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.