To rave in the woods

Late last night I returned to London from a family wedding reception in Nottingham. Though time was too short to make a trip out to Sherwood Forest, I did get some immersion the Robin Hood mythology at Nottingham Castle's museum. During one video exhibition, a nature reserve manager spoke on Sherwood's history, noting that the region was traditionally the site of a great deal of human activity. A rich picture was painted of a busy woodland during the middle ages, a site of royal hunts and diverse industries scattered with outlaw settlements and rowdy parties. This description came as a considerable surprise to me, running contrary to my preconception of such areas as wild preserves remote from human activity. It's quite clear that I haven't got enough experience of British forests.

Looks fun, but how did they power the sound system?

Apparently, I'm not the only one. The forester in the video lamented that Sherwood, like many forests across the country, is now sorely under-utilised by the general public. He urged people to make more use of these natural resources, considering the lush backdrop they offer for excitement, exploration and adventure as much as for rest and peaceful reflection. There's little point in me speculating on why woodland recreation is not as popular as it once was — it would be lazy just to blame TV and the internet. What I can do is make a personal commitment to enjoy as much of the great outdoors as I can, while I can. I'm fortunate enough to live within walking distance of Footscray Meadows (or Five Arches, the stomping ground of my youth), Joyden's Wood and Scadbury Park nature reserve, so I always have a place to unwind during the working week; while this summer I'll be free to venture further afield and really experience what the UK's woodlands have to offer.

*

I'm guessing that most of my readers are in my university department, and I think Geographer's would generally be described as "outdoorsy". Does this stereotype hold true for you? Do you have any interesting forest tales, or recommendations to visit?

Such that all may partake

By Jaz Rabadia

Yesterday a Mrs Cathy Smith, general manager at Cisco South Africa and dear Aunty of mine, shared with me an article describing the 'digitisation of energy', a concept which I interpret to characterise the digital monitoring of power use, from production through to consumption. Collecting, collating and analysing these data would, it argues, allow energy companies to minimise wastage and greatly increase the efficiency — and cost effectiveness — of their power delivery. Data analytics is a tool which has shown considerable success at optimising processes in manufacturing, and its implementation on a industry-wide scale strikes me as a great way for the energy sector to make overtures to the carbon neutrality the world so desperately needs if we are to avoid the worst of climate change.

That said, I have some reservations when it comes to anything that falls under the umbrella of "big data", the main one being the (digital) age-old issue of access. The production of large, fruitful datasets is likely to entail a considerable investment on the part of energy companies, and so I can't imagine that they would feel any great inclination to share these data without compensation. The adoption of such a position would be a shame, especially to those involved in academia; as a student I personally have relied heavily on the privilege of free use of the diverse geographical datasets made available by governmental bodies such as the USGS and Ordnance Survey. Who knows what kinds of innovative research — both institutional and crowdsourced — that could be achieved if inquisitive minds are allowed to access the wealth of information resulting from the digitisation of energy? A commitment to the concept of open data need not merely be a lofty ideal, but a principle which has been repeatedly demonstrated to be economically beneficial.

Even more important than the sharing of data outside of an industry is sharing within it. Consider my post several weeks ago in which I discussed the views of the British energy lobby. One point that stood out for me was their proposal to restructure the UK sector's regulatory system by introducing a 'systems architect': a body which would be better suited to coordinating an efficient power supply network as it takes on an increasingly decentralised structure. For such a system to be effective must require a great degree of co-operation is required between its various components — from power station operators to government regulators to local consumer-side organisations and everything in-between. It seems to me that the only way to achieve such frictionless collaboration is the removal of barriers to access to information. Greater integration of the power supply chain with outside parties would come as a bonus, with benefits both commercial and intangible. With energy being rapidly digitised, I believe that the resultant data must be made open if the industry is to make serious reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

Nature vs Economy

It's rare that I meet somebody who actively opposes tackling deforestation, pollution, or reducing our dependency on fossil fuel. I notice that young people tend to be particularly aware of such issues, and Ipsos Mori's latest Issues facing Britain today survey finds highest concern for the environment amongst the 18-24 group, to which I just about belong. Nevertheless, with only 2% of Britons considering it to be the most important issue, it's clear that the environment is not at the forefront of most people's minds. This would probably come as less of a surprise to me if I spent more time socialising outside the Geography bubble. Economy, on the other hand, has always ranked at or near the top of these polls over the last decade. Talking to students outside of my department, a recurrent idea put forward is that tackling environmental issues is admirable pursuit but, ultimately, an economically costly one. For many, being green is a luxury that the UK can't really afford right now.

