Woodlands.co.uk was chosen as the sustainability sponsor for the February 2023 conference, State of Open 2023.  Mostly held for those working in computing and data, this event was held at the QE2 centre in Westminster, with several hundred individuals who networked and learnt more about open source, open data and open standards.  The highlight was the speech by Jimmy Wales, founder of Wikipedia, explaining that Wiki isn't just about free and open information but about structure: their whole model is unusually open. It's truly democratic amongst wikipedians and is the antithesis of top-down models which dominate most of the world's organisations. As sponsors, woodlands.co.uk committed to plant at least one tree for every conference delegate as a carbon-offsetting measure and to encourage biodiversity. It turns out that at this conference relatively little extra carbon was produced for various reasons - the QE2 conference centre itself has strong environmental policies and the delegates were mostly either UK-based or were travelling to Europe anyway for a related conference.  Nethertheless many of them took away free eco-merchandise from the Woodlands stand, including seeds for planting and wooden pens.  Lots of the conference attendees were also interested in buying land for tree-planting so that their company would be offsetting its own carbon footprint and the staff would have a nearby place to go and enjoy. Sustainability sponsors can occasionally be accused of offering 'greenwash" but in this case there was no risk of that because the OpenUK movement is already so committed to sustainability and to using software to reduce carbon emissions.  And in this case, too, the sponsor was offering practical measures such as the planting of defined numbers of trees in the UK (in Kent) rather than a theoretical payment to a nebulous foreign project.  Conference participants were offered the chance to take away seeds to plant their own oak, cherry, lime, chestnut or sycamore trees. The role of sustainability sponsors at conferences varies but can involve financial support or the promotion of sustainability initiatives.  Some eco sponsors also offer energy audits, sustainability assessments or carbon footprint analysis.  According to the AI chatbot, ChatGPT, "Overall, sustainability sponsors play a critical role in supporting the transition to a more sustainable future by providing resources, expertise, and advocacy to organisations working on sustainability issues."  

Greenwashing is when a company spends more effort on saying how environmentally friendly they are rather than actually reducing the environmental damage they do.  Examples could include the recent claims made by Easyjet that they are already carbon neutral or the target by BP to become carbon neutral by 2050.  The Easyjet claim smells a bit like like fake news but at least they have pledged to spend £25 million over the next year on offsetting their carbon emissions - it's hard to see how even that can compensate for their 331 planes flying around the world 24/7.  BP's claim is easier to make because it's only a target for the year 2050 - "it's easy to write a cheque if you know it won't be cashed for 30 years" and, in any case, it's rather unlikely that the current board will be in place in 30 years' time.  So, putting aside these particular claims, why do big companies engage in such extravagant claims, and are they really just greenwash? Read more...

Campaigners say that we need to increase tree cover to 50% and claim it will help deal with climate change. Tree planting became a big issue in the recent general election but it's much harder than people think and probably less effective at combatting climate change than other simpler measures.   For a start it's a slow business - even in the 1960s tree-planting splurge it took a decade of feverish activity to increase tree cover by just a few percentage points.  Also you need to think carefully about where you plant and what trees you plant - the 1960's planting was mostly on uplands and with mono-cultures that were bad for biodiversity (mainly spruce and pine).  More fundamentally we need to ask what this tree-planting is trying to achieve: can the carbon fixed through one crop of trees realistically counter the burning of carbon from millions of generations of trees represented by burning coal and oil? Read more...

There is considerable debate as to the virtues or otherwise of buying a real Christmas tree over an artificial one.  This comes into focus somewhat more sharply in the post-Christmas period.   A  6 to 7 foot high natural tree (bought with no roots) would be between ten to fifteen years old and it has a fairly low carbon footprint.   As it has been growing, it has been absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and locking it away in the form of cellulose and lignin, whilst releasing oxygen.  However, this footprint changes dramatically if its fate is to be consigned to land fill.   As it decomposes, it will produce methane, a potent greenhouse gas and the carbon footprint of the tree will increase quite dramatically.   If, however, the tree is carefully composted, then its environmental impact can remain relatively low (visit the Carbon Trust for detail).   The cultivation and growth of natural Christmas trees provides a wildlife habitat, and the trees help stabilise and protect soil.  But in some parts of the world, notably Canada and the USA, the growth and supply of Christmas trees has been affected by heatwaves (as in Oregon in 2017 / 2018 - which killed many very young trees), insect damage and wildfires. The effects of climate change are particularly marked in Canada.  It may be that climate change will intensify the effect of these factors, and that Christmas tree ‘farms’ may need to move to higher elevations - where it is cooler and insect pests (e.g. balsam twig aphid) are less of a problem.  Read more...

Winter, and Christmas in particular, is linked with foods and flavours that perhaps we do not experience at other times of the year.  Think of the distinctive smell and taste of the Christmas Pudding with its many ingredients, the cranberry sauce with the turkey, mince pies (with their mixed fruits) and perhaps exotic crystallised figs; all examples of seasonal fare.   The ingredients for some of these may be raised in your garden or come from much further afield.   If we look back in time, then our ancestors would have gathered, stored, and preserved a wide range of foraged fruits and ‘seeds’ to ‘see them through’ the harsher winter months.  They had techniques and recipes for preserving fruits / roots etc. through the winter when fridges and freezing had not been thought of; except for the ice houses on the estates of the landed gentry. In relatively recent times, there has been renewed interest in foraged food such as chestnuts, sloes etc - see Richard Mabey’s book “ Food for Free."  Read more...

Each year, a variety of conifers are sold as Christmas trees, for example, the Norway Spruce Picea abies Silver Fir Abies alba  Nordmann Fir Abies normanniana Scots Pine Pinus sylvestris and in North America Douglas Fir Pseudotuga menziesii  and Balsam Fir Abies balsamea. Read more...

This week’s other “must-read” book is “The One Planet Life : a blueprint for Low Impact Development “ by David Thorpe, which explains the idea of One Planet living, and the One Planet Development planning policy in Wales. David Thorpe is a writer and consultant on sustainability issues. He is a Special Consultant on Sustainable Cities Collective, the primary website for urban leaders globally; a founder and core group member of the One Planet Council; and the author of several books on sustainability, including: Energy Management in Buildings, Energy Management in Industry, Solar Technology and Sustainable Home Refurbishment, all in The Earthscan Expert Guide series. Prior to this he was the News Editor and Opinion Writer of the UK’s Energy and Environmental Management magazine for 13 years. Before that he was director of publications at the Centre for Alternative Technology. Read more...

About a year ago the RSPB, along with Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace, put the cat among the proverbial pigeons by arguing that use of some woodfuel is "Dirtier than Coal".  This caused controversy amongst woodfuel zealots but the study showed that not all woodfuel is created equally.   The report was particularly concerned about subsidies which encourage the burning of whole trees where they are grown especially for woodfuel, and where these displace other land uses often to be transported long distances for power stations.  The "Dirtier than Coal' report said that full carbon accounting was necessary and we should take account of the short term effect of clear felling rather than using thinings: clear felling can lose the benefit of carbon fixing which is achieved by letting trees grow on.  The RSPB position is that we need to do full carbon accounting, create new woodlands and set up coherent sustainability standards. Read more...