# data[].attributes.headline
Cooling solar farms can make them more powerful

# data[].attributes.subject
Cooling solar farms can make them more powerful

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Cooling solar farms can make them more powerful - here is the proof

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Changing the arrangement, height, and direction of solar panels can actually reduce their surface temperature and improve their efficiency.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In 2014 and 2015 Frome Renewable Energy Co-op co-organised One Planet Sunday attended by over 600 people: stalls, music, talks, food and actions to change the world. For more details click here There's a flavour of what happened in 2015 here and 2014 here

Recent projects have included Frome Open Homes which had over 600 visits. Over 50 homes and local mill projects have taken part so far and opened their doors to showcase ways to cut carbon and costs. To see which homes took part in 2015 click here.
Here's to going 'renewable so our streets are less canoeable'!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 2014 and 2015 Frome Renewable Energy Co-op co-organised One Planet Sunday attended by over 600 people: stalls, music, talks, food and actions to change the world. For more details click here There's a flavour of what happened in 2015 here and 2014 here Recent projects have included Frome Open Homes which had over 600 visits.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It's the stuff of science fiction. Imagine driving down the road, and your electric car automatically charges. You don't have to stop. You don't have to get out of the car. Nothing.

Well, this dream could soon be a reality. At least, it may soon be a reality in Indiana.

The Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT), Purdue University, and German startup Magment GmbH have all joined forces to create a system that wireless charges electric vehicles as they drive. Ultimately, the idea is to develop the world's first wireless charging concrete pavement.

In the press release, the teams note that the project will progress in three primary stages.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Engineers Are Creating Concrete Pavement That Wirelessly Charges Electric Cars

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Not much information has been given on how the highway will work, but more details should be available soon, as the project will begin this summer.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
This Insulation Secret Will BLOW YOUR MIND

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Curry Rivel - Heating Initiatives Project

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Curry Rivel Parish Council has been awarded £6,460 by Somerset County Council for a project looking at how we can improve heating the buildings in the village. We will investigate efficiency and sustainable heating methods and then to act as a catalyst for implementing some of them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Gas boilers have served us well, but the next generation of heating is here.

Heat from the air, produced using green power. 4x more efficient. Around 70% less carbon emissions. Available from £500 including the new government grant.

What is a heat pump?

A heat pump extracts heat from the air outside and brings it into the home using electricity. This means you get a bigger quantity of heat with less electrical power usage.

Air-source heat pumps give you comfortable, consistent heating and hot water. But with...

Less energy: Heat pumps use 4x less energy than even the most efficient boilers to generate the same amount of heat.

Less carbon: That efficiency means you'll instantly slash your heat carbon footprint by around 70%. Plus, they run on electricity, which gets greener every year.

Longer life: A heat pump can last 20 years - up to twice as long as a gas boiler.

Visit our Heat Pump Hub to find out more.

Heat pump installation cost

NEW
Government have just increased their grant from £5,000 to £7,500 - we're passing it straight on to you. find out more.

Daikin have just cut £250 off their supplier price - we're passing it straight on to you.
For a limited time only: find out more.

Which? Members now receive a 5% discount on Octopus heat pump and solar installations for a limited time. Claim exclusive offer.

What's it like to live with a heat pump?

We're your heat pump one-stop-shop

We'll handle every bit of your move to a heat pump. From your survey, quote and installation all the way through to aftercare service.

That means a quicker, smoother experience for you, help from the same expert team, and better value for money.

Proven tech for the home of the future

Heat pump technology is 160 years old, and can work well in most homes already - making it the ideal replacement for your old boiler.

Combines heating and hot water

Connects to most existing piping systems and high temperature radiators

Loaded with smart capabilities, and works with home tech from solar panels to batteries.

Smart heating at your fingertips

Control your heat via our simple app. It's just as easy, if not easier, than using your boiler.

After your installation, our friendly engineers will get you set up and show you the ropes. We'll always be on hand to help with any questions.

Get a fixed-price quote with no strings attached:

What's included?

Together with your new heat pump, your fixed-price quote will include:

Installation by our expert team

A compatible hot water cylinder

Any necessary radiator changes

Plumbing & electrical bits needed to fit your new heating system

All delivery and labour required to complete the install

5-year warranty on your heat pump

2-year warranty on all other parts

5-year warranty on labour & workmanship

£7,500 Boiler Upgrade Scheme grant (we apply for this grant on your behalf)

I got a call from Octopus literally a week after requesting to book a home survey. About 15 minutes after the surveyor left I received a quote and I paid the deposit within 10 minutes. It was an absolute no brainer. I would never complain for the price I paid and the product is exceptional.

Marc - Octopus Energy heat pump customer

In the news

Accredited by:

How much does a heat pump cost?

We've been working hard to bring heat pumps to you at the lowest price possible. 90% of our heat pump quotes are lower than the national average.

Our standard installation costs range from as low as £500. It can cost more if you have a larger home or non standard installation but but virtually all our quotes are less than the national average of £5,500. Both of these prices include the new government grant of £7,500.

Fill in our online form and we'll use the info you give, as well as your home's EPC info from the national database, to calculate a tailored fixed price quote for your home when you enquire about getting a heat pump with us.

This online quote will be for a standard installation, which the majority of homes are. The next step after your quote is a home survey, at which point we'll be able to see if your home requires any non-standard work to make it heat pump ready (this is rare, but it happens from time to time).

What's included in a fixed price quote?

Your fixed price quote includes everything you need for your new heating system

Brand new Daikin heat pump sized for your home's heating needs

New Daikin heat pump-compatible water cylinder

Any necessary radiators for your new system

Plumbing & electrical bits needed to fit your new heating system

Labour to complete your installation

5-year warranty on your heat pump

2-year warranty on all other parts

5-year warranty on labour & workmanship

£7,500 Boiler Upgrade Scheme grant (we apply for this grant on your behalf)
Terms & Conditions apply; labour provided based on standard installation

How is my Fixed Price Quote calculated?

We generate your fixed price quote using the information you provide us when you request a quote and EPC data on your home from the national database. This allows us to generate, with a high degree of accuracy, the cost of a standard installation for your property.

If your home requires any non-standard work to make it heat pump ready (this is rare, but it happens from time to time) our team will let you know after your home survey.

How does your pricing compare to other installers?

90% of Octopus Energy heat pump quotes are below the UK average quote, which government publish monthly here. In July 2023 for example, the average UK heat pump cost was £13,065 before any grants, while 90% of our Octopus quotes cost less than this. When you factor in the new government grant that's a cost of £5,565.

What's the process to get a heat pump with Octopus Energy?

Fill out our quick online form and we'll provide you with a fixed price quote. You can speak to our team about any questions you have, and if you choose to accept your quote, we'll take a £500 fully refundable advance payment and book in your home survey.

During the home survey, our experts will check the heat loss of your home and discuss where your heat pump will go. We'll use this time to finalise your heating design and double check that a heat pump is suited for your home.

We'll then send you an assessment of the home survey in a final sales agreement. Our team will be available to answer any questions you may have. If you accept the agreement, our install coordinators will be in touch to arrange and manage your install. We'll then take your final payment after installation.

After installation, our dedicated aftercare team will be available by phone or email, 7 days a week, to help with any queries you have. Your heat pump comes with a 5 year warranty, and 2 year warranty for the other products we install (like your hot water cylinder and radiators). Find out more about our service plans.

Where are you currently installing?

We're currently installing heat pumps across most of England & Wales.

We're working to extend our tentacles across the rest of the UK as quickly as possible. If you're outside of our service area now, we'll let you know as soon as we get to you.

Do I need to be an Octopus Energy customer to get a heat pump installed with you?

Nope! We're on a mission to decarbonise heating - anyone can get a survey and installation with us even if you're not an Octopus Energy customer.

Our claims explained

90% of our heat pump quotes beat the national average:
We compared all of our heat pump quotes for July to the UK national average quote, which government
publish here every month. We found that 90% of our Octopus quotes were below the national average price of £13,065 before any grants, or £5,565 when you factor in the new government grant.

Cut carbon emissions by around 70% with a heat pump:
We've based this on the following carbon efficiency calculation:

Gas CO2 = (A/C*D) = 2.55 tonnes

Electricity CO2 = (A/B*E) = 0.78 tonnes

Carbon saving = 1.7 tonnes or 69%

Where A - E are:

A - 10 MWh typical energy demand for heating and hot water for a 3 bed property

B - 3 heat pump seasonal coefficient of performance

C - new boiler efficiency of 82.5% (BEIS study)

D - Gas fuel emissions of 210 gCO2/kWh (SAP 10)

E - Electricity fuel emissions of 233 gCO2/kWh (SAP 10)

A heat pump will keep you toasty, even at - 20°
Air source heat pumps can actually work in temperatures as low as -20 °C! In Norway, one of the world's coldest countries, every other home has a heat pump (so they must work pretty well). When it gets very cold, the heat pump will need to use a bit more energy than usual to keep your home cosy, but fortunately we only see temperatures below -10°C a few days per year, and even then, a heat pump will still function more efficiently than a gas boiler.

A heat pump is 4x more efficient than a gas boiler
Heat pumps can deliver several units of heat for each unit of electricity. For every 1 kWh of electricity you put in, you could get up to 3.33kWh of heat out, which is an efficiency of 333%! This is because heat pumps don't create heat, but move existing heat from nature into your home (like an air conditioner or refrigerator, but in reverse).

Alternatively, when you burn stuff to generate heat (like gas, oil, or wood), you are instead creating heat by converting matter to energy - so you can never get more than one unit of heat for each unit of energy you burn. Gas boilers in UK homes are only around 83% efficient, so for every 1 kWh of gas you put in, you get 0.83kWh of heat out, which is 4x less efficient than a heat pump (3.33/0.83 = 4.1)

2,000,000 Swedes can't be wrong
The Eco Experts claim that Sweden have 19,510 heat pumps per 100,000 people, (last updated on 26th Jan 2023).
As of 11th April 2023 the population of Sweden is 10,276,357 so 19.509% of this figure = 2,004,814 homes with heat pumps in Sweden.

Set it and forget it:
Operating a heat pump is easy. We'll recommend an ideal temperature based on your home and budget, then help you to set the timer based around your routine and when electricity is cheapest. Once set, our customers say that maintaining a comfortable temperature is far less hassle than their old gas boiler.

Cosiness you can count on
Before installation we do a thorough home survey to ensure the heat pump system we install is optimised for your space. When surveyed, 90% of our customers said the warmth from their new heat pump was either just as comfortable or even more comfortable than their old boiler.

The £250 Daikin discount - how does it work?

For heat pumps installed between June 21st 2023 to March 31st 2024, heat pump manufacturer, Daikin, will be cutting £250 off the supplier price of their heat pumps. And unlike many suppliers, we will be passing that saving directly on to our customers. This £250 discount will be taken off the full price of your heat pump at payment stage.

The Boiler Upgrade Scheme - how does the new £7,500 announcement affect me?

The Boiler Upgrade Scheme is a government grant to help support the cost of of replacing fossil fuel heating systems with a heat pump.

On the 21st September government announced they are increasing the funding to £7,500 from 23rd October 2023. Following this announcement, we've taken the decision to apply this to all of our quotes now subject to this being implemented as announced.

We'll apply this directly to your heat pump quote, so you only need to pay the net amount. If you've already received a quote with the previous funding (£5,000) that's no problem, we'll make sure this is updated in your final sales agreement.

Want to learn more about heat pumps?

Explore more FAQs and videos here.

*Octopus Energy Services Ltd is an appointed representative for Octopus Electric Vehicles Ltd and is a credit broker and not the lender. Octopus Energy Services Ltd is an introducer to MBNA Limited.

For personal (unsecured) loans, MBNA Limited works exclusively with Lloyds Bank plc. MBNA Limited Is a credit broker and not the lender. MBNA is a trading style of Lloyds Bank plc, Registered Office, 25 Gresham Street, London EC2V 7HN. The issue of a loan and the amount of credit or lending offered to you depends on an assessment of your personal circumstances. The interest rate offered to you will also be based on this assessment. To apply, you must be a UK resident aged 18 and over.

Hey I'm Constantine, welcome to Octopus Energy!

×

Octopus Energy Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales.

