CAT Visit Follow-up
1. Had you heard of CAT before you came on this module? If 'yes' then please give an idea where you'd heard about them.
No.
2. Please respond to the points below. All aspects were raised/discussed in the lecture and workshop on site:
• Power: Decarbonizing our power generation infrastructure via renewables - can it be done, is it feasible? What will it take before changes on the scale suggested by Zero Carbon Britain could happen - government intervention or market forces? Or maybe you picked up on the the nuclear power options available - pros and cons/politics involved. How do you feel about this? Please explain your answer either way and any proactive suggestions..
Decarbonisation has finally started with the gov’t announcing that they’re going to be decommissioning all coal-powered power stations by 2023 as they’re unsustainable. (Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34851718). This indicates that the government is listening to the ZCB plan and using their heads. Personally, I think that renewables will be a big thing in the next parliament (2020-2025) – or whenever the infrastructure commission is set up as they’ll recommend spending for infrastructure no matter which party is in power.
Cost effective methods of power generation will always be the front runner. At the moment it’s decided that it’s gas that will be better than coal. Some may disagree, but it’s surely better than coal? I do hope that things like the tidal lagoon in Swansea Bay happen but at the moment that’s not the priority of the gov’t, which is to drag Britain out of debt (we can hope).
So yes, while I’d love for all energy generated to be renewable – I’m not sure that we’re going to get there for a long while yet!
• Transport: Decarbonizing our transport infrastructure - electric vehicles, hydrogen-powered - are they feasible/have you heard of them? Air travel - is it feasible to lower it to the levels suggested in Zero Carbon Britain (?) - please explain your answer either way and any proactive suggestions..
I think that electric vehicles and hydrogen powered vehicles are a very positive step forwards, I can’t see that they’re going to be feasible just yet to mass produce for everybody. Obviously the gov’t has new incentives in terms of car tax/VED for low emission vehicles. Car charging points are being rolled out rapidly across the country, so we’re getting the infrastructure to be able to entertain electric cars – but not on a scale where it’s feasible in my opinion.
Air travel is a tricky one. It’s one of those things where if you hike the prices then there’ll be massive resentment from the population. It’s seen as a ‘right’ to be able to go on holiday and I don’t think that’ll change at all in the foreseeable. I found Ann’s point about ‘why should we be able to take a flight somewhere, but a child in Africa not?’ quite thought provoking. My response being – why can’t they have access to all of Western life? Because they’re economically screwed and their governments are corrupt as anything (see post about oil companies CSR in Africa). It’s by chance that we were born into the circumstances in which we were, and I don’t think that we can do anything about that.
In terms of transport generally, we need to prioritise building infrastructure cleaner modes of transport – for example electric rail and tramways. If you give people a reason to not use their car, or use it considerably less, then they’ll move to these ways. Most short distance commuting is because there is little, or where there is – it’s horrendous, infrastructure. For instance, in Worcester the only ways to get to the city centre, from West Worcester is by foot, car or bus. The buses aren’t reliable or comfortable and are diesel anyway. There’s no P&R service or a train stop. I think that if there was more of a metro system to get around Worcester then more people would use that than cars. (I’m talking about 4 or 5 more cheap to build stations in Worcester that run every 15 or so minutes). A congestion charge and/or a red route would also be great for Worcester.
• Food: Decarbonizing our food infrastructure (according to Zero Carbon Britain) means lessening our reliance on meat and it's various production methods. When grazing land is freed up, it can be 'better used' to grow crops (which ZCB says is a much more efficient use of it). What do you feel about this? Is it feasible? Would you personally want to lessen your meat intake in the week (unless already a vegetarian)? Does the very thought of this annoy you? Please explain your answers and any proactive suggestions in as much detail as possible.
Like I said in the lecture, I can’t see it being adopted with the current generations still alive. I think that it’ll take for those 30+, the generations less receptive to change – especially when they’re in a poor economic area, to grow older or die. Currently people don’t like being told how to eat. Younger generations will be more receptive to change as they’ve got a habit of looking at the wider picture.
Food laws restricting consumption of x meat would not pass through parliament, of that I am certain. Hiking prices of meat would mean poorer families turning to ready meals, something that is slowly being improved currently. Sometimes I could argue that some poorer families need to reprioritize their spending (off topic: Australia looked at having a welfare credit card so that they could make sure that claimants are spending wisely – offering coaching to those who don’t).
Personally I don’t eat a lot of beef. I’m more of a chicken man and I’d think that chicken takes up a lot less resources (sans the associated animal welfare issues). If I was asked to eat less red meat then I’d happily oblige.
3. Please tell us your thoughts, concerns and/or proactive suggests on the 3x most notable things seen on site at CAT (i.e. it could be one of the specific exhibits seen, or maybe the clever use of materials with specific buildings to help reduce CO2 emissions, or maybe their Cob Oven setup/Covered social area or maybe the food on site etc).
• I loved the materials used in the lecture theatre and the way that it’s minimum energy consumption. The walls compacted with local materials and the air flow was very clever. More and more buildings are designed to be minimum energy – especially in new buildings and office blocks. It reminded me of the office block that we saw in learning teams earlier in the semester. I really look forward to more spaces like this as they’re really cool to work in as well as having the sustainability bonus.
• I would have loved to have seen the water lift in action, unfortunately it was out of service for maintenance during our visit. It’s a great idea and makes use of the resources in the quarry. It shows how powerful hydropower can be.
• The vegetarian restaurant wasn’t quite as hardcore as you’d have imagined. I think that most people thought about a more vegan approach to food where there’d be minimal animal produce and perhaps mostly raw plant based food. This was not the case as Liam showed when he was over the moon about there being pizza. It shows that there can be a lot of food for a veggie diet, but I do think that our diet is very meat orientated so wouldn’t be able to be a widespread affair.
4. Now you've had time to reflect, what 3x things gained from the CAT visit might you bring forward into your own ideas and developments for the sustainable packaging brief? Please explain your answers and any proactive suggestions in as much detail as possible.
I’m not sure if there is anything as I didn’t see a great deal of packaging there, I think that information from the London Bio Packaging visit would be more informative here. I think, however, that the visit to CAT was a great eye opener to ZCB and how we can be sustainable together. Also a great opp. to see a cob oven and have an idea of how we’re going to photograph the one built in UW’s allotments.