Connect with us


OECD warning shot rips through business-as-usual brigade

A new report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) delivers startling numbers and a stark warning to governments neglectful of long-term environmental targets.

While the current financial tumult may have tempted governments away from wider issues to focus on public finance and unemployment, a new report called OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050: The Consequences of Inaction looks ahead over the next four decades to highlight four key areas of major concern: climate change, biodiversity, water and health impacts of pollution.



A new report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) delivers startling numbers and a stark warning to governments neglectful of long-term environmental targets.

While the current financial tumult may have tempted governments away from wider issues to focus on public finance and unemployment, a new report called OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050: The Consequences of Inaction looks ahead over the next four decades to highlight four key areas of major concern: climate change, biodiversity, water and health impacts of pollution.

Though the issues addressed should come as no real surprise, the associated figures are in no way tempered to pacify the masses and have the potential to shock.

The OECD was founded in 1961 to stimulate economic progress and world trade, and currently has 34 member countries, including the UK, the US and Canada, many of the major EU member states as well as Japan and Korea.

OECD secretary-general Angel Gurría said, “Greener sources of growth can help governments today as they tackle these pressing challenges. Greening agriculture, water and energy supply and manufacturing will be critical by 2050 to meet the needs of over nine billion people”.

That’s right: over nine billion people feeding into a quadrupled global GDP. And along with the population increase, the report predicts that world energy demands in 2050 will be 80% higher and still 85% dependent on fossil fuels, with most demand coming from emerging economies.

It becomes clear early on in the report that many of the predictions are inherently but logically linked. Increasing energy demands have a double impact on climate change and health as the continued burning of fossil fuels continues to release greenhouse gases and pollutants.

Air pollution, the report says, will become the top environmental cause of global mortality by 2050 having overtaken unclean water and sanitation—figures for which are staggeringly high today, with 783 million people without access to safe drinking water and 2.5 billion people still lacking basic sanitation. Respiratory failure caused by air pollutants will double to 3.6 million annually with China and India taking the brunt.

Demand for the increasingly precious resource that is water is expected to increase by 55% with manufacturing accounting for an alarming share, putting farmers at risk. 40% of the population will be living with severe water shortage particularly in river basins in North and South Africa and South and Central Asia. Given that the Millennium Development Goal is struggling to deliver on its promises in some areas, this section of the report makes for very bleak reading.

Biodiversity suffers a 10% decline, with Asia, Europe and Southern Africa most affected. Mature forests will dwindle by 13%. And further losses are predicted in global rivers and lakes.

All of these catastrophic scenarios will befall us, says the report, if new policies are not introduced and if inaction reigns supreme.

However, the report is not all doom and gloom. It also offers some solutions, most of which involve adhering to or improving on current policy. Indeed, the report recommends a “cocktail of policy solutions”. For example, raising environmental taxes, truly valuing natural assets like water and biodiversity, ceasing environmentally harmful subsidies and increasing public support for basic R&D.

The report also welcomes initiatives like the UK’s Green Investment Bank, which will inject much needed investment into renewable energy. In fact, increased investment in sustainable projects is an essential ingredient in the solutions that are so desperately needed.

Our recent interview with Simon Ellis provides a great example of the strong link between investment and a sustainable future. If you want to address any environmental concerns piqued by the OECD report by allowing your money to work for you and become part of the solution, fill in our online form and we’ll connect you to a specialist sustainable financial advisor.

Related articles:

Safe drinking water goal achieved, but not in most deprived areas

Tackling climate change with sustainable investment

Row over air pollution: is it really “business as usual”?

Developing world at “extreme risk” of climate change

Investors for Biodiversity?

Picture source: DFID


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


Road Trip! How to Choose the Greenest Vehicle for Your Growing Family



Greenest Vehicle
Licensed Image by Shutterstock - By Mascha Tace --

When you have a growing family, it often feels like you’re in this weird bubble that exists outside of mainstream society. Whereas everyone else seemingly has stability, your family dynamic is continuously in flux. Having said that, is it even possible to buy an eco-friendly vehicle that’s also practical?

What to Look for in a Green, Family-Friendly Vehicle?

As a single person or young couple without kids, it’s pretty easy to buy a green vehicle. Almost every leading car brand has eco-friendly options these days and you can pick from any number of options. The only problem is that most of these models don’t work if you have kids.

Whether it’s a Prius or Smart car, most green vehicles are impractical for large families. You need to look for options that are spacious, reliable, and comfortable – both for passengers and the driver.

5 Good Options

As you do your research and look for different opportunities, it’s good to have an open mind. Here are some of the greenest options for growing families:

1. 2014 Chrysler Town and Country

Vans are not only popular for the room and comfort they offer growing families, but they’re also becoming known for their fuel efficiency. For example, the 2014 Chrysler Town and Country – which was one of CarMax’s most popular minivans of 2017 – has Flex Fuel compatibility and front wheel drive. With standard features like these, you can’t do much better at this price point.

2. 2017 Chrysler Pacifica

If you’re looking for a newer van and are willing to spend a bit more, you can go with Chrysler’s other model, the Pacifica. One of the coolest features of the 2017 model is the hybrid drivetrain. It allows you to go up to 30 miles on electric, before the vehicle automatically switches over to the V6 gasoline engine. For short trips and errands, there’s nothing more eco-friendly in the minivan category.

3. 2018 Volkswagen Atlas

Who says you have to buy a minivan when you have a family? Sure, the sliding doors are nice, but there are plenty of other options that are both green and spacious. The new Volkswagen Atlas is a great choice. It’s one of the most fuel-efficient third-row vehicles on the market. The four-cylinder model gets an estimated 26 mpg highway.

4. 2015 Hyundai Sonata Hybrid

While a minivan or SUV is ideal – and necessary if you have more than two kids – you can get away with a roomy sedan when you still have a small family. And while there are plenty of eco-friendly options in this category, the 2015 Hyundai Sonata Hybrid is arguably the biggest bang for your buck. It gets 38 mpg on the highway and is incredibly affordable.

5. 2017 Land Rover Range Rover Sport Diesel

If money isn’t an object and you’re able to spend any amount to get a good vehicle that’s both comfortable and eco-friendly, the 2017 Land Rover Range Rover Sport Diesel is your car. Not only does it get 28 mpg highway, but it can also be equipped with a third row of seats and a diesel engine. And did we mention that this car looks sleek?

Putting it All Together

You have a variety of options. Whether you want something new or used, would prefer an SUV or minivan, or want something cheap or luxurious, there are plenty of choices on the market. The key is to do your research, remain patient, and take your time. Don’t get too married to a particular transaction, or you’ll lose your leverage.

You’ll know when the right deal comes along, and you can make a smart choice that’s functional, cost-effective, and eco-friendly.

Continue Reading