Registered number: 09263424. Registered office: UK House, 5th floor, 164-182 Oxford Street, London, W1D 1NN.
Modern slavery statement.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Get A Heat Pump | Heat Pumps Explained | Octopus Energy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Heat pumps help warm your home more efficiently with heat from the air. Learn more about how heat pumps work and installation costs with Octopus Energy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Discover our eco-friendly air source heat pumps - British Gas

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Air source heat pumps are an energy-efficient way to heat your home, lower emissions and reduce costs. Learn more about the installation process and benefits here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Wedmore Solar Farm - Wedmore Community Power Co-operative

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Solar energy is a tried and tested way of producing electricity and replacing non-renewable fuels such as gas, coal and oil. In doing so it also reduces the damaging emissions of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Two artists in London are finding ingenious ways to fund a project that puts power in the hands of people. Other communities are watching with interest

It would be easy to mistake artists Dan Edelstyn and Hilary Powell for master magicians. For their first stunt, they made £1m of debt disappear (more on that later), and for their next trick they're conjuring up a power station from an ordinary, east London terraced street.

Not the wheezing, fossil fuel burning kind, but one fuelled by sunlight, one that prioritises people over profit, and puts power generation in the hands of the communities it serves.

On course to raise £100,000 through crowdfunding, Edelstyn and Powell hope to install rooftop solar panels on dozens of homes in Walthamstow, London, with some of their neighbours getting the retrofit upgrade for free.

The project, they say, is a direct response to the government's "lack of imagination and foresight" in dealing with climate change and the energy crisis, and a reaction to the record profits raked in by energy firms.

Learning as they go and documenting their journey on film, they're creating a blueprint for 'solar punk' activism that they say could be emulated by communities across the UK.

"Everything's just driven by profit and people are so trapped in making ends meet, it's hard for them to see that there is an alternative," says Powell. "If we're to have an equitable future in this transition away from fossil capitalism, we can't let renewables repeat the power games and monopolies we've seen in the fossil fuel industry. There has to be equitable distribution."

The roots of the project can be traced back to the duo's mischievous 2021 film, Bank Job. It followed the husband-and-wife team as they printed their own 'money' - mock banknotes featuring local heroes including a soup kitchen volunteer and a teacher in place of the Queen.

Selling these artworks raised £40,000, half of which was used to buy and write off £1.2m of payday loan debts. The remainder went to local charities. Debt purchasers can bulk buy bundles of debt for a fraction of its face value. They're allowed to collect on the full amount, or - like Edelstyn and Powell - they can choose to write it off entirely.

The move follows in the footsteps of similar activism in the US where RIP Medical Debt has bought up and cancelled almost $7bn (£5.8bn) in unpaid medical bills, and the Rolling Jubilee Fund which cancelled $3.8m (£3.2m) of student loans.

The pair celebrated their successful Bank Job by blowing up a knackered Ford Transit van near Canary Wharf in London. The vehicle was painted gold and was said to represent debt.

Their latest venture ' Power' is similarly eccentric. It involves Edelstyn and Powell sleeping on the roof of their family home to publicise their crowdfunder (which has nearly reached its £50k initial target).

They reckon that £100,000, plus contributions from some homeowners, will fund solar panels for an initial 30 homes. Buying in bulk, which spreads costs like labour and scaffolding, means savings of around 50 per cent.

A ripple effect is already being felt beyond their neighbourhood - the pair have brokered a deal for five nearby schools to go solar. They've also created more banknotes, with the proceeds going towards organisations focused on generating 'community wealth'. Other neighbourhoods are watching on with keen interest.

"We're arguing that a green deal is not just about technology, it's about social and economic equality as well," says Edelstyn.

With home surveys well under way, the first solar panels should be installed in the New Year.

"We want this to be something that fills people's hopes, dreams and imaginations, and maybe builds their spirits to know that rebellion is possible," says Edelstyn. "We want to show that we can actually achieve something by working together. We need that in our own lives too."
Main image: Peter Searle

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The 'solar punks' creating a community power station in London

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Two artists in London have a bright idea that will put power back in the hands of their local community. Will it catch on?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Solar Flower You Need to Experience - Smartflower

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Smartflower is the innovative sculptural solar flower with advanced photovoltaic solar panels that open and close to cleaning itself for maximum efficiency.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Denmark's largest offshore wind farm to date will feature recyclable wind turbine blades made by Siemens Gamesa.

In 2022, renewable energy giant RWE became the first commercial, large-scale offshore developer to install Siemens Gamesa's recyclable wind turbine blade technology, RecyclableBlade, at its Kaskasi offshore wind farm in Germany. (The blades pictured above are at Kaskasi.) RecyclableBlades will also be installed on 44 out of 100 turbines at the Sofia wind farm, which RWE is building off the UK's northeast coast.

And now, RWE has chosen RecyclableBlade for Thor - Denmark's largest offshore wind farm to date. Forty out of 72 SG 14-236 DD turbines will be equipped with Siemens Gamesa's "worldwide-first" recyclable blades.

Siemens Gamesa's RecyclableBlade technology enables the full reclamation of the wind turbine blade's components at end-of-life: resin, fiberglass, and wood, among others, are separated using a mild acid solution.

(I've asked RWE's spokesperson why it's not using only recyclable turbine blades on Sofia and Thor, and will update when I hear back.)

RWE will build Thor in the Danish North Sea, around 22 kilometers (13.6 miles) from the west coast of Jutland. The 1,000 megawatt (MW) Thor will be able to produce enough clean electricity to supply more than 1 million Danish households - that's 1 in 3 households in Denmark. It's expected to come online no later than the end of 2027.

Thor will also be the world's first wind farm to install Siemens Gamesa's carbon dioxide-reduced steel towers. The GreenerTower will reduce CO2 of at least 63% in the tower steel plates compared to conventional steel.

In the US, RWE is a fast-growing new offshore wind player, acquiring 4 GW of seabed capacity during the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management's 2022 New York Bight and California seabed lease auctions.

Sam Eaton, CEO of RWE Offshore Wind Holdings, said in a statement sent to Electrek about using recyclable blades in its US projects:

RWE has demonstrated a clear commitment to lead on circularity across the offshore wind sector by using recyclable blades at now three offshore wind projects.

The adoption of recyclable wind turbine blades is an integral part of achieving RWE's net-zero targets and presents a great opportunity to make sustainability inherent to the burgeoning US offshore wind industry.

Read more: A Danish wind turbine giant just discovered how to recycle all blades
If you're considering going solar, it's always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you're finding a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage. EnergySage is a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. They have hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high quality solutions and save 20 to 30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it's free to use and you won't get sales calls until you select an installer and you share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you'll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started . -ad*

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Michelle Lewis @michelle0728

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Denmark's largest offshore wind farm will feature recyclable wind turbine blades

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Denmark's largest offshore wind farm to date will feature recyclable wind turbine blades made by Siemens Gamesa.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Toyota has revealed plans for a next-generation electric vehicle battery capable of delivering close to 1,500 kilometres (932 miles) of range.

The Japanese automotive giant said it aims to produce the commercial solid-state battery by 2027, claiming that it will have a charge time of just 10 minutes.

"With the evolution of the vehicle's operating system, the next-generation battery EV will also enable customization of the 'driving feel,' with a focus on acceleration, turning and stopping," the company said in a technology briefing.

The company said that several recent breakthroughs with battery technology meant it was ready to move from the research stage to production of solid-state batteries, which offer a number of advantages over lithium-ion batteries that are currently used in commercial electric cars.

Despite range and charging limitations of lithium-ion batteries, they have been favoured over solid-state batteries due to cost and durability issues.

Toyota claimed that a "technological breakthrough" had overcome these issues, though did not specify which.

The company said it would continue to push forward development of lithium-ion batteries, with plans for a more efficient battery capable of 1,000km of range - nearly double that of the long-range version of Tesla's Model Y.

Lithium-iron phosphate (LFP) batteries will also be developed as a lower cost alternative to lithium-ion and solid-state batteries, Toyota said.

Other innovations unrelated to batteries that were detailed in the briefing included aerodynamic technology "based on rocket hypersonic aerodynamics", as well as manufacturing upgrades designed to reduce costs.

Among these is a production process called Giga casting, which was pioneered by Tesla in order to streamline the manufacturing of electric vehicles.

Toyota President Koji Sato has previously said that the company had fallen behind in the EV sector and was forced to play catchup.

The latest announcement saw Toyota's share price jump to its highest level since last August.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Battery breakthrough 'offers 1,500 kilometre range from just 10 minutes of charging'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
First commercial solid-state battery offers nearly double the range of the long-range version of Tesla's Model Y.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
This Bike Was Built Like A Car To Handle Different Terrains | This car is actually a bike | By Ridiculous Rides | Facebook

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ce train peut aller sur la route! 🚌 🚃 | Voici l’avenir du train de campagne : un hybride entre un train et bus pour connecter les petites villes aux grandes.🚌 🚃

C’est une des solutions... | By Kapaw | Facebook

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Voici l’avenir du train de campagne : un hybride entre un train et bus pour connecter les petites villes aux grandes.🚌 🚃

C’est une des solutions...

# data[].attributes.headline
Funding raised for Redbridge pedal powered edutainment

# data[].attributes.subject
Funding raised for Redbridge pedal powered edutainment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Transforming Redbridge by empowering young adults to make pedal-powered generators & music systems & start a conversation about locally-led responses to the climate crisis.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Draughty homes are uncomfortable. It's also a waste of money if the heat that you've paid for escapes through gaps and cold air comes whistling in from outside. The good news is that draught-proofing is easy and our DIY draught-proofing guide will help you plug those gaps and stay cosy at home.

So, where do the draughts come from?

Most houses, particularly old ones, have cracks and gaps through which warm air goes out and cold air blows in. Not all of these can be dealt with by a DIY-er, but many can, such as the gaps between or around floorboards; around windows and doors; through the letterbox; where pipework comes through external walls; around the loft hatch; and around electrical fittings.

For more information about draught-proofing windows, see our secondary glazing page.

Note: Never block boiler flues, air bricks, or window trickle vents and avoid over draught-proofing windows in kitchens and bathrooms where the moist air needs to escape and where there is no mechanical ventilation like an extractor fan.

Mind the gap

The most common draught zones, and DIY solutions to dealing with them.

Use foam, metal or plastic draught strips (see below), or brush seals for sash windows.

Exterior doors

Fit brush or hinged-flap draught excluders, fitted along the bottom of the doors (see over).

Interior doors

Cut draughts with 'snake' draught excluders (photo, right), or similar strips of material (see over). Note that this should only be a temporary measure - while you're trying to keep warm. Airflow between rooms is good for a home as it reduces the risk of moist air getting trapped in a particular rooms.

Unused chimneys

Chimney draught excluders are available from most DIY stores. Plastic bags stuffed with other plastic bags also work - but remember to remove it in summer to let the air circulate.

Around pipework

Apply silicone mastic, wall-filler or expanding foam as appropriate.

Floorboards and skirting boards:

Fill the gaps with flexible fillers, clear or brown silicone mastic, decorators' caulk or similar products.

Cracks in walls

Use cement or a hard-setting decorators' wall-filler.

Redundant extractor fan outlets

These should be blocked up. This can be done with expanding foam and should then be covered over internally and externally. This can be done with vent covers or by adding plasterboard internally and matching the look of the external wall.

Loft hatches

Fit strips of draught-excluder around the edges of the frame, and don't forget to insulate the hatch itself with fibrous or solid board insulation

Lighting and electrical fittings

Plug the gaps around the fittings with wall-filler.

Letterboxes

Fit flaps or brushes to keep the cold air out and the warm air in (see below).

Dodge the draught

DIY instructions for three of the simplest but most effective draught-busting techniques ...

How to fit a door brush

First, use a tape measure to measure the width of the door and cut the brush to the right length (a hacksaw is good for doing this).

Then position the brush against the door so that the brush is just touching the floor. Using a pencil, make guide marks on the door through the pre-drilled holes in the excluder to show where the screws will go.

Next drill pilot holes in the points you marked and loosely screw the excluder in place.
Open and close the door to ensure it creates a good seal before tightening the screws or adjusting the height if necessary. The excluder should not be placed so low that it makes it difficult to open or close the door!

How to fit a letterbox draught-excluder

First, place the draught-excluder over your letterbox and use a pencil to mark the fixing points through the pre-drilled holes. Maybe a friend could hold the draught-excluder in place while you check that letters can pass through it.

Drill pilot holes at the points you marked and loosely screw the draught-excluder onto the door.
Check that letters can pass through the brushes before tightening the screws, adjusting its position if necessary.

Fixing a perimeter seal around a window or door using foam draught-excluder

Foam draught-excluder strips come in different thicknesses, and it's important to get the right thickness otherwise either your door won't close properly, or the draught excluder won't exclude the draughts.

