Category Archives: environment

Heathrow Luggage Mountain

Absolutely unbelievable!

According to this BBC News item there are now at least 15,000 (and maybe 20,000) pieces of luggage now stranded at Heathrow Airport’s brand spanking new Terminal 5.

And for a third day BA have cancelled around 20% of their flights out of Heathrow with many more apparently leaving without any luggage loaded.

What an unbelievable shambles.

When BA and BAA file for bankruptcy I wonder if the government will have the gall to pay off their shareholders? They’d just better not even think about it!

Yo, Ho, Ho and a Bottle of Duty Free

So after less than one day Heathrow’s sparkling new Terminal 5 has ground to a halt, despite all the much trumpeted testing which was done on the systems using thousands of volunteer members of the public. BAA and the staff appear to be blaming a crap luggage conveyor system. BA are blaming problems with “staff familiarisation”. That’s right; let’s blame the staff when our shiny new technology doesn’t work. Talk about appalling management; I was always taught that the first thing you do is defend your staff publicly (whatever you may have to do behind closed doors) – but that clearly isn’t good enough for BA.

Oh and all this after BAA has been forced to suspend it’s plan to fingerprint every passenger using T5 because the Office of the Information Commissioner says it’s illegal. And why were they going to thus abuse our civil liberties? Because they have been stupid enough to build T5 such that international and domestic passengers (aka. terrorists) can mingle after security checks and could swap boarding passes!

I wonder why I won’t be flying BA any more?

Full BBC News report.

Super-Cows and the Redesign of Farming

I always see Focus, the BBC’s science and technology magazine, and mostly I find it too superficial to satisfy to my scientific mind (not surprising really, it’s designed for interested amateurs, not former science professionals). But occasionally they have an interesting and thought-provoking article or comment. One such is in the current issue (April 2008) where Colin Tudge, zoologist, science writer and broadcaster, makes the case for the redesign of farming rather than the current trend towards super-livestock. Unfortunately the BBC doesn’t put the whole of the printed magazine online, so here is a heavily edited (but I hope undistorted) version of Tudge’s article; to read the whole thing you’ll have to buy the magazine.

The US government has approved the cloning of high-performance cattle, pigs, and goats … The idea is to make genetic copies of ‘elite’ animals: the ones that grow quickest, or give the most milk … Commercially, this sounds good.

But the decision … has been met with protest.

[A] few decades ago, traditional dairy cows in the western world yielded between 600 and 800 gallons per year, and were productive for at least five to 10 years … Modern herds are expected to average more than 1000 gallons a year [and some even 2000 gallons] … These high-performance cows average only 1.8 lactations, after which they have mastitis and are crippled.

Worse, though, is the mindset behind this use of cloning. For elite animals do not perform well except in cosseted conditions, and are … force-fed on high-grade feed. This requires huge capital – so such animals are intended only for rich countries whose consumers already have more than enough.

Worst of all, the frenetic search for the high-yield animals completely misconstrues the role of livestock. Already we are failing to feed the world’s population. An
estimated one billion out of 6.5 billion people are chronically undernourished while another billion suffer from excess.

The central task is to produce the most nourishment possible from the available landscapes. Food crops produce far more food calories and protein per hectare than livestock, so they should be our priority – cereals, pulses, nuts, tubers, fruit, and vegetables … Cattle and sheep should feed on grass or … trees that grow in places where we cannot easily raise crops … The omnivores like pigs and poultry can feed on surpluses and leftovers.

So farming that is designed to maximise food output produces a lot of plants, with modest amounts of livestock … Plenty of plants, not much meat and maximum variety is precisely what modern nutritionists recommend.

But modern, industrial, high-tech farming has nothing to do with feeding people. It is designed to generate cash.

Dr Alice Roberts

In the latest issue (January 2008) of BBC Focus magazine (science for the intelligent 10-year-old) there’s a mini-interview with one of the few females on TV who really do make my heart beat faster: Dr Alice Roberts, “clinical anatomist, archaeologist, TV presenter and author”, also a very talented artist and a qualified medic. Those of you in the UK who’ve watched either Time Team (Channel 4), Coast (BBC2) or Don’t Die Young (BBC2) will know Alice Roberts as the slightly off-the-wall girlie with the dyed red hair. The interview includes:

What’s the greatest threat to humanity?
Humanity.

Who would you clone?
I wouldn’t. Sexual reproduction is much more exciting.

What would your epitaph say?
Boadicea, Queen of the Iceni. And I’d be buried in a chariot just to fool future archaeologists.

Seriously Zen Mischief!

Harlequin Ladybird (Harmonia axyridis)


Harlequin Ladybird (Harmonia axyridis), originally uploaded by kcm76.

