I'm not supporting fuel price campaign

I received a round robin email this week. It was launching a protest campaign about the price of fuel. The allegation was that although the current price of oil is low, the price at the pump is high - hitting 114.9 per litre in some areas. And the worry is that this will soon mount to £1.50 per litre some time soon.

A year ago there was a similar campaign asking people to stop buying fuel on a particular day. This time round the idea is to stop buying fuel from particular companies - BP and Esso - for the rest of this year. The thinking is that if these companies aren't selling any fuel then they'll reduce their prices and the other companies will have to follow suit.

But, of course it will only work if they get millions of people to boycott the two companies and the email urges everyone reading it to forward it on to at least 10 others. It's extraordinary how quickly chain mails like this can whip through the population. Apparently, if each person follows instructions it will take only 6 generations to reach three million others.

The email I was sent had lots of email addresses on it - it hadn't been Bccced. So I copied all the addresses for my response, as follows:

"I think this is a ridiculous idea and won't be supporting it! We should all be aiming to reduce our petrol and diesel consumption to reduce carbon emissions. If fuel is cheap, people drive more. For anyone concerned about fuel prices I'd recommend buying a more fuel-efficient car, driving less, shopping on the internet, using the train and taking up cycling and walking. I'll be doing all those things but also buying my petrol from BP - not Esso because Exxon has a very powerful anti-climate change lobbying campaign. Best wishes and apologies. Julia"

I sent this off with some trepidation. I anticipated quite a hostile response. Actually, it wasn't too bad - I got three follow up emails. The first asked me what a 'sustainability consultant' was. I wasn't sure of the tone behind the email but recommended that the sender look at my website and have heard nothing more.

The next sender was a bit angry but not about the stance I took. His concern was that his email address had been circulated to zillions of others by me and the person who originally sent the campaign message to me. I thought he had a valid point, so I apologised and promised that if I'm ever foolish enough to send out a mass email again I'll hide the list of names.

The third and final email I've received so far was a bit more critical about my position on fuel charges. Her position was that it was all very well for me but she had special circumstances - a disabled son - that made it a particular hardship for her. And that she needed others to campaign on her behalf. Clearly, I'm sympathetic to her situation and understand that she might need some extra help. But I don't think that justifies cheap fuel all round.

We have to be able to deal with exceptions if we're going to make any significant changes to reducing climate change emissions. And we have to accept that not everyone is going to be a winner. So anyone who's driving around in a gas guzzling car and complaining about fuel charges doesn't get my sympathy vote. If the prices stay high it might encourage people to change their car or drive less.

M&S listening to underwear concerns!

Mike Barry - Head of Sustainable Business at M&S

I buy most of my underwear from M&S. You won't be surprised to hear that this winter I've bought some thermals!

Reading the pack I was surprised to see the following instructions - 'It's easy to look after too - just put it in the machine and then the tumble drier.' My eco-radar went into over-drive! This didn't tie in well with M&S's ground-breaking Plan A initiative.

Tumble driers are pretty well top of the black list for energy wasting appliances. Even if you live in a small flat you should be able to find somewhere to dry your clothes - a rack in the bath or a pulley system near the ceiling, for example.

I've been working with M&S for years advising them on sustainability issues. So I wrote an email to Mike Barry, Head of Sustainable Business. He emailed me back, as follows: 'Lingerie have agreed we will remove this 'recommendation' to tumble dry thermal for Autumn 2010, on the packaging.' He went on to explain that there would still be a drier symbol on the sew-in label because that's just to show that the items can be tumble dried.

I'm looking forward to warmer weather but in the mean-time I'm still wearing my thermals - and I won't be putting them in the drier.

Eco driving simulator

I crashed.

The Energy Savings Trust brought their eco driving simulator to the M&S Plan A suppliers conference, where I was speaking. It looked great fun, so I thought I'd have a go.

I discovered that the optimum eco-efficiency score was seven - seven of what I'm not sure. And the best score of previous drivers, on the board, was 6.9. The chap demonstrating the machine explained that you could get more than 7 if you were a super-efficient driver.

First, I wanted to get an idea of what you were supposed to do, so I watched someone else. He was clearly a cautious driver and went slowly, whilst he was working out the system. And his final score was 6.8 - not far behind the leader.