Ideally you need a short length - about 50mm - to use as a test strip. Stick this to the door frame (not the door itself), as close as possible to the edge nearest you.

Close the door and slip a plastic card between the test strip and the door. It should be a comfortable fit. If you have to force it, then the excluder is probably too thick; if the credit card is loose and falls out, then the excluder is probably too thin. Once you've done the test, remove the test strip.

When you're satisfied that you have the right thickness of foam excluder, measure the frame of your door and cut the foam strip to the required lengths.

Clean and dry the door frame to ensure the adhesive sticks properly, then apply to the door frame, as near to the edge as possible, checking that it isn't difficult to open or close the door.

You can use exactly the same technique to seal a window using a foam seal.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
DIY draft-proofing - Centre for Sustainable Energy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Draughty homes are uncomfortable. It's also a waste of money if the heat that you've paid for escapes through gaps and cold air comes whistling in from outside. The good news is that draught-proofing is easy and our DIY draught-proofing guide will help you plug those gaps and stay cosy at home.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Solar PV - Centre for Sustainable Energy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How does Solar PV work? How much does it cost? How do you install it and what grants for solar PV are available?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Domestic battery storage is a rapidly evolving technology which allows households to store electricity for later use.

Domestic batteries are typically used alongside solar photovoltaic (PV) panels. But it can also be used to store cheap, off-peak electricity from the grid, which can then be used during peak hours (16.00 to 20.00).

Solar PV and batteries

If you have solar PV you can generate plenty of electricity when the sun is shining. But on overcast days you'll make less, and you'll make none at all at night. This generally doesn't match up with when you want to use electricity; it's at night when you want the lights on and to use appliances like a dishwasher or TV.

The electricity you generate but don't use is typically exported into the national grid and used elsewhere - it's not wasted. You can get paid for this (see SEG below), but the payment is much lower than the price you pay for electricity, so it's better financially to use as much as possible in the home.

This is where battery storage comes in. If you can store the electricity generated during the day, you can use it later in the evening and the following day, reducing the amount of electricity you purchase from the grid. There are other ways to use more of your solar generation, without the need to buy a domestic battery. See Getting the best from your solar PV panels for more information.

Batteries, time-of-use tariffs and heat pumps

Some batteries can now import and export electricity directly from the grid and you could install a domestic battery without having any renewable generation. With a time-of-use tariff your battery can store cheaper electricity during off-peak hours (typically at night) to be used when electricity is more expensive.

Some batteries can track the price and only charge when electricity is at its cheapest. Storing energy in this way could enable you to pay lower prices for a large quantity of your electricity consumption. This could work particularly well if you have a heat pump or other electric heating as some of your heating costs could be met with cheap rate electricity.

On a national scale, as more renewable generation is installed it will eventually exceed demand during off-peak periods and will need to be stored for use when demand is high. Domestic battery storage can play its part in this.

Smart Export Guarantee (SEG) payments

The Smart Export Guarantee (SEG) is a government policy that was introduced in 2020 to replace the feed-in tariff and ensure that households can be paid for renewable electricity they export to the grid.

This is most commonly associated with solar PV, however more recently households can be paid for energy that is exported from certain domestic batteries, though not all have this capability and the installation must be Microgeneration Certification Scheme (MCS) certified.

Energy suppliers set their own SEG rates with the average around 4p/kWh, but it can be as high as 15p/kWh.

Financial savings

While a battery may save on imported electricity costs, their capital cost remains high, with payback periods in the region of 8-12 years, which is similar to their reported lifespan. The payback period will depend on a number of factors:

The size of your PV array.

The size and cost of the battery system.

The amount of electricity you use in the evenings and mornings which could be supplied by the battery.

The cost of electricity supplied via the grid and whether you use a ToU tariff.

Whether you have a heat pump or other electric heating.

How much you could be paid for exporting the electricity to the grid via the SEG instead of charging a battery.

Calculating simple payback period

A typical household may consume 3,500kWh of electricity per year and a typical solar array may generate 2,800kWh in that time. Of this, the household may use 30% with the rest being exported to the grid. With a 6kWh battery the household may now be able to use 70% of the solar generated energy - more than twice as much.

The table below shows how the numbers might stack up:

In this example, the key variables are the capital cost of the battery, the unit cost of grid electricity and the SEG payment. With a SEG payment of 4p/kWh, the payback period is 12 years. If the SEG payment increases to 15p/kWh, the payback period would increase to 19 years - arguably longer than the battery's lifespan - as the relative benefit of not having a battery has increased.

On the other hand, capital costs are likely to keep falling which will decrease the payback period. An increase in grid electricity costs will also reduce the payback period.

This demonstrates the complexities and dynamic nature of calculating whether a battery is a good investment.

It gets more complicated if we consider time-of-use tariffs.

If we take the typical 3,500kWh annual household electricity usage and divide equally across the year, it uses 9.6kWh per day. Assuming a battery has enough capacity to supply this and is 'charged' at a cheaper rate of 12p/kWh, the annual cost of electricity would be £420 (assuming there is no solar PV installed).

A standard tariff of 34p/kWh would cost £1,190 per year, giving an annual saving of £770. If the battery costs £6,000 then the payback period is eight years. Installing solar PV in this scenario would further reduce the payback period.

Back-up power

Not all batteries can deliver electricity during a power cut. Buying this capability could cost more than a basic battery system.

Electric vehicles

An electric vehicle (EV) is essentially a big battery you can drive. Smart chargers allow the EV to prioritise solar electricity or cheaper rates with a time-of-use tariff. It's unlikely you would have both an EV and a battery, and if reducing emissions is your priority, switching your car to an EV will save far more emissions than installing a domestic battery.

Some EVs can be used to power your home, just like a domestic battery. For this to be possible, the EV and the EV charger will need to be bi-directional charging compatible.

Solar battery sustainability

Although it is often considered more sustainable to use a higher percentage of the solar electricity that you generate and use less electricity from the national grid, this is not always the case. So long as the local grid has enough capacity to transport your excess solar generation to another household that needs it, then that renewable energy is not lost.

On a national scale we do not yet produce more renewable electricity than we can use, though this is likely to happen in the future. When it does, domestic battery storage can play a part in storing this and reducing the need for fossil fuel generation at other times, therefore reducing overall emissions.

There are also greenhouse gas emissions associated with the lifecycle of a domestic battery. These are called 'embodied emissions' and are released during the mining of the raw materials, manufacturing, transport and disposal of the battery. The battery system would therefore have to reduce overall emissions by more than the embodied emissions to result in a net reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.

As well as the embodied emissions, there are a host of ecological and social impacts associated with domestic batteries which are difficult to quantify and compare. These are primarily the result of mining the primary materials, principally lithium (the most common material used for domestic batteries), but also cobalt and nickel. In response, manufacturers are looking to develop more sustainable materials and processes.

Using a domestic battery to store solar energy for later use has the potential to save you money but it is not likely to have a clear beneficial impact on the environment at the moment.

So, should I get one?

As we've seen number of variables will deterimine whether a battery is a good investment.

The financial and environmental case for domestic batteries may not work for everyone at the moment, but both are likely to improve over time. If your primary motivation is to reduce your emissions, a better foucs would be on reducing your heating demand, installing a heat pump or buying an EV.

What to look for ...

Some pointers on what to look for when buying a battery.

Capacity

This is how much electricity the battery can store in kilowatt hours. An analysis of your electricity consumption is required to work out the optimum size. Your installer should work with you to do this.

Number of 'cycles'

One cycle is a full charge and full discharge, but this rarely happens[KS8] . Batteries usually partially charge, so a 50% charge and discharge is half a cycle. If you know the number of warrantied cycles (i.e. the number of cycles you are guaranteed to get) you can work out how many kWh the battery will give you over its lifetime, to ensure the payback period will be less than the expected lifespan of the battery.

Charge/discharge rate

This refers to the power input and output in kW. Make sure that you have enough power input to match the maximum output from your PV and enough output to run the appliances you want to use.

Back-up power capability

Do you need it?

Price per kWh of storage capacity

There are various batteries available on the market, and at varying prices. If you are trying to decide between similar batteries, then the price/kWh of storage capacity is a useful way to compare different systems.

AC or DC coupling

Solar PV needs an inverter, as does a battery. A system using DC coupling has a single combined inverter, while AC coupling requires separate inverters for battery and panels which has implications for the system's function and efficiency. In general, AC-coupled batteries are probably better if you already have PV as they are easier to retrofit.

DC may be a better option if you install PV and a battery at the same time, as they can be fully integrated. This is typically more efficient and tends to be cheaper, though such a system may not be able to charge from the grid.

A reputable installer

Make sure your installer is certified by the Microgeneration Certification Scheme (MCS).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Battery storage - Centre for Sustainable Energy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Domestic battery storage is a rapidly evolving technology which allows households to store electricity for later use. Domestic batteries are typically used alongside solar photovoltaic (PV) panels. But it can also be used to store cheap, off-peak electricity from the grid, which can then be used during peak hours (16.00 to 20.00).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Boiler Tweaks To Tackle The Cost Of Living Crisis. AKA Lower the flow temperature on a combi boiler

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
CSE supports people and organisations to tackle the climate emergency and end cold homes. Our free energy advice changes lives.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Energy plans, initiatives and achievements - Frome Town Council

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Explore some of the things Frome Town Council is doing to help cut carbon, reduce fuel poverty and make the town more energy resilient.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Energy plans, initiatives and achievements - Frome Town Council

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Explore some of the things Frome Town Council is doing to help cut carbon, reduce fuel poverty and make the town more energy resilient.

# data[].attributes.body
Further information regarding our peer-to-peer electricity trading project in Bangkok, Thailand

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BCPG & Power Ledger's T77 Project in Bangkok, Thailand

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We help people transact energy, trade environmental commodities and invest in renewables.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Fact: Electric vehicles typically have a smaller carbon footprint than gasoline cars, even when accounting for the electricity used for charging.

Electric vehicles (EVs) have no tailpipe emissions. Generating the electricity used to charge EVs, however, may create carbon pollution. The amount varies widely based on how local power is generated, e.g., using coal or natural gas, which emit carbon pollution, versus renewable resources like wind or solar, which do not. Even accounting for these electricity emissions, research shows that an EV is typically responsible for lower levels of greenhouse gases (GHGs) than an average new gasoline car. To the extent that more renewable energy sources like wind and solar are used to generate electricity, the total GHGs associated with EVs could be even lower. Learn more about electricity production in your area.

EPA and DOE's Beyond Tailpipe Emissions Calculator can help you estimate the greenhouse gas emissions associated with charging and driving an EV or a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) where you live. You can select an EV or PHEV model and type in your zip code to see the CO ₂ emissions and how they stack up against those associated with a gasoline car.

Myth #2: Electric vehicles don't have enough range to handle daily travel demands.

Fact: Electric vehicle range is more than enough for typical daily use in the U.S.

Electric vehicles (EVs) have sufficient range to cover a typical household's daily travel, which is approximately 50 miles on average per day. The majority of households (roughly 85%) travel under 100 miles on a typical day. Most EV models go above 200 miles on a fully-charged battery, with nearly all new models traveling more than 100 miles on a single charge. And automakers have announced plans to release even more long-range models in the coming years.

Range estimates for specific EVs are available from the Find A Car tool on www.fueleconomy.gov -click on the car you are interested in, and check out the "EPA Fuel Economy" line in the table.

How you drive your vehicle and the driving conditions, including hot and cold weather, also affect the range of an electric vehicle; for instance, researchers found on average could decrease about 40% due to cold temperatures and the use of heat. Visit www.energy.gov to get tips on maximizing your electric car's range in extreme temperatures.

Myth #3: Electric vehicles only come as sedans.

Fact: Electric vehicles now come in a variety of shapes and sizes.

Electric vehicles (EVs) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) are now available in many vehicle classes, extending beyond small sedan/compact models. There are currently more than 50 PHEV and EV models on the market. More models are being released in the coming years, so vehicle class options are likely to expand.

Myth #4: There is nowhere to charge.

Fact: Electric vehicles can be plugged into the same type of outlet as your toaster! When you need to charge while on the road, you'll find over 40,000 stations in the U.S. available to the public.

Many people can meet their driving needs by plugging in only at home. Most electric vehicles (EVs) can be charged with a standard 120 V (Level 1) outlet. To charge the vehicle more quickly, you can install a dedicated 240 V (Level 2) outlet or charging system. And for those who live in apartments or condominiums, EV charging stations are becoming a more common building amenity.