I found this today on a rose bush in the garden; the first one I’ve seen; I’m pretty well certain of the ID. Not the best of pictures I’ve ever taken.

The Harlequin Ladybird is a recent arrival in the UK and it is spreading from the SE. It is a pest: it is aggressive, spreads quickly and predates other ladybirds rather than following their example and eating aphid. More information at www.harlequin-survey.org and www.ladybird-survey.org. Yes, I have submitted a report to the survey.

And now one has a dilemma. Do I destroy the beasticle on the basis that it is a pest, or do I let it go free rather than risk damaging my karma?

Parakeets under threat?

According to yesterday’s BBC news the UK’s Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) has commissioned a study to look at the problem (what problem?) of increasing numbers of Rose-Ringed Parakeets in Britain. There is now a large population (estimated at 30,000) of these handsome bright-green birds around the southern and western fringes of London and into Surrey with enclaves building elsewhere in the country. No-one is sure exactly how they birds arrived here, about 50-60 years ago; there are a number of competing theories none of which has been substantiated.

It seems Defra and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) are worried that the parakeets will start out-competing native songbirds for food and nest sites and possibly, as their numbers increase, cause economic damage to fruit crops. However the RSPB website does admit that there is currently not a problem and that the birds have protected status; but it is reported that the RSPB is prepared to consider culling the parakeets, they say only as a very last resort.

These are wonderful, colourful and cheeky birds – albeit they can be a bit noisy and they’re not native to the UK (they come from the Himalayan foothills in India). Although I don’t see them often in my part of west London (not enough really big trees nearby, despite it is quite a green area) they do pass through my garden a handful of times a year. Personally I would be sad to see them disappear or even be culled.

Two BBC News stories: Parakeet ‘threat’ to native birds and How do parakeets survive in the UK?

Second Life Ecology

According to a post at Treehugger an avatar in Second Life uses as much electricity as the average Brazilian. To arive at this conclusion Nicholas Carr recently has done a back-of-envelope calculation comparing the impact of actual humans and Second Life avatars. You can follow the math that leads to this conclusion here but be warned, as always with these things Carr has caused a tirade of critical comment. Now whether Carr is right or not I don’t know, but the even if he’s out by a factor 10 or 100 it does beg a number of questions: Is Second Life ecologically sustainable? Should Second Life have to trade carbon offsets in the real world? And even: Should Second Life be banned by the world powers as a way of reducing CO2 emissions?

Thought-provoking Science

There have been a number of interesting articles recently in the more popular scientific magazines.

First of all, catching up on the December 2006 issue of Scientific American, there was a one page item by Michael Shermer “Bowling for God” in which he asks “Is religion good for society? Science’s definitive answer: it depends”. Along the way he supports my theory that more secular and less rigidly moral societies have lower rates of teenage pregnancy and STD infection. Shermer concludes “Moral restraints on aggressive and sexual behaviour are best reinforced by the family, be it secular or sacred”.

This week’s issue of New Scientist also contains some interesting articles. Ed Douglas, in “Better by Design” asks “If only we built more lasting relationships with the tings we buy. Could better design cure our throwaway culture?” Douglas’s thesis is that we need to go back to a culture which doesn’t throw things away and doesn’t build everything with built-in obsolescence. One way to fix our environmental problems is to build products which we cherish and can sensibly repair, and/or which can be reused and recycled when we have finished with them. Almost all products these days are ephemeral; little has a useful life of more than 6 months. And yet it wasn’t always like this. Remember the teddy bear you had, and cherished, as a child? Bet you still have it! What if we cherished all products in the same way? Yes, OK there would be fewer manufacturing jobs. But we’d see an increase in service jobs: repairing and recycling stuff. Wouldn’t this make more economic and environmental sense?

Another article I found interesting, “Under the Cover of Darkness”, is all about how animals see in the dark. Scientists have discovered that, unlike most animals which can see only in shades of grey in the dark, geckos see in colour even in low light situations.

Following that is an article on “Extreme Childbirth” and the move by some women, so called “freebirthers”, to give birth without any medical intervention whatsoever. While our forebears would not have had the medical intervention we have it seems to me that women would normally have given birth with at least a help-mate (later to become the midwife) to hand — as I believe is still the case today in primitive societies. Freebirthers don’t necessarily shun the presence of a help-mate, although there are groups who insist on being alone — something the article suggests is dangerous because of the peculiarities of human anatomy. The article even contains a box on “How to recycle a placenta”! Interesting, but not tea-table reading.

Unfortunately New Scientist doesn’t provide access to its current articles unless you subscribe, so I can’t link direct to their articles here.