retired from the energy industry. As a member of both the Parliamentary Group for Energy and Royal United Services Institute (RUSI – where I was energy security expert) I played my part in the development of the legislation and budgeting processes for carbon management across the UK and the European Union. We have not got it right yet, I am sure, but we are now a long way down the road of transition.
 
The implementation of the plan offers considerable challenges to social policies, in particular:
 
• fuel poverty as energy costs necessarily rise (we are now only just seeing the beginning of this price escalation taking place)

• energy security as we inevitably move towards a nuclear future (and so must the rest of the world, including areas challenged by stability)

• displacement as transport moves to remove the petrol engine from global economies (this is relatively easy in the UK but not easy in many developing countries).
 
There is so much work to be done here, at both national and global levels, and engagement with this process ought to be a massive call to action for British Quakers. I was saddened, therefore, to see so much emotion and energy at Canterbury diverted towards the development of British-Quaker-only ‘target setting’ and ‘measuring’ using yet to be discovered homespun scoring mechanisms. (Compare the maturity of our thinking about target definition as set out at Canterbury with that already in place in the UK’s current mandatory scheme above.)
 
Let us instead first learn what our country is doing already in this area and then engage with policy makers in the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) and related ministries to influence national policy so that it is implemented through Quaker values. This way we can play a significant role in achieving transition to a low carbon economy with sensitivity and tenderness towards the casualties that will emerge from the transition process itself. This ought to be more useful work to us than collecting alternative statistics about Meeting houses.
 
If I can offer some comfort to those disappointed at the loss of measuring and targets, my deep experience in the area of target setting and carbon management is that targets will help to show you that you have done the least that you can do – they will not inspire you to reach for that which you might achieve.


Comments


• energy security as we inevitably move towards a nuclear future (and so must the rest of the world, including areas challenged by stability) DO WE HAVE TO…..WHY?? When its now clear its quite possible to meet our needs from renewables - see reports from CAT (Centre for Alternative Technology - Zero Carbon Britain”) and WWF(World Wildlife Fund) Nuclear is such an unforgiving technology - when things go wrong- and we aren’t all seeing all wise beings - we are mortal and fallible. The safest nuclear reactor is the one that 83 million miles away - our Sun!- and we are getting rather good at tapping energy from it. Best wishes John Allbar”

By johnalbar on 20th August 2011 - 15:13


Please login to add a comment