Connect with us


George Osborne conference speech: immediate reactions



Chancellor’s infrastructure and devolution plans must dovetail with climate goals and properly involve the British public, says think tank. Plus newspapers immediate reactions.

Think tank Green Alliance has welcomed the national infrastructure commission announced by the Chancellor today. Green Alliance has long argued that the UK’s long term economic sustainability requires a more strategic approach to infrastructure decision making, at national and combined authority level.

However, the think tank cautioned that the commission’s success will depend on the extent to which it dovetails with the UK’s climate ambitions, building resilient infrastructure that enables the nation to decarbonise and meet legislated carbon budgets. The UK’s infrastructure pipeline is currently dominated by high carbon spending. The commission must also take the public’s views seriously, if it’s to avoid planning infrastructure that never gets built because of public opposition. Green Alliance proposed how this could work in its report, Opening up infrastructure planning.

Similarly, plans to reform business rates and allow elected mayors to levy an infrastructure tax could revitalise local infrastructure development. The new power available to elected mayors could score two policy goals: smart mayors will use the tax to fund energy efficiency retrofits for households in fuel poverty, thus reducing a heavy burden on councils’ health and social care spending as well as reducing carbon emission from homes.

Matthew Spencer, director of Green Alliance, said, “The Chancellor’s infrastructure commission is welcome, but it will only be successful if it avoids the ‘white elephant’ risk. This is where experts advise what’s in the national interest but the public has a very different view, leaving ministers lumbered with expensive and unpopular projects. The commission could be successful but only if works within carbon budgets, takes the demand side seriously and builds in meaningful public engagement right from the start.”

The press reaction

Daily Mail: Osborne promises new roads, railways, houses and a tax overhaul to save the high street: “‘We are the builders, Labour are the wreckers’: Osborne promises new roads, railways, houses and a tax overhaul to save the high street.” Read more.

Financial Times: Osborne poaches Labour peer to lead rail and energy overhaul. “George Osborne will put Andrew Adonis, the former Labour transport secretary, at the head of a significant overhaul of the way Britain delivers big infrastructure projects, from high-speed rail to nuclear power stations.” Read more.

Daily Telegraph: George Osborne unveils radical business rates overhaul: “George Osborne has announced a major overhaul of the UK’s business rate system in a move that is likely to please retailers and small business owners alike.
The Chancellor used his speech at the Conservative party conference to announce that the £26bn raised in business rates each year will be devolved to local councils.” Read more.

The Guardian: George Osborne’s conference speech – the verdict: “Echoes of Aneurin Bevan … or Citizen Smith? Our panellists give their views on the chancellor’s speech.” Read more.

New Statesman: George Osborne’s love bombing of Labour voters should terrify the opposition: “Michievous fellow that he is, George Osborne could not resist using his Conservative conference speech to have a dig at his erstwhile nemesis, Ed Balls. It was Andrea Jenkyns, the Tory who dislodged Balls in Morley and Outwood, who introduced the Chancellor on stage. “If I’d told you twelve months ago that the Member of Parliament for Morley and Outwood was going to come onto this stage and speak in our economy debate you’d have called security,” Osborne went on to quip.'” Read more.

London Evening Standard: Jim Armitage: Lord Adonis’s lack of party loyalty will give infrastructure the green light: “First Liberal, then Labour and now working for the Tories, Lord Adonis — declared by Chancellor George Osborne as his new infrastructure commissioner — has happily worn every political hue during his career in Westminster’s centre ground.” Read more.

The Spectator: How the Tories are trying to make their majority permanent: “This is the first conference since the election where the Tories won a majority and the first since Labour chose an unelectable leader. But, strikingly, George Osborne chose to use his speech to emphasise how the Tories must show the millions of working people who voted Labour in May that they ‘are on their side’.” Read more.

Reuters: Osborne borrows policy with eye on leadership: “Chancellor George Osborne, making a pitch to become Britain’s next prime minister, staked his claim to the political “centre ground” on Monday by saying his party was the only option for workers.” Read more.


Will Self-Driving Cars Be Better for the Environment?



self-driving cars for green environment
Shutterstock Licensed Photo - By Zapp2Photo |

Technologists, engineers, lawmakers, and the general public have been excitedly debating about the merits of self-driving cars for the past several years, as companies like Waymo and Uber race to get the first fully autonomous vehicles on the market. Largely, the concerns have been about safety and ethics; is a self-driving car really capable of eliminating the human errors responsible for the majority of vehicular accidents? And if so, who’s responsible for programming life-or-death decisions, and who’s held liable in the event of an accident?

But while these questions continue being debated, protecting people on an individual level, it’s worth posing a different question: how will self-driving cars impact the environment?

The Big Picture

The Department of Energy attempted to answer this question in clear terms, using scientific research and existing data sets to project the short-term and long-term environmental impact that self-driving vehicles could have. Its findings? The emergence of self-driving vehicles could essentially go either way; it could reduce energy consumption in transportation by as much as 90 percent, or increase it by more than 200 percent.

That’s a margin of error so wide it might as well be a total guess, but there are too many unknown variables to form a solid conclusion. There are many ways autonomous vehicles could influence our energy consumption and environmental impact, and they could go well or poorly, depending on how they’re adopted.

Driver Reduction?

One of the big selling points of autonomous vehicles is their capacity to reduce the total number of vehicles—and human drivers—on the road. If you’re able to carpool to work in a self-driving vehicle, or rely on autonomous public transportation, you’ll spend far less time, money, and energy on your own car. The convenience and efficiency of autonomous vehicles would therefore reduce the total miles driven, and significantly reduce carbon emissions.

