These were just two of the chants that BVFoE members joined in with while marching along with several thousand other people in the Hague on November 18th. A campaign weekend had been organised by FoE (Holland), the highlight of which was the building of a 250m long, 20-sandbag (1.5m) high dyke around the venue of the climate change talks to show that people everywhere want greenhouse gas emissions curbed, that the time for talking is up and that action and commitment to targets is needed. Marching to the Conference Centre with thousands of like minded people was uplifting to say the least. Banners and placards in all languages, colours and designs were evident, carried by individuals from every corner of Europe and beyond -- from Poland, Estonia, Czech Republic, Australia, Japan -- some individuals had painted faces, colourful hair, rode wacky solar powered machines or scooted along on skateboards, while others looked more conventional...but all had one thing in common, a desire to see global climate change taken seriously and something done about it. In the event so many people arrived, over 5,000, that the dyke was completed ahead of schedule and was done so in a peaceful, hardworking, cooperative, while at the same time, carnival atmosphere. While one member of BVFoE helped fill sandbags others joined a 'chain-gang' and helped pass them to the dyke builders. School children from Belgium who had cycled all the way the previous day were invited to lay the last sandbag. Everyone was so 'up' -- we had achieved our goal in less time than anticipated in a wonderfully cooperative and enjoyable manner and we were expecting no less from the world delegates attending the talks.

As we now know, however, things didn't turn out that positively. The delegates were unable to get their act together for the sake of the environment, the talks ending with no agreement or firm commitments made. Additionally, we now also seem to be in a slanging match with France. Whatever the background to this and however worthy (arguably) it was of Prescott to try and act as peacebroker by drawing up a compromise agreement, it remains clear that it is still America, and to a lesser extent the other countries in the so-called Umbrella Group (Japan, Canada & Australia), that remains the main stumbling block to a global commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions, particularly CO₂, are produced by the burning of fossil fuels -- coal, gas, oil and its derivatives such as petrol and diesel. Instead of looking ahead to using the already existing cleaner technologies such as wind & solar power and less polluting alternatives to petrol and diesel, the US wants to continue with its backward looking policies, burning dirty fuels to provide its power - no doubt goaded on by the oil industry. Even worse, you may have heard a lot about the US wanting to engage in carbon trading. This idea originated at the Kyoto Summit three years ago where countries were informally assigned a 'quota' of greenhouse gas emissions that they would be allowed to legitimately produce. Ironically, however, some countries were given quotas that, because of their economic status and infrastructure, they would be unlikely to meet anyway. America has proposed that it should be allowed to 'purchase' unfilled quotas from countries such as Russia and Ukraine that are emitting a lot less emissions now than in 1990, thus causing additional pollution that probably would never have been produced in the first place !!

At last though, people here in Britain do seem to be waking up to the fact that something is going badly wrong with the weather patterns and that the predictions made about climate change some years ago are unfortunately now happening. Every caller to a recent radio debate about climate change wanted emissions cut and was frustrated and angry that the world is basically being held back on this issue by the stubborn arrogance of a few countries. More surprisingly, many callers were also describing what small things they are doing to help, and we can all help on a personal level -- even simple things like turning lights off in unused rooms, putting just sufficient water in the kettle instead of completely filling it up every time it's boiled, using our cars less wherever possible and, importantly, letting our elected officials know how we feel on this issue

A switch to cleaner fuels will not mean, as the US would have us believe, that we will somehow be disadvantaged -- we only have to look to countries with sound environmental policies such as Holland, Switzerland, Germany and Scandinavian countries to see this. All have a higher standard of living quotient than does Britain and generally healthier economies. One of our energy companies, Unit(e), is already producing all of its power from renewables, while some others offer a 'green tariff' option, but all of the power companies need to know that there is a demand from their customers for power generated from wind, wave and solar. Next time that doorstop rep from a power company comes knocking, why not ask how much (if any) of their power is generated from renewables. If nothing else, this certainly gets rid of them quickly (!!) but more importantly they will hopefully start to realise there is a demand out there for cleaner power that their company needs to address unless it wants to lose customers.

It looks as though there will now be another round of talks next Spring in Bonn, and possibly another protest similar to The Hague dyke building. If this happens, why not join us, board Eurostar and come and let your voice be heard??

For a change, the environment has come out the winner with the recent passage of a new law, the Countryside and Rights of Way Bill. The good news was reported on 1st December:

"Tough new laws to protect the UK's most important wildlife havens were given Royal assent last night (Thursday). The Countryside and Rights of Way Act includes numerous measures that Friends of the Earth has been lobbying for, and follows 20 years of hard campaigning. The new legislation will help tackle the appalling destruction inflicted on many of the UK's best wildlife havens. More than half of England's Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) are in an unfavourable condition."

The Act has four main wildlife provisions: the conservation of Sites of Special Scientific Interest; action on biodiversity; better protection for species; and a ‘duty of care' on public bodies.

Matt Phillips, senior wildlife campaigner at Friends of the Earth said:
"We are delighted that this new Act has been passed and congratulate the Government for introducing it. These new laws will substantially improve the prospects of our meadows, wetlands, wild flowers and animals surviving long enough for future generations to see.

Members of BVFoE attended a Rally in Stoke Park, Guildford, at the end of November to protest, along with hundreds of others, against the incinerator planned for the Slyfield area of Guildford.

But why should we in the Blackwater Valley be concerned?

• Incinerators provide no incentive for increased recycling schemes because a constant supply of high calorific value waste (paper and plastic) is necessary to 'feed' them and make them economically viable. It is likely that there would be less incentive to introduce kerb-side recycling in Surrey.
• Waste often isn't sorted before being incinerated, thus items such as batteries containing heavy metals, plastics, and other nasties, are burned ....leading to:
• Emissions from chimneys, which may include carcinogenic dioxins, that affect a 10-15 mile radius around the burner, ie. us!....
• Ash. One third of the 225,000 tonnes of waste to be burnt at Slyfield will end up as waste, that’s 75,000 tonnes to be landfilled. (Don’t let any of the proponents of incinerators get away with the excuse that burning is an alternative to landfill) Furthermore, while the bottom ash is fairly inert and can be put into a standard landfill site, 10% is fly ash which is the filtered flue emissions. This fly ash for the modern incinerators can be very toxic (with the older incinerator the flue emissions were hardly filtered) and needs special licensed landfills for disposal. The nearest landfill is currently in Bucks but so that Surrey (and Hants) can justify the proximity principle (i.e. local dumps) for their incinerators, they are both lobbying for the Grooms Farm landfill near Bordon to have such a licence (see article in BVFoE Winter 2000 newsletter).
• The contract for this incinerator is being awarded BEFORE the Surrey Waste Plan (to which BVFoE has given comments) has been issued. This Plan should be calling for incentives for more people to recycle (or compost) more of their waste and waste minimisation at source, instead of taking the building of new incinerators for granted. If less waste were generated in the first place, incinerators would not even have to be considered!! (Something to bear in mind perhaps when buying those Chrissy presents -- one or two small items suddenly become a 'gift pack' around this time of year simply because they are encased in mounds of packaging).

Thanks to everyone who wrote and sent cards to the DETR on the matter of Dibden Bay in Southampton Water. This would be an extremely damaging development particularly to the wading birds who rely on the mudflats for their food. An RSPB reserve up the Water is also going to be ruined by the dumping of dredgings on it.

How will this development effect us up here? For a start a high proportion of the 6,000 extra daily lorry movements will be up the M3 past us. Additional freight trains going up north will pass across the Bournemouth – London mainline, causing additional hold-ups and delays.