Coffee House Challenge

RSA OXFORD COFFEE HOUSE – AUGUST MEETING 2006

Coffee House Challenge Event in Oxford Happening on 17 Aug 2006 at Starbucks in Borders, 9 Magdalen Street, Oxford,
OX1 3AD. Facilitator Oscar O'Connor
Is the environmentalist’s case for sustainability, sustainable?
By Nicholas Newman
29 August 2006

It is not always possible to solve all the worlds’ problems, but it can be fun trying. When local members of the Royal Society of Arts (RSA) met in the convivial setting of an Oxford coffee house on the agenda for tonight’s discussion was ‘Is the environmentalist’s case for sustainability, sustainable?’ That is their definition we only need to be concerned with exploiting natural resources without destroying the ecological balance of a particular area to the exclusion of all other factors.

Our facilitator for this evening’s debate was a computer software entrepreneur; other participants were an eclectic mix of merchant bankers, media people, engineers, academics and charity workers.
The facilitator introduced the topic and gave a short account of the efforts he was making trying to achieve a high level of sustainability in his computer business. He outlined the investments he was making including the purchase of a wind farm to provide electric power for his offices.

‘What’s the bottom line?’ asked the prosperous pin striped suited Mancunian merchant banker to the facilitator.
‘I see it as strictly as an investment; my business will save money on fuel bills and earn income from any surplus electricity sold. Oh… the added bonus is that it will do my public image no harm. For me it’s a win- win situation,’ replied the facilitator, a Kirk Douglas look alike in his sport jacket and jeans.

‘That’s all very laudable and if I was in your shoes I would do the same thing.’ the journalist in the bespoke grey suit and pointed out that this investment would not be viable if it had not been the benefits the facilitator was reaping from government subsidies and the facilitator agreed. The journalist then went on to point out the other public policy misgivings including the costs involved in providing back up capacity when wind farms have to switched off due to:
· Maintenance,
· Excessive wind for safety reasons,
· Insufficient wind to generate electricity, and the cost of linking these often remote farms to the national grid.
In addition ‘Environmentalists, such as David Bellamy regards such windmills as a blot on the natural beauty of the landscape,’ added the serious dark haired glamorous publisher who resembled the French women politician Ségolène Royal.

The engineer opined that ‘In fact… what the real trouble with the Green’s vision of Sustainability… is that it is a virtual policy not based on the real world! What the Green’s find scary is that the public are seeing it as too optimistic and theoretical.’

‘The public realizes that what appears sustainable for one individual, is often not sustainable for society as a whole, however much the Green Movement likes to spin it’ commented the grey haired, near retirement academic who closely resembled Jacob Bronowski.

‘Did you know there are over a 150 definitions for sustainability.’ laughed the charity worker adding. ‘That is the trouble; sustainability is like a chimera, one is not always sure what people actually mean.’
‘Well, let’s see if we can come up with a definition what the Green Movement actually means by Sustainability’ the facilitator suggested.

The publisher added ‘Ugh… something to do with saving the environment and stopping global warming.’
The stern looking engineer, with a Glaswegian accent, laughed ‘It is a romantic ideology… promoted by hippy tree huggers who hate city life, and expect us all to return to being simple peasants in the countryside. No doubt, they fancy themselves as lords of the manor.’

‘That certainly explains why sustainability has become fashionable amongst Prince Charles and his cronies and the chattering classes in Westminster.’ commented the banker.

The engineer noted ‘Its like a religion amongst them, they can see only one solution to the world’s problems… even though alternative energy such as windmills and solar technology has proved such a disappointment.’
‘In my opinion… it’s almost as if there is something missing from the sustainability equation.’ said computer expert. ‘I wonder what it is?’ he added.

‘Seems to me… that Green Movement has deliberately ignored aspects of tackling the problem in order to fit in with their ideology.’ said the engineer.

The academic opined ‘Yes, they do provide a rather one sided argument, it is like one of those puzzle pictures with half the pieces deliberately thrown away.’