Workplace charging is also becoming more widely available, and there are growing numbers of public charging stations. These stations can be found along highways, at grocery stores or other retail locations, and in public garages. There are currently over 40,000 stations available nationally. Most of these stations have Level 2 chargers, providing 10-20 miles of range per hour, but increasing numbers of higher-powered DC Fast charging stations are becoming available, delivering 60 miles or more of range in 20 minutes or less. Learn more about vehicle charging.

The Alternative Fuels Data Center's map, and associated app for mobile devices, provides locations of all public charging stations in the U.S., and is updated regularly. Several automakers have charging station location information built into their onboard information systems, and many apps, including popular navigation ones, also provide charging station locations.

Myth #5: Electric vehicles are worse for the climate than gasoline cars because of battery manufacturing.

Fact: The greenhouse gas emissions associated with an electric vehicle over its lifetime are typically lower than those from an average gasoline-powered vehicle, even when accounting for manufacturing.

Some studies have shown that making a typical electric vehicle (EV) can create more carbon pollution than making a gasoline car. This is because of the additional energy required to manufacture an EV's battery. Still, over the lifetime of the vehicle, total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with manufacturing, charging, and driving an EV are typically lower than the total GHGs associated with a gasoline car. That's because EVs have zero tailpipe emissions and are typically responsible for significantly fewer GHGs during operation (see Myth 1 above).

For example, researchers at Argonne National Laboratory estimated emissions for both a gasoline car and an EV with a 300-mile electric range. In their estimates, while GHGs from EV manufacturing are higher (shown in blue below), total GHGs for the EV are still lower than those for the gasoline car.

Recycling EV batteries can reduce the emissions associated with making an EV by reducing the need for new materials. While some challenges exist today, research is ongoing to improve the process and rate of EV battery recycling. See the U.S. Department of Energy's ReCell Center for more information.

US DOT FHWA (2018). 2017 National Household Travel Survey. https://nhts.ornl.gov/
https://www.aaa.com/AAA/common/AAR/files/AAA-Electric-Vehicle-Range-Testing-Report.pdf https://afdc.energy.gov/stations/#/find/nearest (There are also over 5,500 Tesla-only stations available.) Search for "Alternative Fueling Stations" in your phone's app store. The developer is National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fact: Electric vehicles typically have a smaller carbon footprint than gasoline cars, even when accounting for the electricity used for charging. Electric vehicles (EVs) have no tailpipe emissions. Generating the electricity used to charge EVs, however, may create carbon pollution.

# data[].attributes.headline
Towards a sustainable future: transformative change and post-COVID-19 priorities

# data[].attributes.subject
Towards a sustainable future: transformative change and post-COVID-19 priorities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
EASAC - Science Advice for the Benefit of Europe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A Perspective by EASAC's Environment Programme

The word 'transformative' has entered current discourse from several directions, most recently in the European Green Deal which promises 'deeply transformative' policies. Before that, various analyses of the slow progress towards the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals concluded that 'transformative changes' would be required if humanity is to secure a sustainable future. The failure to reverse trends to worsening climate disruption and biodiversity loss is also said to require transformative change. But in steering national and regional societies, new words or concepts need to be translated into policy and action. Policy-makers and their public need to understand why 'transformative' or 'transformational' change is necessary if they are to support the conclusions of the advocates of change; otherwise these words risk becoming just another catch phrase.
back to overview

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A Perspective by EASAC's Environment Programme The word 'transformative' has entered current discourse from several directions, most recently in the European Green Deal which promises 'deeply transformative' policies. Before that, various analyses of the slow progress towards the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals concluded that 'transformative changes' would be required if humanity is to secure a sustainable future.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Are 'tulip turbines' the answer to energy eyesores?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The artistic shape is the key for these vertical turbines to be more effective than traditional models.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We use cookies to improve your experience on our website. By browsing this website, you agree to our use of cookies.

ok Find out more

The origins of Airlander 10

The beginning of Airlander 10

During 2014, we undertook an extensive work programme to reclassify the prototype as a civil aircraft, which we named Airlander 10. We also launched the LOCATE (LOw CArbon aircraft using lighter-than-air TEchnology) grant-support programme in May 2014. An approximately £3.8m project, this provided extensive information driving the refinement of the aircraft's specification.

Return to Flight

In February 2015, the Regional Growth Fund awarded a £3.4m grant and, in March, the European Union's Horizon 2020 programme awarded approximately £2m in support of our Return to Flight programme. With these grants in place and an equity round in progress, we officially commenced the Return to Flight programme on 1 May 2015.

Over 500 modifications were made during the course of the Return to Flight programme, based on an extensive analysis of the results of the LEMV program and significant computational and experimental work, to develop the new Airlander 10 prototype. Airlander 10 successfully completed its maiden flight in the UK on 17 August 2016. This 30-minute flight was a major step for HAV, and provided further confirmation of the technology including the enhancements made.

A second test flight was completed on 24 August 2016. At the end of this flight, the front of the cockpit was damaged when a loose mooring line resulted in an overly steep landing approach. An investigation followed and HAV considered aircraft systems, mooring and ground support systems, and both flight and ground operations to ensure we learned everything we could.

A further four test flights were completed following this incident. These additional flights included an expansion of the operational envelope to the maximum allowed under our initial European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) approvals. Extensive data was collected during each flight, which drove both the further development of the aircraft and our bespoke Flight Trainer. We also received confirmation from both EASA and the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) that we would be able to expand the flight envelope based on the data from our flight test programme. This was an important moment in the development of Airlander.

On the morning of Saturday 18 November 2017, the day after the successful completion of the sixth test flight, the prototype Airlander detached from its mooring mast on the airfield at Cardington. This triggered the in-built hull deflation mechanism. We launched an extensive internal investigation to determine what led to the de-masting. Our internal report recommended a number of corrective and preventative actions, which are being implemented as we have progressed to the production Airlander.

Read about our investigation

During 2018, HAV focused on integrating all of our experience into a production standard design of Airlander. This work was undertaken with extensive input from potential customers to ensure that detailed requirements were taken into account in the design. HAV also obtained the regulatory approvals needed from the CAA to commence design and production of the type certified production Airlander 10.

Preparing for production

Moving forward

We are poised to launch the next stage in Airlander's development - the production and type certification programme for the production-standard aircraft.

Production Airlander 10

Design Organisation Approval

The UK Civil Aviation Authority awarded HAV a Design Organisation Approval. This is an important milestone on the path to type certification

Read more about the DOA

Production Organisation Approval

The UK Civil Aviation Authority awarded HAV a Production Organisation Approval. Like the DOA, the POA is a critical step on the path towards type certification.

Read more about the POA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We use cookies to improve your experience on our website. By browsing this website, you agree to our use of cookies. ok Find out more The origins of Airlander 10 The beginning of Airlander 10 During 2014, we undertook an extensive work programme to reclassify the prototype as a civil aircraft, which we named Airlander 10.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Fixing the world, one gizmo at a time. | iFixit News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
iFixit is a global community of people helping each other repair things. Let's fix the world, one device at a time. Troubleshoot with experts in the Answers forum-and build your own how-to guides to share with the world. Fix your Apple and Android devices-and buy all the parts and tools needed for your DIY repair projects.

# data[].attributes.headline
Countries leading the way to green energy

# data[].attributes.subject
Countries leading the way to green energy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Which countries are leading the energy transition race?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A new Forum report examines the past decade of the energy transition, looks at where we are now, and identifies what else needs to be done.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Carbon footprint is a horribly abused phrase, so it's worth spelling out exactly what it means.

When talking about climate change, footprint is a metaphor for the total impact that something has. And carbon is a shorthand for all the different greenhouse gases that contribue to global warming.

The term carbon footprint, therefore, is a shorthand to describe the best estimate that we can get of the full climate change impact of something. That something could be anything - an activity, an item, a lifestyle, a company, a country or even the whole world.

CO2e? What's that?

Man-made climate change, or global warming, is caused by the release of certain types of gas into the atmosphere. The dominant man-made greenhouse gas is carbon dioxide (CO2), which is emitted whenever we burn fossil fuels in homes, factories or power stations. But other greenhouse gases are also important. Methane (CH4), for example, which is emitted mainly by agriculture and landfill sites, is 25 times more potent per kilogram than CO2. Even more potent but emitted in smaller quantities are nitrous oxide (N2O), which is about 300 times more potent than carbon dioxide and released mainly from industrial processes and farming, and refrigerant gases, which are typically several thousand times more potent than CO2.

In the UK, the total impact on the climate breaks down like this: carbon dioxide (86%), methane (7%), nitrous oxide (6%) and refrigerant gases (1%). Given that a single item or activity can cause multiple different greenhouse gases to be emitted, each in different quantities, a carbon footprint if written out in full could get pretty confusing. To avoid this, the convention is to express a carbon footprint in terms of carbon dioxide equivalent or CO2e. This means the total climate change impact of all the greenhouse gases caused by an item or activity rolled into one and expressed in terms of the amount of carbon dioxide that would have the same impact.

Beware carbon toe-prints

The most common abuse of the phrase carbon footprint is to miss
out some or even most of the emissions caused, whatever activity or
item is being discussed. For example, many online carbon calculator
websites will tell you that your carbon footprint is a certain size based
purely on your home energy and personal travel habits, while ignoring
all of the goods and services you purchase.

Similarly, a magazine publisher might claim to have measured its carbon footprint but in doing so looked only at its office and cars while ignoring the much greater emissions caused by the printing house that produces the magazines themselves. These kinds of carbon footprint are actually more like carbon 'toe-prints' - they don't give the full picture.

Direct versus indirect emissions

Much of the confusion around footprints comes down to the distinction between 'direct' and 'indirect' emissions. The true carbon footprint of a plastic toy, for example, includes not only direct emissions resulting from the manufacturing process and the transportation of the toy to the shop: it also includes a whole host of indirect emissions, such as those caused by the extraction and processing of the oil used to make the plastic in the first place. These are just a few of the processes involved. If you think about it, tracing back all the things that have to happen to make that toy leads to an infinite number of pathways, most of which are infinitesimally small. To make the point clearly, let's try following just one of those pathways. The staff in the offices of the plastic factory used paper clips made of steel. Within the footprint of that steel is a small allocation to take account of the maintenance of a digger in the iron mine that the steel originally came from ... and so on for ever. The carbon footprint of the plastic toy includes the lot, so working it out accurately is no easy task.

To give another example, the true carbon footprint of driving a car includes not only the emissions that come out of the exhaust pipe, but also all the emissions that take place when oil is extracted, shipped, refined into fuel and transported to the petrol station, not to mention the substantial emissions caused by producing and maintaining the car.

The essential but impossible measure

The carbon footprint, as I have defined it, is the climate change metric that we need to be looking at. The dilemma is that it is also impossible to pin down accurately. We don't stand a hope of being able to understand how the impact of our bananas compares with the impact of all the other things we might buy instead unless we have some way of taking into account the farming, the transport, the storage and the processes that feed into those stages. So how should we deal with a situation in which the thing we need to understand is impossibly complex?

One common response is to give up and measure something easier, even if that means losing most of what you are interested in off the radar. The illusionist Derren Brown refers to one of his core techniques as the misdirection of attention: by focusing his audience on something irrelevant he can make them miss the bit that matters. Examples include an airport waxing lyrical about the energy efficiency of its buildings without mentioning the flights themselves.

The same thing can happen by accident. If you settle for a toe-print,
there is a very good chance it will misdirect your attention away from
the big deals. An alternative response to the dilemma, and the approach that this book is all about, is to do the best job you can, despite the difficulties, of understanding the whole picture. My work is about making the most realistic estimates that are possible and practical, and being honest about the uncertainty.

See more about carbon footprints.

This article is drawn from How Bad Are Bananas? The Carbon Footprint of Everything by Mike Berners-Lee

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is a carbon footprint? | Mike Berners-Lee

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Carbon footprint is a horribly abused phrase, so it's worth spelling out exactly what it means. When talking about climate change, footprint is a metaphor for the total impact that something has. And carbon is a shorthand for all the different greenhouse gases that contribue to global warming.

# data[].attributes.headline
Monetary and financial authorities across the world’s largest economies aren’t practicing what they preach on climate

# data[].attributes.subject
Monetary and financial authorities across the world’s largest economies aren’t practicing what they preach on climate

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Absence of high impact climate policies among G20 central banks, report reveals
London, 31 March 2020 - Monetary and financial authorities across the world's largest economies aren't practicing what they preach on climate, according to a new report published today by research and campaign group Positive Money.

