Heat and Dust

I’ve been in India for just over a month now.  In that time the day time temperatures have soared from a pleasant 28 degrees to a blistering 36.  Outside of our compound the landscape is brown and shriveled. Choking red dust gets everywhere.  It makes you want to shower several times a day, and at night sleep is only possible with the AC on

.

No doubt this collective extra demand for power is the root cause of the power cuts which, always fairly frequent, now affect us daily.  There has also been another memo from ‘the management’ to all residents warning that the consumption of water is unsustainable and getting worse.  Already there is a moratorium on washing cars, although this is widely ignored.  Now they say if the situation doesn’t change they may have to drain the swimming pool!

No doubt the problem is exacerbated by the ubiquitous Reverse Osmosis machines fitted in almost every house and apartment.  The RO machines plumbed into the mains take the widely distrusted tap water and produce sparkling pure potable water.  But for every glass of Adam’s ale they give, over two litres of waste water is poured down the sink.  Of course we try to make use of what we can, collecting it in jugs and using it to water the pot plants.  But it becomes a bit oppressive, and there’s only so much that the plants can drink.  But over consumption is merely the proximate cause of the drought.  The roots go much deeper and wider.

Bangalore is classified as a tropical savannah region.  Average yearly rainfall here is 975mm (38 inches), not much less than Manchester’s, but nearly all of that occurs during the five months of the year when the monsoons blow.

As something of a boom town the city and surrounding region has seen spectacular growth in the past few decades.  In 1961 the population was 1.2m, the sixth largest city in India.  Today, driven by manufacturing, IT and even the Indian space programme, the population now stands at around 9m, the third largest in India.  That number includes a higher proportion of affluent middle class Indians who expect to enjoy a first world standard of living.  However, the region saw heated disputes over water 100 years ago, and all that extra population only makes the situation worse.

 A beautiful new airport opened 40km North West of the city in 2008.  It compares favourably with any similar new airport in Asia: Bangkok, Hong Kong, Kansai etc.  It has brought a great influx of private investment to the North of the city.   New hotels, restaurants and above all countless new condominiums and walled residential developments are springing up all across the region.  This includes the one where I am staying, which is barely four years old.  But where is the infrastructure to support this growth? Road surfaces are gradually being improved.  There is even a new over overhead expressway linking the airport with the downtown area, or there would be if the money hadn’t dried up half way through.  But what about electricity, or even more pertinently water?

There are few rivers and virtually no standing water.  For domestic use as well as for industry or agriculture, water here comes from boreholes.  But every year they have to go deeper.  According to the Times of India, current wells reach down 1,000 metres to find an adequate supply, and new technology is being sought to extend the range to 2,000 metres.  When one borehole dries up they immediately make plans to sink another, seemingly unaware that the aquifers are all connected underground.

Planning has something of a bad name these days in the west.  In the post communist world it smacks of state interference and petty bureaucracy. In the UK, David Cameron’s libertarian government has fought a sustained campaign against the planners blaming regulation and red tape for holding up much needed growth.  But he and other like minded politicians should take a look at Bangalore.

India is making great strides towards solar power, playing to a natural strength.  Presumably the power cuts will eventually be sorted out.  But where will the water come from?  In the end it may be this more than any other factor that puts a natural cap on development here.

Marine Wildlife Deserves Better Than This

One tries to be topical but it isn’t everyday that one of my blogs gets an immediate response from a Parliamentary Under Secretary of State.  Only yesterday I discussed government plans to act on only 31 out of 127 recommended sites for Marine Conservation Zones, and this morning the Fisheries minister, Richard Benyon, is reported by the BBC explaining that he just doesn’t have the dosh.

My own hubris does not extend to believing that the dozen or so page views my piece has received overnight might include the erstwhile minister.  That would put me on a par with the editor of the Skibbereen Eagle who told Kaiser Bill that his illustrious newspaper ‘had his eye on’ the German emperor.  As I reported yesterday plenty of more significant voices than my own have been raised in support of this cause including: Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall and the Marine Conservation Society.

What is significant however is the shift in the government’s position.  Until now their argument has been that in the 96 sites not selected the science was unclear.  Heaven forbid that they might accidentally protect something that is not actually critically endangered.  However, in the report by the BBC’s Roger Harrabin, Mr Benyon admits that he would like to go further but cuts to the DEFRA budget mean that he simply doesn’t have the money needed to assess sites and put in place the necessary conservation measures.

The one concession he does make is to say that his department will release proposals for a second set of MCZs along with his decision on the first tranche.  Previously there had been no clear commitment to doing anything beyond the original 31 sites.