Can nature boost a county's economy? is an interesting piece from the BBC which shows how nations can harness their "natural resources"*, with a focus on renewable energy production. This runs counter the narrative described above, as you can see from this extract of a discussion with a UCL professor:

"What we have to get away from is thinking that somehow environment is opposed to economic activity, and [instead] recognise that environment contributes enormously to human life, and find ways of integrating those things in our minds.

Check out the article, have a listen to the associated radio broadcast, and let me know what you think of the idea that caring for the environment comes at a financial cost.

*I've put this term in scare quotes because I find it to be a rather jarring concept. This is is a feeling that I'm not quite equipped to expound right now, but I promise to get back to it in later posts.

No coal is the goal

That Energy UK has decided to advocate for a shift from coal to green energy is news that could be celebrated by a student in the environmental sciences. Energy suppliers finally coming to terms with the destructive nature of their business and moving toward a break with fossil fuels? I should be keeping myself warm this Sunday by dancing around the house, a-whooping and a-hollering.

However, if you know me, or have been following this blog, then you may have observed that I can occasionally be given to some degree of cynicism. My gut instinct is to write off this sudden volte-face as little more than a ploy, a marketing stunt, a coldly calculated act of subterfuge. COP21 seemed to signal a change in climate change policy momentum. The world is supposed to be marching together toward a low-carbon future, and the energy industry can't be seen to be digging in its heels. For the sake of a greener image, coal — those ugly, dirty, heavily polluting bricks of fossilised vegetation — has to be forsaken. Fortunately, it makes for a handy sacrifice: the table below highlights its continual and rapid decline in importance as a source of energy, and in any case the government is minded to kill coal power altogether.

Coal has been supplanted by other fuel sources, primarily oil.
Total Energy Production in the UK, from a DECC press release.

A highly sceptical reader might therefore view this news not as some noble change of heart, but rather a simple acknowledgement of the inevitable — one that just happens to produce positive publicity.

As I said, that would be by instinctive reaction. However it's not always a good idea to blog directly from the gut; it can be valuable to take the time to ruminate on an issue. The article above states that Energy UK are championing a shift that's not just away from coal but also toward low carbon, so I wondered if this seemingly green attitude is borne out by the 125-page report which accompanied the announcement. Pathways to 2030 is a comprehensive document summarising the current attitudes and expectations of the British electricity sector, and it would be worth a read for those of you on courses with more of a focus on climate or energy policy.

If you have an anti-industry stance, then some the report's contents will not be unexpected. The first chapter makes the argument that the government should take more responsibility for conveying to the public the 'inevitable' increases in energy bills due to decarbonisation plans, reinforcing the narrative that tackling environmental concerns will hit people in the pocket. Personally I find this attitude rather disappointing, coming from an enormously profit-making industry — although I should admit here being among the 68% of the population who support their renationalisation. It's also unsuprising that the report takes aim at regulatory bodies OFGEM and DECC, for contributing to an "industry code process [that] has stifled innovation and is too bureaucratic for today’s needs". Given that I have little knowledge of the intricacies of governance structure, I'm unsure what to make of their suggestion for the creation of a new body: a 'systems architect', divorced from high level policy decisions, which is able to co-ordinate an energy sector framework integrated over multiple levels (see link in caption below). Is this a sensible push for more streamlined management, or an expression of the desire of companies for greater independence from regulatory interference?