I'm quite competitive, so I thought I'd try and beat that! But I couldn't even stay on the road. The pavements, lamp posts and other cars leapt out at me as I swerved wildly trying to avoid them. It wasn't long before I crashed. The good thing about this was that the machine stopped and my eco-rating score started again from scratch.

There was no clutch - only the accelerator and brake pedals and a rather odd set of gears. The optimum driving speed was between 4o and 6o kph. And there were lots of traffic lights. They were a real hazard. The trick was to use your speed to coast as much as possible, rather than constantly braking and accelerating.

I understood the idea but putting it into practice was another matter. My score was 4.6, which is not so great. However, although I think my normal driving is rather better than that. Although I do have an unfortunate habit of scraping the side of my car or reversing into gates, my eco-efficiency seems to be pretty good. In my Audi, I often get around 5ompg, whereas official figures suggest it should lower than that.

You may think that this is all a pointless exercise but how you drive makes a big difference to the fuel efficiency of your car - by as much as 20%. So take your foot off the pedal, coast a bit more - and try not to crash!


Addendum - I'm rather pleased to see that it has been proposed to fine drivers for leaving engines running when the car is stationery. I found out that if you're going to stop for more than 9 seconds it makes sense to turn your engine off. The Energy Savings Trust, suggest that a minute is a good guideline. The point is the same - you're causing pollution and going nowhere. That doesn't make sense. They also explain that modern engines don't need warming up, even in cold weather. Just get in a drive.

The Environmental Investigation Agency - Fighting Eco-Crime

I’ve been made a lifetime member of the Environmental Investigation Agency or EIA for short. I think this campaigning organisation fighting eco-crime should be getting more attention.

Founded in 1984, the EIA is rather unique in its approach to campaigns. Whether it’s illegal logging, smuggling ozone-destroying chemicals or trading in endangered species, they have under-cover detectives finding out what’s going on.

At their open day, which I went to this week, we were able to see some of the equipment they use to secretly film these activities. I wanted to take some photographs of the more ingenious methods used but they didn’t want them to be publicised, so I can’t reveal any more.

Currently, one of their biggest concerns is the illegal trade in tiger parts. Wild tigers in China are slaughtered for their skins which are then used in luxury rugs. And tiger farms have been found to be selling wine made from tiger bones. Another threat to tigers is destruction of their habitat – a few years ago EIA campaigned against illegal talc and marble mines that were operating in what should have been protected tiger areas.

Ivory trading is also targeted by the EIA – in 1989 they played a key role on getting it banned. But they report that in 2009 ivory seizures have soared as elephant poaching is on the rise. The organisation is going to be working on the ground to gather evidence of the syndicates responsible, so they can be brought to justice.

Only this week it’s being reported that Bristol City Council are planning a plant-fuelled power station. Apparently, one of the main feedstocks will be palm oil. This vegetable oil is also ubiquitous in a vast range of everyday products from soaps to soups and from chips to chocolate. EIA logging investigators says that the spread of palm oil plantations is a major cause of deforestation, which in turn is a significant contributor to climate change.

In Europe, as much as 19% of wood imports come from illegal or suspicious sources. In the US it’s nearly half that because in 2008 it became illegal to import or sell products made from stolen timber. And EIA helped get this on the statute books. They hope to do the same in the UK.

My involvement with EIA is through the Chilling Facts campaign, now in its second year. Targeting UK supermarkets we wanted to highlight the huge climate change impact of their refrigeration gases, which are responsible for nearly one third of their carbon footprint. EIA is calling for a worldwide ban on HFCs. This is technically possible, but politically difficult. However, I’ve managed to give both Ed Milliband and his shadow Minister for Energy and Climate Change, Greg Barker, the technical briefing document about the campaign.

The first Chilling Facts survey was published in January 2009. Ranking the supermarkets on their commitment to moving away from HFCs, it highlighted how little attention had been paid to the issue. However, the second survey showed significant progress, as all the major players had some improvements to report. And some were setting a deadline for phasing out HFCs - although there's still a long way to go.

Next year we’re planning to include air conditioning in our survey, as this uses HFC gases too. And we’re going to be looking a the disposal of refrigeration equipment - we think that supermarkets may not be keeping track of this. In particularly, we're worried that the climate-unfriendly cooling gases are not being captured, as they should be.

If you want to know what’s happening on the front line of eco-crime, join EIA and find out. And click here to see a video overview of their work.