Endorsed by 24 leading research institutes and NGOs, Positive Money's 'Green Central Banking Scorecard' assesses the relative progress G20 central banks have made on sustainability in relation to research and advocacy, monetary policy, financial policy, as well as other ways they are leading by example, and sets out what actions policymakers could be taking to tackle environmental breakdown.

The results show that while 14 out of 20 central banks scored full marks on their research and advocacy efforts, this has so far rarely translated into concrete action, with overall scores dragged down by a stark lack of green monetary and financial policies across the board.

China tops this year's scorecard with an aggregate score of 50 out of 130, which equates to a mediocre 'C' grade in the scorecard. This reflects the fact that, while China's monetary and financial authorities have taken steps to steer lending towards greener activities, even policymakers in the top ranking countries still have a long way to go to align finance with the climate goals governments have committed to.

The report reveals an absence of high-impact policies that meaningfully reduce financial support for fossil fuels across the G20. In cases where central banks have integrated climate into their policies, the focus has been on financial disclosures, stress tests, and encouraging lending towards green assets, rather than crucial steps to wind down financial support for fossil-fuel-intensive and ecologically harmful activities.

The authors call for policymakers to urgently remedy this policy shortfall by taking action to exclude unsustainable activities from the assets they purchase and accept as collateral for lending, and for financial regulation to penalise high-carbon lending, with higher capital requirements to more accurately reflect the risk of fossil fuel investments.

As well as being a necessary prerequisite for central banks' goals of maintaining price and financial stability and supporting government policy, the report also argues that the Covid-19 pandemic, which has origins in ecological degradation, strengthens the case for central banks taking a more proactive and interventionist role in promoting sustainability.

Positive Money's report comes after the 2021 Banking on Climate Change report from Rainforest Action Network and other NGOs last week revealed that the world's 60 largest private banks have financed fossil fuels to the tune of $3.8 trillion since the Paris Agreement in 2015, with a 10% increase in fossil fuel expansion projects in 2020.

The report comes as G20 finance ministers and central bankers are set to meet on 7-8 April to discuss a new Action Plan to address global challenges including climate and environment-related risks.
David Barmes, Positive Money economist and lead author of the report, said:

"While it's positive that central bankers are 'talking the talk' by featuring climate more prominently in speeches and research, there has been a widespread failure to 'walk the walk' by turning these words into concrete policy action.

"The 2008 crash showed financial markets cannot be left to self-regulate in the face of systemic risk, but by failing to confront the climate crisis we are repeating the same mistakes on an even bigger scale. Global finance will continue to generate instability and environmental breakdown until central banks and supervisors reshape the financial system to better serve people and the planet.

"Protecting environmental stability is a prerequisite for maintaining monetary and financial stability. If central banks are to fulfil their core mandates and support governments' climate targets, they must step up action to clamp down on dirty financial flows."

On the Bank of England falling behind other countries' central banks ahead of the UK hosting COP26, Katie Kedward, Policy Fellow at UCL's Institute for Innovation and Public Research, said:

"The Bank of England has taken a leading role in its research and advocacy on climate change. With only months to go before the UK hosts the crucial COP26 summit, this research underscores that the Bank of England can go further to contribute to the greening of the financial system.

"The newly updated green mandate from the government will now help the Bank to take further steps through its monetary and financial policies, and it is positive to see the recent commitment to decarbonise the corporate bond purchase portfolio. In order to 'lead by example', the Bank of England should explore how to implement other important policies, such as climate-aligned capital requirements to actively penalise high-carbon lending."

Notes

1. View the report in full: http://positivemoney.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Positive-Money-Green-Central-Banking-Scorecard-Report.-EMBARGOED-Mar-31-00-01-BST-SP.pdf

2. The report will be launched at 13:30 BST on 31 March with an online event, featuring contributions from Official Monetary and Financial Institutions Forum (OMFIF) chief economist and director of research, Danae Kyriakopoulou, International Institute of Green Finance director general Yao Wang, and Reclaim Finance executive director Lucie Pinson. Register to attend here: https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/central-banks-leaders-or-laggards-in-the-climate-challenge-tickets-146926684669

3. For more on how finance is funding fossil fuels, see the latest Banking on Climate Chaos report: https://www.ran.org/bankingonclimatechaos2021/

4. For more information or to arrange a briefing/interview with a spokesperson, please contact press@positivemoney.org.uk or Anna Pick on 07948802104

Positive Money campaigns for a money and banking system which supports a fair, democratic and sustainable economy. Set up in the aftermath of the financial crisis, Positive Money is a not-for-profit company funded by charitable trusts and foundations, as well as small donations from its network of over 65,000 supporters. www.positivemoney.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Central banks failing to match green rhetoric with action - report

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Absence of high impact climate policies among G20 central banks, report reveals London, 31 March 2020 - Monetary and financial authorities across the world's largest economies aren't practicing what they preach on climate, according to a new report published today by research and campaign group Positive Money.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Advice on insulation, energy bills, using heating controls, smart meters, boilers, heat pumps, solar panels, keeping warm at home, meters, heaters and more ...

These are our downloadable fact sheets. They are all PDFs and are around 1 MB.

We have a web page for most of these topics, and these can all be found here.

Some of our fact sheets are available in Arabic, Polish, Somali and Easy-Read.

Some speakers of Arabic, Polish and Somali are relative newcomers to the UK and experience difficulties ensuring their homes are adequately heated, insulated and ventilated, and also in dealing with energy companies. We hope that these leaflets can help remedy some of the most widespread problems, making homes warmer and healthier.

The leaflets are free to download and distribute, and we encourage you to share them widely.

Arabic (modern standard)

Polish

Our Polish translations are available in regular and also easy-read format.

Somali

Easy Read

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Home energy fact sheets - Centre for Sustainable Energy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Advice on insulation, energy bills, using heating controls, smart meters, boilers, heat pumps, solar panels, meters, heaters and more

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When his family washing machine stopped working just a few months outside its warranty, Johan Rääf was less than impressed.

"It was really strange because it's not been used every day, or not even that much," says the 36-year-old from Stockholm.

Like many Swedish parents, Mr Rääf deals with the constant stream of laundry generated by his two small children by using the larger communal washers available in his apartment block, alongside the machine in his own flat. "So, it was a problem that needed to be fixed, but it wasn't like my life depended on it," he laughs.

He paid a local repair firm 1,500 Swedish krona (£130; $180) to provide and fit a replacement part the following day; making use of a Swedish tax break which halves the cost of hiring people to repair white goods in your home.

But fixing things that break down often isn't that easy, cost-effective or even desirable. Most of us tend to replace things that break instead of mending them.

According to iFixit, which campaigns for the right-to-repair, at least 30% of electric and electronic products are discarded when they are still in a repairable state. This kind of rubbish is becoming one of the world's fastest growing waste streams.

Many customers don't repair household items simply because they have become more affordable to produce and buy new, in recent decades, says Thomas Opsomer, a spokesperson for iFixit.

He estimates that the price of a new washing machine adjusted for inflation is between 10 and 20 times cheaper now than it would have been in the 1960s.

"If a new appliance is very cheap, then already that makes the case for repair harder," he says.

At Lund University in southern Sweden, sustainable business researcher Jessika Luth Richter says there's also been a big cultural shift in how we value things we own.

We live in an "age of fast consumption" where gadgets have become viewed as "disposable" and "it's fashionable to upgrade our products to the latest models available", she says.

Meanwhile, brands are in tough competition with one another, and seek to lure us in with special offers and speedy delivery options to encourage us to buy new products and enjoy the "instant gratification or instant hit".

Washing machine makers might not agree with that. Britain's Ebac already designs its washing machines to last 10 years. Founder and chief executive John Elliott thinks most washing machines are "quite well built", but does have his doubts about the cheapest ones on the market.

"There's some cheap washing machines - they sell them at a price lower than we can buy the components. That tells you something, doesn't it?"

While Mr Rääf was able to find a company in his Stockholm neighbourhood to fix his washing machine, Ms Luth Richter says the number of local repair stores has fallen across Europe, as our appetite for this kind of fast consumption has grown.

That means even customers who want to live more sustainably can find it hard to source the expertise to fix broken products at an affordable price. iFixit's research suggests people aren't willing to pay repair costs that amount to more than 30% of the price of a new product.

"What most of them are feeling is that they don't know what it will cost and they don't know when they can get it [repaired]. And that makes all the difference," agrees Måns Ljungmark, a manager at Swedish appliance brand Electrolux, which has its headquarters in Stockholm.

The company's actively trying to encourage more customers to fix broken products as it tries to become a more sustainable business. It has increased its online and phone advice, to help enable customers to carry out simple repairs themselves. Plus, it is trialling a £150 (1,785kr) flat fee repairs service in parts of Sweden and in Denmark.

"We are taking a risk because some repairs are more expensive and some repairs are less expensive, because we want to enable repairs," says Mr Ljungmark. The initiative could drive down profits from new sales, he accepts, but he hopes the business will still benefit in the long run, from "building loyalty and trust".

So far the flat-fee service is proving popular, with a 20% increase in bookings during 2020. In Sweden, it's been enabled by the same tax break Johan Rääf used to fix his washing machine. White goods repairs have increased steadily since they were included in the scheme (known as ROT) in 2017, and jumped by 16% in 2020.

There's a lack of data on customer motivations, but the Swedish Tax Agency and manufacturers like Electrolux speculate that job losses and economic uncertainty brought on by the pandemic may be encouraging more people to repair rather than splash out on newer products.

Sustainability campaigners want more countries to offer similar tax incentives or other "economic levers" to help promote repairs. But with public finances already squeezed during the pandemic, that could be a challenge even for governments with a strong environmental agenda.

Another method is punishing manufacturers that make it deliberately tricky to repair products. In the EU a new law has just come in, forcing firms to supply spare parts for machines for up to 10 years and to design products to make them longer-lasting. The rules apply to washing machines, dishwashers, fridges and lighting. Repairs should be possible with commonly-available tools and without damaging the product.

Campaigners say it is a step in the right direction. But the law doesn't specify anything about the price of parts. Plus only professionals, not consumers, will be able carry out the repairs, a move backed by manufacturers who were worried about risk and liability.

At iFixit, Mr Opsomer is also worried that as products in our homes become more high-tech and connected, this could "introduce new possibilities for failure and make things harder to fix".

But manufacturers like Electrolux argue the opposite. Måns Ljungmark says that as our household products become smarter, this will actually help enable repairs and longevity. For example, if your dishwasher can suggest when you need to rinse a filter, this may prevent a future breakdown.

However this still leaves consumers with a dilemma: buy a shiny new smart product designed to enable sustainability, or repair something older with fewer functions.

Sustainability specialists insist it is almost always both cheaper and more sustainable to stick with what you've got. If you throw away a product, you're both contributing to the two billion tonnes of rubbish the world generates each year, and adding to the planet's carbon footprint by buying a new item, often made from newly-mined materials.

But experts are split on whether profit-driven companies or fast-consuming customers will really be able to adjust their habits.

"As long as it is more profitable for a company to sell a new product than to repair that product, a company will be under very much pressure from their shareholders to do just that," argues Mr Opsomer.

Jessika Luth Richter is more optimistic that it will become both easier and trendier to fix stuff in future. "The more people that are repairing and are choosing to buy repair services or more repairable products, the more we will see this becoming mainstream," she says.

"And it used to be mainstream. So that's what makes me positive too, that. It is in some ways a return to what we used to be able as a society to do more of."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When his family washing machine stopped working just a few months outside its warranty, Johan Rääf was less than impressed. "It was really strange because it's not been used every day, or not even that much," says the 36-year-old from Stockholm.

# data[].attributes.headline
My HERU (home energy recycling unit), a heat pump run on the very materials that we no longer want and have such a problem getting rid of. 

# data[].attributes.subject
My HERU (home energy recycling unit), a heat pump run on the very materials that we no longer want and have such a problem getting rid of. 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I live on the edge of the River Ilen where the river is still tidal. Every so often I walk along the river's edge collecting waste plastic, glass bottles and tins or aluminium cans that have washed up along the shore line.

I put it in plastic bags and phone the council who send someone to come and collect it and take it to a municipal site. I go home, have a cup of tea and feel a mix of righteousness, sadness and frustration, because I know that on the next high tide more rubbish will get dumped on the edge of the river and more rubbish from the edge of the river will re-enter the waterways.