There’s a flip side to this argument, however. If autonomous vehicles are far more convenient and less expensive than previous means of travel, it could be an incentive for people to travel more frequently, or drive to more destinations they’d otherwise avoid. In this case, the total miles driven could actually increase with the rise of self-driving cars.

As an added consideration, the increase or decrease in drivers on the road could result in more or fewer vehicle collisions, respectively—especially in the early days of autonomous vehicle adoption, when so many human drivers are still on the road. Car accident injury cases, therefore, would become far more complicated, and the roads could be temporarily less safe.


Deadheading is a term used in trucking and ridesharing to refer to miles driven with an empty load. Assume for a moment that there’s a fleet of self-driving vehicles available to pick people up and carry them to their destinations. It’s a convenient service, but by necessity, these vehicles will spend at least some of their time driving without passengers, whether it’s spent waiting to pick someone up or en route to their location. The increase in miles from deadheading could nullify the potential benefits of people driving fewer total miles, or add to the damage done by their increased mileage.

Make and Model of Car

Much will also depend on the types of cars equipped to be self-driving. For example, Waymo recently launched a wave of self-driving hybrid minivans, capable of getting far better mileage than a gas-only vehicle. If the majority of self-driving cars are electric or hybrids, the environmental impact will be much lower than if they’re converted from existing vehicles. Good emissions ratings are also important here.

On the other hand, the increased demand for autonomous vehicles could put more pressure on factory production, and make older cars obsolete. In that case, the gas mileage savings could be counteracted by the increased environmental impact of factory production.

The Bottom Line

Right now, there are too many unanswered questions to make a confident determination whether self-driving vehicles will help or harm the environment. Will we start driving more, or less? How will they handle dead time? What kind of models are going to be on the road?

Engineers and the general public are in complete control of how this develops in the near future. Hopefully, we’ll be able to see all the safety benefits of having autonomous vehicles on the road, but without any of the extra environmental impact to deal with.

Continue Reading


New Zealand to Switch to Fully Renewable Energy by 2035



renewable energy policy
Shutterstock Licensed Photo - By Eviart /

New Zealand’s prime minister-elect Jacinda Ardern is already taking steps towards reducing the country’s carbon footprint. She signed a coalition deal with NZ First in October, aiming to generate 100% of the country’s energy from renewable sources by 2035.

New Zealand is already one of the greenest countries in the world, sourcing over 80% of its energy for its 4.7 million people from renewable resources like hydroelectric, geothermal and wind. The majority of its electricity comes from hydro-power, which generated 60% of the country’s energy in 2016. Last winter, renewable generation peaked at 93%.

Now, Ardern is taking on the challenge of eliminating New Zealand’s remaining use of fossil fuels. One of the biggest obstacles will be filling in the gap left by hydropower sources during dry conditions. When lake levels drop, the country relies on gas and coal to provide energy. Eliminating fossil fuels will require finding an alternative source to avoid spikes in energy costs during droughts.

Business NZ’s executive director John Carnegie told Bloomberg he believes Ardern needs to balance her goals with affordability, stating, “It’s completely appropriate to have a focus on reducing carbon emissions, but there needs to be an open and transparent public conversation about the policies and how they are delivered.”

The coalition deal outlined a few steps towards achieving this, including investing more in solar, which currently only provides 0.1% of the country’s energy. Ardern’s plans also include switching the electricity grid to renewable energy, investing more funds into rail transport, and switching all government vehicles to green fuel within a decade.

Zero net emissions by 2050

Beyond powering the country’s electricity grid with 100% green energy, Ardern also wants to reach zero net emissions by 2050. This ambitious goal is very much in line with her focus on climate change throughout the course of her campaign. Environmental issues were one of her top priorities from the start, which increased her appeal with young voters and helped her become one of the youngest world leaders at only 37.

Reaching zero net emissions would require overcoming challenging issues like eliminating fossil fuels in vehicles. Ardern hasn’t outlined a plan for reaching this goal, but has suggested creating an independent commission to aid in the transition to a lower carbon economy.

She also set a goal of doubling the number of trees the country plants per year to 100 million, a goal she says is “absolutely achievable” using land that is marginal for farming animals.

Greenpeace New Zealand climate and energy campaigner Amanda Larsson believes that phasing out fossil fuels should be a priority for the new prime minister. She says that in order to reach zero net emissions, Ardern “must prioritize closing down coal, putting a moratorium on new fossil fuel plants, building more wind infrastructure, and opening the playing field for household and community solar.”

A worldwide shift to renewable energy

Addressing climate change is becoming more of a priority around the world and many governments are assessing how they can reduce their reliance on fossil fuels and switch to environmentally-friendly energy sources. Sustainable energy is becoming an increasingly profitable industry, giving companies more of an incentive to invest.

Ardern isn’t alone in her climate concerns, as other prominent world leaders like Justin Trudeau and Emmanuel Macron have made renewable energy a focus of their campaigns. She isn’t the first to set ambitious goals, either. Sweden and Norway share New Zealand’s goal of net zero emissions by 2045 and 2030, respectively.

Scotland already sources more than half of its electricity from renewable sources and aims to fully transition by 2020, while France announced plans in September to stop fossil fuel production by 2040. This would make it the first country to do so, and the first to end the sale of gasoline and diesel vehicles.

Many parts of the world still rely heavily on coal, but if these countries are successful in phasing out fossil fuels and transitioning to renewable resources, it could serve as a turning point. As other world leaders see that switching to sustainable energy is possible – and profitable – it could be the start of a worldwide shift towards environmentally-friendly energy.


Continue Reading