Showing results 11 - 15 of 24 for the month of March, 2011.
Here’s a pilot for a TV programme called ‘Growing Communities’, produced and directed by Sara Proudfoot Clinch which “gives you a glimpse at how to grow your own community from meeting the Transition Town Lewes group who are learning to live without fossil fuels, to community allotments, to bee keeping in the church yard, to keeping chickens in a tiny back garden of a town house”.
(A guest post this morning from Peter Lipman, Chair of Transition Network).
I’ve been nominated and then shortlisted for an “inspiring leader” award in Climate Week. This led to discussion at Transition Network about involvement in Climate Week and agreement that it might be useful for me to explain some of my thinking about it. There’s been a lot of controversy about Climate Week, mainly because of companies like the Royal Bank of Scotland being a supporting partner. After all, RBS could do more about climate change if they stopped funding the exploitation of the tar sands.
Absolutely hideous developments in Japan at the moment. Our deepest commiserations to everyone there. Developments at the Fukushima nuclear power plant, described in this morning’s papers as ‘very grave’, prompted Alexis Rowell, Director, cuttingthecarbon and Joint Organiser, Transition Belsize to write the following:
It’s hardly a surprise that building nuclear power stations on seismic fault lines, as Japan has done, turns out to be a foolish thing. In the pause for reflection about the safety of nuclear power that the Fukushima disaster is bound to create, here are ten reasons why it’s a mistake to build a new round of nuclear power stations in the UK.
One of the things with climate change as an issue is that when you’re trying to work out what your position is on climate change, there is a scientific consensus and there’s a body of research there – there’s certain criteria you can use when you come to it to work out if this is valid or not. In terms of economics it’s a grey area, in that there’s so much opinion – so for those of us who are coming through the work that you’ve been doing to trying to get our heads around what’s happening on a global scale, what should be the criteria be, do you think, that we should use when looking at different people’s takes on the economy, as to whether they’re valid or not? What was the criteria that you used when researching on the book?
That’s an interesting question; that’s a very good question.
On Richard Heinberg’s recent visit to Totnes, which included a talk on ‘The End of Growth‘, myself, Ben Brangwyn of Transition Network (BB) and Frances Northrop of Transition Town Totnes (FN) did an interview with Richard. Part 2 will appear here tomorrow….
Welcome to Totnes, lovely to have you here again! The first question is: your new book is about economics and the book before was looking at coal….but in terms of the peak oil question that underpinned your previous books, what’s your assessment of where we are now? Is it still as much a part of your overall analysis as it was….?
Oh yes, very much so. The new book, The End of Growth makes the case that world economic growth is effectively at an end, both for reasons internal to the world financial monetary system and also for reasons external to the world financial monetary system and the primary factor outside the monetary system is oil.