Sadly, research shows that most of what I pick up will either go to landfill or end up back in the water on some far-flung shore.

Tins, bottles and plastic need to be clean if they are to be to be recycled. If the plastic I pick up is not clean, it will contaminate the recycling stream. If I mix recyclable plastic with non-recyclable plastic, I will contaminate the recycling stream.

According to figures from Repak: In Ireland, 100,000 tonnes of contaminated recyclable material is sent to landfill each year, causing considerable damage to the environment. Repak estimates that each person in Ireland generates 61 kg of plastic packaging waste per year. Too much of that ends up in the ocean.

Government policy to improve the environment has consistently encouraged recycling, however the material that is sent for recycling is mostly shipped to Asia. Indeed, waste plastic has become an important mainstream trade. Global annual imports and exports of plastic waste have been rapidly increasing since 1993. In 2016 alone, about half of all plastic waste intended for recycling was exported, with China taking most of it.

Collectively, China and Hong Kong have imported 72.4 per cent of all plastic waste. Hong Kong acts as an entry port into China, with most of the plastic waste that has been imported to Hong Kong (63pc) also going directly to China as an export. Out of all plastic waste imported into Asia, only about 20 per cent is recyclable. This 20 per cent is removed and traded whilst the other 80 per cent is dumped into landfill or the riverbanks and finishes up in the ocean.

Most of the plastic that I pick up from the banks of the river, in an effort to stop it entering the oceans, makes an expensive journey across the world and ends up in the ocean; because we simply give our waste problem to other countries; who just like us, do not really have the resources to deal effectively with it.

In 2013, the Chinese Green Fence campaign saw intensive inspections by China of incoming loads of waste material, in an effort to enforce import regulations.

This resulted in a reduction of plastic waste accepted at the Chinese border, with some shipments being turned away and sent back to the source countries.

As China tightened up it's laws and refused to accept much of the West's plastic waste, other countries followed with Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam bringing in restrictions in 2018.

January 1, 2021 saw the new legislation making shipping of mixed plastics from Europe to underdeveloped countries illegal.

Data from Eurostat shows that Ireland produces the highest volume of plastic waste per person in the EU. This leaves us with a significant problem.

Nik Spencer of Mission Resources states: "The issue of protecting our environment from our own 'waste' is critical. The continuing action of discarding material with no further purpose, to the well evidenced and documented broken 'waste' system in the blind faith it is not causing harm to the environment, must be significantly reduced with haste, to avoid untold environmental and human health issues.

This requires a Paradigm Shift in our way of thinking, driven by Life Cycle Assessment."

The paradigm shift Nik is talking about is to stop thinking of 'waste' and instead call it 'resource'.

His view is that every home and every business should manage this valuable resource at source, cutting out the need for expensive transport to central collection areas and redistribution.

Nik's solution is slow pyrolysis, using the resource in individual waste-to-energy plants connected to a boiler, hot water tank and your drain. You open the device's lid, put in your rubbish, which can be anything from spoiled food to grass cuttings to used nappies and plastic packaging. Close the lid. Press the start button. Walk away.

His company has created My HERU (home energy recycling unit), a heat pump run on the very materials that we no longer want and have such a problem getting rid of.

Nik says all materials' lifecycles should be examined so that at the end of their lifecycle there should be nothing that could damage the environment. He describes pyrolysis as the speeding up of a natural process. "Bury a dinosaur or a tree in the earth in a lack of oxygen" he told me "and wait for millions of years whilst the heat from the earth transforms it into hydrocarbons. HERU does exactly that process but speeds it up."

Using HERU produces a very small amount of oily vapour that passes over the heat exchangers and condenses. The oil content is washed off the heat exchangers and along with any chlorine flushed down the drain. Removing the chlorine before the combustion stage avoids dangerous dioxins being produced. The combustion stage produces syngas which is scrubbed through a water screen filter, passes through a cyclone to spin off the moisture, through a compressor, and thence directed to a storage tank until it's needed by your boiler.

All that is left is ash containing a gritty substance called lye. The final stage involves the HERU pressure-washing its own innards to flush the ash down the drain. Lye helps clean the sewers and because it is alkaline it helps neutralise the sulphuric acid drained to sewers by modern boilers. This sulphuric acid inhibits the bacteria used in water treatment plants, so neutralising it is helpful to the water companies.

We urgently need to find elegant solutions to our environmental problems.

However, we not only need technological solutions and community efforts but we also need the political will to respond to those technological solutions, creating policy that supports them and puts them within reach by using subsidies and grants. We need policy that allows communities to choose a regenerative future and works on clearing up our unsustainable past.

Stop thinking 'waste' start thinking 'resource'.

Find more about HERU at www.myheru.com.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
When zero waste is far from zero - it can be a plus

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I live on the edge of the River Ilen where the river is still tidal. Every so often I walk along the river's edge collecting waste plastic, glass bottles and tins or aluminium cans that have washed up along the shore line.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Committee on Climate Change has today published a report that urges the Government to accelerate a ban on diesel and petrol cars.

The Government has proposed plans to ban diesel and petrol vehicles by 2040. However, a new report has said that this is too long and that the ban should be enforced from 2030.

Air pollution currently contributes to up to 36,000 deaths in the UK each year, while figures from the World Health Organization (WHO) show that over half of all premature deaths related to air pollution on a global scale are due to heart disease and stroke.

Research funded by the British Heart Foundation has previously found that even short-term exposure to diesel exhaust has harmful effects on the heart and circulatory system, promoting blood clotting and putting the heart under additional stress, both of which could increase the risk of a heart attack or stroke in people who are vulnerable.

Unfortunately, the UK's legal limit of PM2.5 - dangerous particles caused by air pollution that has links with poor cardiovascular health - is not as strict as the levels recommended by the WHO.

The British Heart Foundation believes that adopting the WHO's air quality guidelines into UK law is critical in protecting the public's health. While the Clean Air Strategy, published in January, made a commitment to reduce the number of people living in areas where air pollution is above the WHO's recommended limits, many vulnerable people, including those who already have existing heart and circulatory conditions, are currently exposed to dangerous levels of air pollution.

John Maingay, our Director of Policy and Influencing, said:

"It is encouraging that the Committee on Climate Change is urging a ban on diesel and petrol cars by 2030, rather than 2040. This positive step in the right direction will help us on the way to meeting the WHO's air quality targets.

"We now need to see the rapid introduction of electric vehicle charging points and infrastructure on a wider scale to meet demands and help people to switch to greener modes of transport. But this is only part of the bold action we need to see across government, to support an ambitious plan to meet stricter legal limits for air pollution and truly protect the health of the nation."
Find out more about air pollution

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BHF welcomes calls to ban diesel and petrol cars by 2030

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Committee on Climate Change has today published a report that urges the Government to accelerate a ban on diesel and petrol cars. The Government has proposed plans to ban diesel and petrol vehicles by 2040. However, a new report has said that this is too long and that the ban should be enforced from 2030.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Last year was a record breaker for the UK's wind power industry.

Wind power generation reached its highest ever level, at 17.2GW on 18 December, while wind power achieved its biggest share of UK energy production, at 60% on 26 August.

Yet occasionally the huge offshore wind farms pump out far more electricity than the country needs - such as during the first Covid-19 lockdown last spring when demand for electricity sagged.

But what if you could use that excess power for something else?

"What we're aiming to do is generate hydrogen directly from offshore wind," says Stephen Matthews, hydrogen lead at sustainability consultancy ERM.

His firm's project, Dolphyn, aims to fit floating wind turbines with desalination equipment to remove salt from seawater, and electrolysers to split the resulting freshwater into oxygen and the sought-after hydrogen.

The idea of using excess wind energy to make hydrogen has sparked great interest, not least because governments are looking to move towards greener energy systems within the next 30 years, under the terms of the Paris climate agreement.

Hydrogen is predicted to be an important component in these systems and may be used in vehicles or in power plants. But for that to happen, production of the gas, which produces zero greenhouse gas emissions when burned, will need to dramatically increase in the coming decades.

Mr Matthews says his firm's project is just getting going, with a prototype system using a floating wind turbine of roughly 10 megawatt capacity planned, but not yet built.

It's possible that the system could be based in Scotland and the aim is to start producing hydrogen around 2024 or 2025.

But there are many other ventures in this area besides Dolphyn.

Wind turbine maker Siemens Gamesa and energy firm Siemens Energy are ploughing 120m euros ($145m; £105m) into the development of an offshore turbine with a built-in electrolyser.

German energy company Tractebel is exploring the possibility of building a large-scale, offshore hydrogen production plant powered by nearby wind turbines; and UK-headquartered Neptune Energy is seeking to convert an old oil platform into a hydrogen production station, which will pump hydrogen ashore to the Netherlands via pipes that once transported natural gas.

It is more efficient to pipe hydrogen back to land rather than burning it at sea and generating electricity there, notes Mr Matthews. This is because of the losses involved when sending electricity over long distances along undersea cables. Laying those cables is also expensive.

All of the excitement around hybrid wind energy and hydrogen generation systems is partly down to climate commitments but economics are also involved.

Large-scale hydrogen electrolysers are becoming more available while the costs of installing wind turbines has fallen "dramatically", says James Carton, assistant professor in sustainable energy at Dublin City University.

He and others think the time is right to kick-start large-scale hydrogen electrolysis at sea, though the idea has been around for many years.

Oyster is yet another project in this area, and involves a consortium of companies including Danish energy firm Ørsted and British electrolyser specialists ITM Power, among others.

In the first instance, a wind turbine will power an onshore electrolyser that will churn out hydrogen. The device will be exposed to sea spray to simulate, to a degree, the harsh environment facing offshore equipment. ITM intends to design a system compact enough to fit into a single wind turbine.

The firm's chief executive, Graham Cooley, points out that it is much easier to store molecules such as hydrogen than electrons in batteries.

"All the renewable energy companies... they've realised they've got a new product," he adds. "Now they can supply renewable molecules to the gas grid and industry."

The Oyster consortium hopes to have shown off a demonstrator of its system within 18 months.

Among the many potential uses for hydrogen is as a fuel for gas-burning boilers in homes. Converting the domestic gas grid to provide hydrogen, and fitting homes with boilers capable of burning it, would be a huge task.

However, it would mean that excess wind energy could in principle be used to supply this giant system, meaning very little of that energy would go to waste, says Mr Carton, referring to the gas main pipes scattered around the UK and Ireland: "We have a big tank, it's just a really long tank in the ground."

For some, this is all very exciting. But there are hurdles yet to overcome. A spokesman for the wind energy industry body WindEurope says that while renewable hydrogen produced via wind-powered electrolysis is "future-proof", a decade or so of technological development is required before these systems will have a larger impact.

Jon Gluyas, Ørsted/Ikon chair in geoenergy, carbon capture and storage at Durham University, adds that the real question is whether it is cost-effective to set up such equipment at scale. Proponents, unsurprisingly, argue it is - but with energy systems the proof is only ever in the pudding. Ultimately, Prof Gluyas says a mix of different technologies and approaches will be needed for countries like the UK to be carbon neutral.

For Mr Carton, the vision remains tantalising. Schemes that solve the problem of wind's variability by using excess power to good use could be transformative, he argues: "It'll change the way we look at renewables."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The global race to produce hydrogen offshore

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Last year was a record breaker for the UK's wind power industry. Wind power generation reached its highest ever level, at 17.2GW on 18 December, while wind power achieved its biggest share of UK energy production, at 60% on 26 August.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Oil and gas giant sets sights on developing science-based climate targets, as hydrogen, nature based solutions, carbon capture, utility business, and electric vehicle infrastructure all earmarked for increased investment

Shell has today launched a major new green plan to ramp up investments in low carbon technologies and natural carbon capture efforts, align its decarbonisation goals with climate science, and seek regular advisory consent from shareholders for an "accelerated" net zero transition strategy.

The oil and gas giant confirmed its total carbon emissions peaked in 2018 at 1.7 gigatonnes, while its oil production peaked the following year in 2019, as it outlined its most comprehensive plan to date to become a net zero energy company by 2050.

Last week the Anglo-Dutch firm reported record-breaking losses of around £16bn during a torrid year for the oil and gas industry, having been hit hard by plummeting demand and even negative barrel prices triggered by the coronavirus pandemic and resulting economic disruption.

But from today, CEO Ben van Beurden said Shell would reshape its organisation to better integrate its business strategy, portfolio, and environmental ambitions under a single 'Powering Progress' umbrella, as part of an "accelerated strategy" to drive down emissions while delivering value for shareholders.