So the government’s argument comes down to saying, times are hard, we are all having to tighten our belts and Britain’s sea creatures will have to shoulder their share of the problem.  We’ll look at it again when resources are more plentiful.

The trouble with that argument is that for many endangered species or habitats this is literally a matter of life and death.  Failure to act now could have dire consequences for decades to come, and for some species it might be terminal.  The government has ring-fenced from cuts the Overseas Aid budget, currently running at about £12 billion per year.  Implementing the full list of proposed MCZs would cost less than a thousandth part of that amount.

But then out of sight is out of mind.  The bottom of the ocean is about as far out of sight as you can get.  Plus it's difficult to get sentimental for a sea slug or a sponge.  And yet we have seen time and again that it is often the smallest and least cuddly organisms that underpin the entire ecological model.

Richard Benyon is the fisheries minister who was unable to identify more than two common fish from a selection of 12 popular varieties eaten in the UK.  As minister responsible for wildlife he came under criticism last year for felling 218 acres of woodland on his family estate to allow extraction of aggregates, and of course he works for Owen Paterson, the environment secretary who believes Europe needs agrochemical companies more than it needs bees.  Is it just me or is the claim to be the ‘greenest government ever’, wearing just a little thin? 

Bumping Along The Bottom

This Sunday, March 31^st marks the end of the UK government’s consultation period on proposals to create Marine Conservation Zones (MCZ) in English and Welsh offshore waters.  It concludes a four year process set up by The Joint Nature Conservation Committee and Natural England to look at ways of protecting the marine environment.

From the outset the project was designed to be as comprehensive as possible, recognising the complex and varied relationship we have with the seas around our shores.  We treat the sea as a larder, a playground, a factory, a dustbin, a transport superhighway, a source of energy, a carbon sink and much more.  Accordingly the list of groups invited to consult was also long and varied (see below).

In September 2011, the project delivered a list of 127 recommended sites, each one specially selected to protect significant species or individual habitats.  The smallest may cover a single reef or tidal estuary, while the largest protects a large swathe of the biologically important Dogger Bank.  Together these 127 sites account for roughly 15% of the total sea area managed by DEFRA (The Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs). (Separate proposals are in place for Scotland and inshore waters in Wales.)

It is important to understand that these MCZs are not exclusion zones.  Their purpose is to protect the sea bed, including the huge range of fish, plants and invertebrates that live and breed there.  Destructive forms of fishing such as scallop dredging or beam trawling are prohibited, but low impact forms of fishing are allowed to continue.

They are not an attack on fishermen or the communities who live by fishing.  Half of Britain’s fisheries are currently being fished out to unsustainable levels, according to government figures.  These MCZs will protect the long term future of fishing in British waters.

Last year the government announced that after spending £8 million and taking three years to review, it intended to protect only 31 of the 127 sites recommend, a list which the government’s own scientists said was needed to secure the health of our oceans.

So much for the ‘Greenest Government Ever’!  Of course the government needs to balance the competing interests of the environment with the need to secure jobs and growth, but even the deepest recessions come to an end within a few years.  Compare that to the ocean quahog which takes 400 years to reach full size and is now endangered by unrestricted trawling. 31 conservation zones represents the minimum that the department could do for the environment.  Right now it is not only the trawl doors that are bumping along the bottom!

The Marine Conservation Society (MCS) has been lobbying to get the government to follow through on its own recommendations, and the TV chef and campaigner, Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall took up the cause in his programme Hugh’s Fish Fight.

On February 25^th, around 1500 people braved a biting Easterly wind to march across Westminster Bridge and petition Parliament.  I know because I was one of them.  Since then, over 24,000 have used the site to send emails to DEFRA demanding 127 MCZs.

It will be interesting to see what impact this demonstration of people power has.  It is yet another test for the man who is rapidly becoming something of a regular feature on this blog, Environment Secretary, Owen Paterson.  But whatever the outcome of the consultation, we now know what needs to be done to protect our seas.  I hope and expect that the fight will go on beyond Sunday until the full list of MCZs in in place.

The following list is taken from the DEFRA website:

  

List of Consultees

Academic / research organisations
Angling organisations
Aquaculture organisations
Coastal development organisations
Coastal managers
Coastal MPs
Commercial Fishermen’s organisations
Consumer organisations
Environmental NGOs
Government agencies
Inshore fisheries and conservation authorities
Local Government
Marine aggregates industry sector organisations
Marine dredging industry sector organisations
Marine industry sector groups/organisations
Marine leisure & recreational organisations
Oil & gas industry sector organisations
Ports and Harbours authorities
Producer organisations
Recreational boating sector organisations
Regional advisory councils
Renewable energy sector organisations
Shipping industry sector organisations