‘What we have to do is find the missing pieces.’ observed the charity worker looking like a trendy architect.
‘Well we can start,’ noted the journalist. ‘I think from the Green Movement’s deliberate antagonism to big government solutions and conventional technology as the methods for dealing with the world’s energy, pollution and global warming issues.’

‘I think the main issue is how we are going to supply future energy needs in away that tackles pollution and global warming.’ argued the facilitator.

‘Well... we are still missing something, are it’s the issue of energy security. Also we need to discuss this problem from a European Union public policy viewpoint, not from an individuals or even British perspective.’ observed the journalist.

This jump in scale stunned many in the debate and they asked the journalist for his reasoning. ‘Well the electricity to power the kettle to boil the water for your tea probably came from a French nuclear power station and there is a good chance that Russian gas baked the cake you are eating and Middle Eastern oil fuelled the car you used to get to the meeting. That is why we need to talk about this issue from an EU standpoint.’ answered the journalist.
‘Well that takes the biscuit.’ said the charity worker, clearly stunned.
The facilitator opined. ‘Let’s look behind the spin.’

The publisher commentated. ‘Well we might as well start with their antipathy to nuclear power and other forms of conventional technology, it appears their case against nuclear is weak and full of inconsistencies.’ He added ‘to put it simply they don’t like nuclear power because they are against nuclear weapons.’

‘As Mr Spock would say about the Green Movement’s case, “…does not compute.”’ commented the academic.
‘Take their case against nuclear waste from nuclear power stations; well about the same amount is generated by hospitals, yet we people have no qualms about living next to them nor other locations that store industrial waste with a long hazard life.’ stated the health and safety inspector.

‘Even in terms of its cost effectiveness, nuclear is looking a good investment,’ commented the banker and he added ‘already the Finns, Brazilian and Chinese government are building new plants; while other countries are in the planning stages.’

As the debate continued, what surprised debaters, as we summarized our thoughts were that the general opinion of the meeting appeared to be moving towards a pro-nuclear attitude. Despite the spin of the Environmentalists nuclear power had become part of the solution and not the problem. As to why nuclear power was now seen as part of the solution to Europe’s energy supply problems, is because of the recent jump in energy prices caused by strikes in Nigeria, war in the Middle East and Russia switching off gas supplies to the Ukraine. People have come to realise the world had become a less certain place for EU’s consumers and the environmentalists solutions won’t provide the power we need to keep our homes, hospitals and places of work powered.

‘In fact in terms of energy and price security, it is time for Europe to start reopening its coal fields and building both new coal and nuclear power stations along side existing sites if possible.’ said the Journalist. ‘Such employment opportunities’ he added ‘would be welcomed by many in Europe’s deprived regions of Europe where many existing field and generating plants are located today.’

‘Such development would be viable and reduce our dependency on the whims of leaders of the many failed states from which we currently get much of our supplies.’ agreed the banker.

‘There are even doubts that Europe should continue to have such faith in alternative energy, it was based on a world view that bares little resemblance to today’s.’ noted the Engineer. Alternative energy without its massive subsidies it is still not viable nor even reaches the productivity targets long promised. In contrast conventional technology continues to improve, reduce costs, and improve viability and productivity.’

Overall, the meeting concluded that in order for Europe to operate a sustainable energy policy, it needed to ignore the Green’s so called sustainable energy policies, as they were clearly not sustainable. Instead we should keep our options open in terms of continuing research into alternative technologies, that we need to invest in energy conservation, open new coal fields and place a high priority on completing a network of standardised design nuclear and coal power stations. In order to reduce, building and operating costs and decrease construction time.

By now it was ten o’clock; we had been talking for some three solid but very enjoyable and stimulating hours of discussion. We all agreed we had a great time, anyway the waiters wanted to go home. As we walked to the pub next door, we discussed having as the subject for the next debate ‘Turkey’s proposed accession to the EU’, but that is still to be decided and will be another story for next time - perhaps.

TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF ARTS
CONTACT oscar@tenthousandthings.com
OR http://www.rsa.org.uk/
See News: Public needs better understanding of nuclear safety)

The bottom line is Europe needs a Common Energy Policy that works.