"We must give our customers the products and services they want and need - products that have the lowest environmental impact," he said. "At the same time, we will use our established strengths to build on our competitive portfolio as we make the transition to be a net zero emissions business in step with society."

Although it last year announced a landmark 2050 net zero target - covering its core business and the use of its oil and gas products - Shell is one of many oil and gas companies continuing to face increasing pressure from stakeholders, regulators, and wider society to set out a credible decarbonisation pathway.

To date, the firm has only set decarbonisation targets based on the 'intensity' of its CO2, which critics have frequently pointed out would potentially allow Shell to grow its overall carbon footprint if demand rose even while hitting its intensity goals. And today, the firm unveiled a suite of new short-term new goals, based on a 2016 starting point, to reduce its carbon intensity by six to eight per cent by 2023, 20 per cent by 2030, 45 per cent by 2035, and 100 per cent by 2050.

However, it also promised to work with the Science Based Targets Initiative as well as the Transition Pathways Initiative to "develop standards for the industry and align with those standards".

Such a move would make Shell the first major oil and gas companies to set independently-verified decarbonisation targets aligned with climate science based on the 1.5C global warming pathway set out in the Paris Agreement.

Moreover, starting at its upcoming 2021 AGM, Shell said it would submit an energy transition plan to shareholders for an advisory vote, making it the first oil and gas firm to do so. "We will update that plan every three years and seek an advisory vote on the progress made each year," it said.

Such commitments underscore the growing competition between European oil majors to bolster their social license to operate in decarbonising economies, with rival oil and gas giant BP similarly announcing expanded efforts to deliver net zero emissions by 2050 under its new CEO Bernard Looney.

However, many environmental campaigners and some investors and analysts remain highly sceptical of the efforts from Shell, BP, and other oil industry players to curb their emissions given their on-going investment in new fossil fuel projects.

Indeed, while confirming its intention to build a low carbon business "of significant scale" by the early 2030s, Shell today reiterated that it aims to continue using its upstream oil and gas business to generate cash for returns to shareholders and to fund investment in new growth areas for its business.

As such, in the near term the firm is aiming to invest $2-3bn per year in renewables and energy solutions, a figure that still pales in comparison to its plan to invest $16-17bn per year on its fossil fuels and chemicals business.

Nevertheless, the company said it plans to continue to expand its interests in selling electricity, a move it began in earnest after the acquisition of First Utility - since renamed Shell Energy - in 2017. It today set a goal to sell around 560TWh of power a year by 2030, doubling the amount it sells currently, while serving around 15 million retail and business customers worldwide.

Hydrogen is also a key pillar of Shell's revamped strategy, with the firm aiming to continue building on its "leading position" in the technology by continuing to develop integrated "clean" hydrogen hubs to help fuel expected growing demand from heavy industry and transport. The firm said it aims to achieve a double-digit share of the growing market for clean hydrogen.

Meanwhile, it also aims to invest around $100m a year in "high quality, independently-verified" nature-based solutions projects - such as forestation - to build "a significant and profitable business" in helping customers to offset residual emissions in support of net zero emissions targets.

The new service comes in addition to plans to use nature-based solutions to offset around 120 million tonnes of its own emissions and work to develop capacity for an additional 25 million tonnes a year of carbon capture and storage (CCS), it said. Shell currently has interests in three CCS projects both in operation and under development, with a combined capacity to capture around 4.5 million tonnes of CO2.

The company also holds a major stake in the electric vehicle charging market, which it today said it plans to expand further, from a global network of over 60,000 charge points today to around 500,000 by 2025.

And it is investing in growing its biofuels production and distribution business, having sold more than 10 billion litres of biofuels in 2019, Shell said.

"Whether our customers are motorists, households or businesses, we will use our global scale and trusted brand to grow in markets where demand for cleaner products and services is strongest, delivering more predictable cash flows and generating higher returns," Van Beurden said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Shell confirms oil production has peaked as it unveils 'accelerated' green plan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Oil and gas giant sets sights on developing science-based climate targets, as hydrogen, nature based solutions, carbon capture, utility business, and electric vehicle infrastructure all earmarked for increased investment Shell has today launched a major new green plan to ramp up investments in low carbon technologies and natural carbon capture efforts, align its decarbonisation goals with climate science, and seek regular advisory consent from shareholders for an "accelerated" net zero transition strategy.

# data[].attributes.headline
Lifestyle change and system change are two sides of the same coin 

# data[].attributes.subject
Lifestyle change and system change are two sides of the same coin 

# data[].attributes.body
UNEP Emissions Gap report

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Lifestyle change and system change are two sides of the same coin - UNEP Emissions Gap report

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction to climate change

Q&A on what climate change is and impacts of climate change Joanna Haigh and Ed Hawkins

Q&A on what the assembly will consider and why tackling climate change has proved difficult Chris Stark and Rebecca Willis

Introduction to climate change: written briefing from Expert Leads

Overarching ethical questions on how to get to net zero

Q&A on ethical questions Tony Juniper, Kirsten Leggatt, Chris Stark

Q&A on ethical questions Fernanda Balata, Professor Paul Ekins, Modi Mwatsama

Overarching practical and strategic questions on how to get to net zero

Q&A on where our energy comes from and how we use energy, and key practical issues to consider for how the UK gets to net zero Chris Stark, Professor Rebecca Willis

Considering evidence

Where our energy comes from

Q&A on where our energy comes from Jenny Hill, Professor Jim Watson

How we travel

How we travel: written briefing from Expert Leads

Surface transport

Air travel

In the home

In the Home: written briefing from Expert Leads

Challenges and approaches

Ways of making change happen

What we buy

What we buy: written briefing from Expert Leads

Food, farming and land use

Food, farming and land use: written briefing from Expert Leads

Where our electricity comes from

Removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere

Coronavirus and net zero

MPs address the Assembly

Addressing the Assembly and Q&A Rachel Reeves MP

Message of thanks Mel Stride MP, Chair of the Treasury Select Committee

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Q&A on what climate change is and impacts of climate change Joanna Haigh and Ed Hawkins Q&A on what the assembly will consider and why tackling climate change has proved difficult Chris Stark and Rebecca Willis Introduction to climate change : written briefing from Expert Leads Q&A on ethical questions

# data[].attributes.headline
Your Personal Choices Do Make A Difference

# data[].attributes.subject
Your Personal Choices Do Make A Difference

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
1. Will the Manatee With the Trump Graffiti Be OK?

2. The World Needs Genetically Robust Corpse Flowers

3. Why People Believe in Conspiracy Theories

4. Why I Stopped Defending GMOs

Two weeks ago, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released a dire report that made crystal clear that we have about a decade to stop catastrophic levels of climate change. The report caught fire for another extremely near deadline: It suggests that if we don't manage to dramatically shift carbon emissions, we'll start feeling the brunt of the effects as soon as 2040. These dates have prompted a more urgent asking of the oft-discussed question: How do we start this herculean task?

Recent articles in Vox, the Guardian, and the Outline have warned that individuals "going green" in daily life won't make enough of a difference to be worth the effort. In fact, they argue, such efforts could actually make matters worse, as focusing on individual actions might distract people from pressuring corporations and government officials to lower greenhouse gas emissions and enact the broader policy change we need to meet our climate goals. These articles and others like them (including in Slate) tend to conclude that the only truly meaningful action people can take to influence our climate future is to vote.

Voting is crucial, but this perspective misses a large point of individual actions. We don't recommend taking personal actions like limiting plane rides, eating less meat, or investing in solar energy because all of these small tweaks will build up to enough carbon savings ( though it could help). We do so because people taking action in their personal lives is actually one of the best ways to get to a society that implements the policy-level change that is truly needed. Research on social behavior suggests lifestyle change can build momentum for systemic change. Humans are social animals, and we use social cues to recognize emergencies. People don't spring into action just because they see smoke; they spring into action because they see others rushing in with water. The same principle applies to personal actions on climate change.

Psychologists Bibb Latane and John Darley tested this exact scenario in a now-classic study. Participants filled out a survey in a quiet room, which suddenly began to fill with smoke (from a vent set up by the experimenters). When alone, participants left the room and reported the apparent fire. But in the presence of others who ignored the smoke, participants carried on as though nothing were wrong.

People don't spring into action just because they see smoke; they spring into action because they see others rushing in withwater.

The IPCC has sent up a flare on climate change, but this warning is not enough. Many people will need to see others making real changes instead of carrying on with business as usual. Ask yourself: Do you believe politicians and businesses will act as urgently as they need to if we keep living our lives as though climate change were not happening? Individual acts of conservation-alongside intense political engagement-are what signal an emergency to those around us, which will set larger changes in motion.

It's true that fossil fuel companies bear the lion's share of responsibility for this crisis, and that consumers buying efficient light bulbs will not set things right; we need government action to shift our energy sources from coal and gas to sunlight and wind. It's also true that shortsighted campaigns for lifestyle change can backfire. When campaigns focus only on easy consumer tweaks and say nothing about policy, they imply climate change requires little real effort and that consumers can fix this crisis alone.

But when individuals supplement policy efforts with substantial, sustained, and wide-ranging action, they inspire new social norms. These norms can then aggregate to large-scale impacts. For instance, mass lifestyle change-flying and driving less, eating less meat, heating and cooling homes less, reducing food waste- helps cover gaps where policy change would fall short of our climate goals. More importantly, social norms can spark collective action and move the needle on policy.

As in previous cultural shifts-like those around smoking or drunk driving-more people will need to see fossil fuels as an extreme danger to human health and safety. A powerful way to spread this attitude is to act like it in our own lives, minimizing the fossil fuels we burn. Climate scientist Peter Kalmus-who has not flown since 2012- summarizes this attitude: "I try to avoid burning fossil fuels, because it's clear that doing so causes real harm ... . I don't like harming others, so I don't fly." One person skipping a flight will not solve global warming alone, but when one person withdraws from a system that causes harm, they make that harm palpable to others.

How can we get large numbers of people to make such changes? Psychologists find that conservation behavior spreads across people. It's not enough to tell people they should conserve; people have to see what others do. For instance, the odds of someone buying solar panels for their roof go up for each home in the neighborhood that already has them. In fact, homes with solar panels more visible from the street have an even larger impact on neighbors. This is because people's actions reveal what they value. When people see their neighbors conserve energy, they infer that their community values environmental action.

When we enact personal change out of climate concern, we show that there is real support for laws aimed at enacting societalchange.

Advocates similarly gain credibility by walking the walk. In a study released this week, community organizers who owned solar panels themselves recruited 63 percent more homeowners to install solar panels than community organizers who did not. Again, people inferred that advocates with solar panels believed more in the importance of the issue.

What can you do when current norms promote unsustainable behaviors like frequent flying or eating large amounts of meat? Change the norms. And people will likely rapidly adapt. In one recent study, café patrons learned that 30 percent of Americans had recently changed their behavior by eating less meat. These patrons were twice as likely to order a meatless lunch compared with a control group (1 in 3 people versus 1 in 6). Why? Changing a habit takes effort; when people do it, they signal the importance of change. Change also signals that more people will curb their meat eating in the future, and people conform to this anticipated norm as if it were a current reality. Finally, change signals that anyone can take climate action, and eating less meat is not just for vegetarians.

As a rule of thumb, the more substantial the change you make, the more you signal the need for change. Recycling matters, but it is common and easy. When you order the veggie burger even though you're a meat lover, take a bus instead of an Uber, or skip a professional conference that requires air travel, you deliver a message that fossil fuels are dangerous and that climate change requires an urgent response.

How many people does it take to start change? Just one. This insight comes from research on "social dilemmas," or situations in which people can contribute towards communal well-being-as in reducing emissions and calling representatives-or can ride along for free while others do the work. Psychologists study these situations using tasks that pit individual gains against collective good. In one task, anonymous players can contribute money to a collective fund, which gets doubled and redistributed, or they can keep their money and benefit from the contributions of their fellows. Share more and the group benefits; keep more and you benefit. In general, people contribute more when they see others do it too- even if only one other person starts the trend at first. Climate change scholar Steve Westlake found this exact pattern in a recent survey: Among respondents who knew one person who gave up flying for the environment, half flew less themselves.