Energy UK call for a reorganisation of the current energy system architecture, shown above, to increase flexibility and efficiency. (graphic from Institution of Engineering and Technology briefing paper)

There were, however, some points that came as a pleasant surprise. For example, I've only recently learned about how electricity providers struggle to cope with sudden spikes in demand, such as a million kettles coming on at half-time in the World Cup final. The Energy UK's proposal that this expensive volatility could be smoothed by greater interconnection of the power grid with Europe seems like a sound one. Similarly, they profess support for decentralised energy technologies, such as photovoltaics and battery storage. What I'm hoping this translates to is a commitment to increase investment in solar power and other renewables, despite their apparent abandonment by the UK government. This, combined with assertions such as "the power sector would (and should) continue to do most of the “heavy lifting” on decarbonisation", would indeed strike me as a clear positive step on behalf of the energy sector toward decarbonisation.

Though I need to spend more time gaining the expertise to properly digest this Pathways document, I am deciding to set my position on this news in the meanwhile to measured optimism. 

Burgers can be made from beetroot?

If you work or study in the Euston area, you've probably walked past the Quaker Centre opposite Euston Station. As well as stocking an excellent selection books on spirituality, peace and sustainability, their Friends House restaurant is currently having a Meat Free March (which includes the tail end of February). I can vouch personally for the grub; I enjoy lunch there every week, and today I discovered that beetroot burgers are a) a thing, and b) delicious. If you consider yourself an environmentalist, or just want a hearty and wholesome meal, why not check it out this over the next month?

"See the trees and the wood"

The common room in my Geography department is a little bit like a dentist's waiting area. However, instead of well-worn editions of Grazia and Trout Fisherman Magazine , you'll find lying around some slightly more academic — and considerably less read — publications, such as Scientific American and National Geographic. Today I was leafing through a copy of Nature when the phrase 'Treat forests as natural habitats' popped out at me. The line summarised a short correspondence from Bruun et al (2015) titled Forests: see the trees and the wood , a criticism of an earlier submission to the same journal for failing to recognise the natural value in forest ecosystems. This seemed right up my street, so I had to have a read of the article in question.


The comment piece (Fares et al, 2015), argues that European forest management policies should be reconsidered and centered more towards sustainability. At first, this doesn't seem at all seem unreasonable — I can't imagine many scientists supporting the practice of unsustainable forestry. However I think one has to question what exactly the authors really mean by 'sustainability'. In the hope that you get my point, I'll do my best to summarise the steps for managing Europe's forests that they suggest:

• Plant stronger, more productive tree species that are more resilient to climate change.
• Gear forest management strategies towards minimisation of disturbances (by removing dead or "excess" biomass to combat fires, and cultivation of more pest-resistant genetic lines) and maximisation of carbon storage (e.g.  more frequent harvests and greater practice of thinning).
• Focus on quantifying and expanding forest's potential economic value: the use of tree biomass for renewable energy, as well the less tangible "ecosystem services" (such as their use for recreation and the protection offered to river catchments).

Notice a recurrent theme in this? Personally, I'm surprised by how commercially focused the notion of sustainability promoted in this article is. My expectation was that, given the threat posed by rapid anthropogenic climate change, it would have described various methods to protect forests and their biodiversity. It appears instead that Fares et al's argue for shaping European forestry policy so as to extract the maximum economic value from them, and the main criticism by Bruun et al. is that such strategies "overlook the implications for forests as natural ecosystems and run counter to biodiversity sustainability guidelines".



Fallen trees can provide a habitat for "a wealth of species that thrive on dead and decaying wood"( Bruun et al, 2015) . 

Is the economic valuation of forests, particularly for bioenergy production, necessarily at odds with protecting their wellbeing (from a conservationist perspective)? I don't know the answer, but it seems like it shouldn't be impossible to achieve both. At least I hope so, since this dilemma is central to the field of work I'm interested in. Then again, especially considering what I've learnt with regard to palm oil biodiesel , I probably shouldn't be too optimistic.

Creating energy from the earth

Plantations of the oil palm in Indonesia.

This isn't the first time I've mentioned  EURENSSA, nor will it be the last. Among the various presentations given at the environmental research camp, one of particular interest to me discussed the production of biodiesel from palm oil plantations in Indonesia. Today I had the opportunity to interview Noor Hossain, the Industrial Ecology student who delivered that presentation. I asked him to shed some light the topic of biofuel; his research in it, key issues involved, and how modellers can contribute. Have a listen to our discussion below, and if you're interested in Noor's research then you can check out his ResearchGate page here.