Flying less does reduce emissions. Crucially, though, social norms provide a backdrop for policy change. When people forge an initial commitment to a cause, like buying less meat, they often proceed to political commitments, like contacting a senator. People don't like to be hypocrites; they like harmony between their lifestyles and their politics. Rather than undermining political action, sustainable living prompts sustainable voting. A caveat: These benefits emerge when conservation requires some sacrifice. Easy, single-shot actions (like buying efficient lightbulbs) make us feel like we have done our part and can disengage. More challenging, ongoing actions (like changing our diets) propel us forward into action. Just as sacrifice convinces others that climate action is important, it convinces us of our own commitment; we start to see ourselves as climate advocates. Eating less meat creates a gateway to workplace advocacy-like encouraging digital meetings or lobbying for solar panels-which opens a door to signing petitions or protesting.

If people act on climate change in their daily lives, they will expect industry to do its part. People value reciprocity: We punish free riders who don't do their part and reward those who chip in-and businesses know it. They also pay attention to trends. For example, after roughly a decade of decline in per capita meat consumption, the CEO of Tyson Foods-the world's second-largest producer of chicken, beef, and pork- announced that the company would shift to more plant-based alternatives. Lyft recently announced it would offset carbon emissions from its rides. Google, Apple, Sony, T-Mobile, and others have committed to buying renewable energy. Did these companies make changes solely out of the goodness of their hearts? Of course not. Every company follows incentives-to manage public relations, meet consumer demand, and stand out from competitors. Where consumers go, industry incentives follow.

Politicians run a similar calculus to decide if environmental policies will get them re-elected. When we enact personal change out of climate concern, we show that there is real support for laws aimed at enacting societal change. Personal conservation might not achieve our climate goals, but it can convince politicians to pass laws that will.

For instance, California just passed a law known as SB 100: By 2045, the fifth-largest economy in the world will be powered by 100 percent renewable electricity. The bill was sponsored by state Sen. Kevin De León, who has challenged Dianne Feinstein for her Senate seat-a tough race in which any challenger needs good PR. If Californians had no reputation for energy conservation and environmental concern, would De León have taken a political risk anyway and prioritized passing SB 100? Perhaps not. In anonymous interviews, politicians who personally care about climate change have expressed hesitation to sponsor laws when they perceive insufficient constituent concern. Each individual's choices, especially when amplified through social influence, help create a social environment ripe for political change.

There are plenty of things to do about climate change beyond voting. Take a train or bus instead of a plane, even if inconvenient-in fact, especially when inconvenient. Take a digital meeting instead of an in-person one, even if you give up expensed travel. Go to a protest, invest in noncarbon energy, buy solar panels, eat at meatless restaurants, canvass for climate-conscious candidates. Do whichever of these you can, as conspicuously as you can. With each step, you communicate an emergency that needs all hands on deck. Individual action-across supermarkets, skies, roads, homes, workplaces, and ballot boxes-sounds an alarm that might just wake us from our collective slumber and build a foundation for the necessary political change.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Actually, Your Personal Choices Do Make a Difference in Climate Change

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Will the Manatee With the Trump Graffiti Be OK? The World Needs Genetically Robust Corpse Flowers Why People Believe in Conspiracy Theories Why I Stopped Defending GMOs Two weeks ago, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released a dire report that made crystal clear that we have about a decade to stop catastrophic levels of climate change.

# data[].attributes.headline
Reducing Your Carbon Footprint Still Matters

# data[].attributes.subject
Reducing Your Carbon Footprint Still Matters

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
1. Will the Manatee With the Trump Graffiti Be OK?

2. The World Needs Genetically Robust Corpse Flowers

3. Why People Believe in Conspiracy Theories

4. Why I Stopped Defending GMOs

Two weeks ago, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released a dire report that made crystal clear that we have about a decade to stop catastrophic levels of climate change. The report caught fire for another extremely near deadline: It suggests that if we don't manage to dramatically shift carbon emissions, we'll start feeling the brunt of the effects as soon as 2040. These dates have prompted a more urgent asking of the oft-discussed question: How do we start this herculean task?

Recent articles in Vox, the Guardian, and the Outline have warned that individuals "going green" in daily life won't make enough of a difference to be worth the effort. In fact, they argue, such efforts could actually make matters worse, as focusing on individual actions might distract people from pressuring corporations and government officials to lower greenhouse gas emissions and enact the broader policy change we need to meet our climate goals. These articles and others like them (including in Slate) tend to conclude that the only truly meaningful action people can take to influence our climate future is to vote.

Voting is crucial, but this perspective misses a large point of individual actions. We don't recommend taking personal actions like limiting plane rides, eating less meat, or investing in solar energy because all of these small tweaks will build up to enough carbon savings ( though it could help). We do so because people taking action in their personal lives is actually one of the best ways to get to a society that implements the policy-level change that is truly needed. Research on social behavior suggests lifestyle change can build momentum for systemic change. Humans are social animals, and we use social cues to recognize emergencies. People don't spring into action just because they see smoke; they spring into action because they see others rushing in with water. The same principle applies to personal actions on climate change.

Psychologists Bibb Latane and John Darley tested this exact scenario in a now-classic study. Participants filled out a survey in a quiet room, which suddenly began to fill with smoke (from a vent set up by the experimenters). When alone, participants left the room and reported the apparent fire. But in the presence of others who ignored the smoke, participants carried on as though nothing were wrong.

People don't spring into action just because they see smoke; they spring into action because they see others rushing in withwater.

The IPCC has sent up a flare on climate change, but this warning is not enough. Many people will need to see others making real changes instead of carrying on with business as usual. Ask yourself: Do you believe politicians and businesses will act as urgently as they need to if we keep living our lives as though climate change were not happening? Individual acts of conservation-alongside intense political engagement-are what signal an emergency to those around us, which will set larger changes in motion.

It's true that fossil fuel companies bear the lion's share of responsibility for this crisis, and that consumers buying efficient light bulbs will not set things right; we need government action to shift our energy sources from coal and gas to sunlight and wind. It's also true that shortsighted campaigns for lifestyle change can backfire. When campaigns focus only on easy consumer tweaks and say nothing about policy, they imply climate change requires little real effort and that consumers can fix this crisis alone.

But when individuals supplement policy efforts with substantial, sustained, and wide-ranging action, they inspire new social norms. These norms can then aggregate to large-scale impacts. For instance, mass lifestyle change-flying and driving less, eating less meat, heating and cooling homes less, reducing food waste- helps cover gaps where policy change would fall short of our climate goals. More importantly, social norms can spark collective action and move the needle on policy.

As in previous cultural shifts-like those around smoking or drunk driving-more people will need to see fossil fuels as an extreme danger to human health and safety. A powerful way to spread this attitude is to act like it in our own lives, minimizing the fossil fuels we burn. Climate scientist Peter Kalmus-who has not flown since 2012- summarizes this attitude: "I try to avoid burning fossil fuels, because it's clear that doing so causes real harm ... . I don't like harming others, so I don't fly." One person skipping a flight will not solve global warming alone, but when one person withdraws from a system that causes harm, they make that harm palpable to others.

How can we get large numbers of people to make such changes? Psychologists find that conservation behavior spreads across people. It's not enough to tell people they should conserve; people have to see what others do. For instance, the odds of someone buying solar panels for their roof go up for each home in the neighborhood that already has them. In fact, homes with solar panels more visible from the street have an even larger impact on neighbors. This is because people's actions reveal what they value. When people see their neighbors conserve energy, they infer that their community values environmental action.

When we enact personal change out of climate concern, we show that there is real support for laws aimed at enacting societalchange.

Advocates similarly gain credibility by walking the walk. In a study released this week, community organizers who owned solar panels themselves recruited 63 percent more homeowners to install solar panels than community organizers who did not. Again, people inferred that advocates with solar panels believed more in the importance of the issue.

What can you do when current norms promote unsustainable behaviors like frequent flying or eating large amounts of meat? Change the norms. And people will likely rapidly adapt. In one recent study, café patrons learned that 30 percent of Americans had recently changed their behavior by eating less meat. These patrons were twice as likely to order a meatless lunch compared with a control group (1 in 3 people versus 1 in 6). Why? Changing a habit takes effort; when people do it, they signal the importance of change. Change also signals that more people will curb their meat eating in the future, and people conform to this anticipated norm as if it were a current reality. Finally, change signals that anyone can take climate action, and eating less meat is not just for vegetarians.

As a rule of thumb, the more substantial the change you make, the more you signal the need for change. Recycling matters, but it is common and easy. When you order the veggie burger even though you're a meat lover, take a bus instead of an Uber, or skip a professional conference that requires air travel, you deliver a message that fossil fuels are dangerous and that climate change requires an urgent response.

How many people does it take to start change? Just one. This insight comes from research on "social dilemmas," or situations in which people can contribute towards communal well-being-as in reducing emissions and calling representatives-or can ride along for free while others do the work. Psychologists study these situations using tasks that pit individual gains against collective good. In one task, anonymous players can contribute money to a collective fund, which gets doubled and redistributed, or they can keep their money and benefit from the contributions of their fellows. Share more and the group benefits; keep more and you benefit. In general, people contribute more when they see others do it too- even if only one other person starts the trend at first. Climate change scholar Steve Westlake found this exact pattern in a recent survey: Among respondents who knew one person who gave up flying for the environment, half flew less themselves.

Flying less does reduce emissions. Crucially, though, social norms provide a backdrop for policy change. When people forge an initial commitment to a cause, like buying less meat, they often proceed to political commitments, like contacting a senator. People don't like to be hypocrites; they like harmony between their lifestyles and their politics. Rather than undermining political action, sustainable living prompts sustainable voting. A caveat: These benefits emerge when conservation requires some sacrifice. Easy, single-shot actions (like buying efficient lightbulbs) make us feel like we have done our part and can disengage. More challenging, ongoing actions (like changing our diets) propel us forward into action. Just as sacrifice convinces others that climate action is important, it convinces us of our own commitment; we start to see ourselves as climate advocates. Eating less meat creates a gateway to workplace advocacy-like encouraging digital meetings or lobbying for solar panels-which opens a door to signing petitions or protesting.

If people act on climate change in their daily lives, they will expect industry to do its part. People value reciprocity: We punish free riders who don't do their part and reward those who chip in-and businesses know it. They also pay attention to trends. For example, after roughly a decade of decline in per capita meat consumption, the CEO of Tyson Foods-the world's second-largest producer of chicken, beef, and pork- announced that the company would shift to more plant-based alternatives. Lyft recently announced it would offset carbon emissions from its rides. Google, Apple, Sony, T-Mobile, and others have committed to buying renewable energy. Did these companies make changes solely out of the goodness of their hearts? Of course not. Every company follows incentives-to manage public relations, meet consumer demand, and stand out from competitors. Where consumers go, industry incentives follow.

Politicians run a similar calculus to decide if environmental policies will get them re-elected. When we enact personal change out of climate concern, we show that there is real support for laws aimed at enacting societal change. Personal conservation might not achieve our climate goals, but it can convince politicians to pass laws that will.

For instance, California just passed a law known as SB 100: By 2045, the fifth-largest economy in the world will be powered by 100 percent renewable electricity. The bill was sponsored by state Sen. Kevin De León, who has challenged Dianne Feinstein for her Senate seat-a tough race in which any challenger needs good PR. If Californians had no reputation for energy conservation and environmental concern, would De León have taken a political risk anyway and prioritized passing SB 100? Perhaps not. In anonymous interviews, politicians who personally care about climate change have expressed hesitation to sponsor laws when they perceive insufficient constituent concern. Each individual's choices, especially when amplified through social influence, help create a social environment ripe for political change.

There are plenty of things to do about climate change beyond voting. Take a train or bus instead of a plane, even if inconvenient-in fact, especially when inconvenient. Take a digital meeting instead of an in-person one, even if you give up expensed travel. Go to a protest, invest in noncarbon energy, buy solar panels, eat at meatless restaurants, canvass for climate-conscious candidates. Do whichever of these you can, as conspicuously as you can. With each step, you communicate an emergency that needs all hands on deck. Individual action-across supermarkets, skies, roads, homes, workplaces, and ballot boxes-sounds an alarm that might just wake us from our collective slumber and build a foundation for the necessary political change.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Actually, Your Personal Choices Do Make a Difference in Climate Change

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Will the Manatee With the Trump Graffiti Be OK? The World Needs Genetically Robust Corpse Flowers Why People Believe in Conspiracy Theories Why I Stopped Defending GMOs Two weeks ago, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released a dire report that made crystal clear that we have about a decade to stop catastrophic levels of climate change.

# data[].attributes.body
Doughnut Economics Lab

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
1. Change the Goal - 1/7 Doughnut Economics