Each year, the earth’s population grows, impacting the environment in small, subtle ways that add up over time. Unfortunately, climate change affects every aspect of our lives, right down to the ways we produce our food and how efficient our agriculture systems are.

One study conducted by Arizona State University found greenhouse gas emissions could cause the yield of vegetables to fall by 35% by 2100. The reasons for the lower yields varied between factors such as water shortages and an increase in salinity and less filtering of the sun’s rays. 

To adapt to a changing climate, farmers will have to change the way they produce food, and there may even be concerns with growing enough food to keep up with supply.

Weather concerns

As the ozone layer becomes further eroded, crops will suffer from long, hot days. In traditionally milder climates, the types of vegetables grown may change to adapt to shifting weather.

Some crops are better able to withstand harsher sunlight than others, so rather than growing sensitive plants such as lettuces, farmers might shift to root crops such as turnips or carrots. The selection of fruits and vegetables may become smaller as a result.

It’s more likely the agriculture industry will turn to hothouses or hydroponic growing methods to produce plants. However, if water shortages are an issue, hydroponic crops may become a thing of the past. Farmers may look for chemical solutions to grow food in, which would, in turn, impact the food itself by adding chemicals that don’t naturally occur.

Global warming could result in shifting weather patterns, as well. Natural disasters can further impact agriculture and the meat industry, reducing the available food and driving up prices. Farmers must have a clear plan for how to deal with an approaching storm and its aftermath.

Winters could become harsher, summers hotter and the milder weather of fall and spring would be a thing of the past. Consumers and farmers would have to adapt to changing seasons.

Wildfire devastation

You’ve likely heard about the California wildfires ravaging parts of the western United States. One aspect many people don’t consider is the overall impact and loss of life, as well as the loss of crops.

About 90% of the wildfires that occur are due to human error. People leave campfires unattended or flick a cigarette out their window while driving. Whatever the cause, once a spark hits the dry ground, the fire starts to rage almost uncontrollably.

An out-of-control fire damages grazing land, impacting farmers who raise livestock. It can also destroy crops, burn down buildings farmers need to store food and equipment and drive people out of their family farmland for good.

Extreme weather where it doesn’t rain for months on end causes the dried-out land that explodes into a blazing inferno. However, crops are also often rainfed, so when it doesn’t rain, a lack of moisture affects crops. Even if the fire doesn’t reach the farmland, the food may become unusable as plants wither and die. 

On the other end of the extreme, when it finally does rain, the parched land may not be able to soak in all the water at once, and flooding occurs. Floods can cause issues such as storm drains and sewage overflowing and running into food supplies.

Increased production

Agricultural specialists work hard to produce stronger, more disease-resistant and higher-yield crops. Unfortunately, with the science comes some concerns over genetically modified foods and what they might do to the human body over time. Climate change has already impacted our food supply, and time will tell how much it is for the better or worse.

A rise in carbon dioxide in our climate could increase some crops such as rice, soybean and wheat. These types of food are not as high in nutrients and cancer-fighting agents as green leafy vegetables, for example. 

Flooding, changing seasons and other weather changes impact the growing seasons of specific crops and could cause more and more damage to outdoor crops, driving some food production indoors and spiking prices at the same time. Farmers will have to shift what they grow and how they grow it to keep up with an expanding population.

There is some good news for farmers in the northern United States, Canada and Russia, though. One report predicted the conditions in those areas would improve for producing food. However, conditions in portions of Australia and in the Mediterranean will deteriorate.

Global climate change will force scientists to figure out how to produce more, waste less and grow food even in less-than-ideal conditions. While many negatives accompany climate change, learning to better use the resources we have as inhabitants of our green planet is a positive move in the right direction.

Changing things

While some people believe the earth is past the tipping point where we have a chance to reverse the damage done to our climate, others believe it isn’t too late to teach upcoming generations to care for the environment.

Small changes, such as conserving water, growing your food and reducing your carbon footprint, may start to shift things so food shortages and water scarcity aren’t as much of a concern in the next 50 years.

This Author 

Emily Folk is a regular contributor to The Ecologist, a conservation and sustainability writer and the editor of Conservation Folks.

Gardeners should consider swapping walls and fences for hedges, says the Royal Horticultural Society (RHS), as new research shows how they provide a range of frontline environmental services.

The call forms part of the charity’s Greening Great Britain campaign which urges the public to turn urban concrete corners into thriving green spaces.

Analysis by the charity of 44 of the most popular hedges, found that as well as mitigating flooding, capturing pollutants and acting as a sound barrier they can also be used to help heat and cool the home. Hedge species in urban environments were also found to provide a crucial resource for a wide diversity of animal species through the provision of shelter, nest sites, food resources and corridors for movement.

Urban hedges

The best all-round performers suitable for UK gardens include beech, holly, privet, western red cedar and rose.

The varying structure of hedges makes them well suited for specific roles. Those with hairy, rough and oval leaves, were found to better capture and retain particulates with dense, but porous canopies capturing the most.

A yew canopy exposed to roadside pollution can accumulate and retain, for example, four times more particles than Photinia which has smoother leaves and is less dense. 

Meanwhile wide, tall and layered evergreen species have been shown to act as sound barriers with English yew (Taxus baccata) and western red cedar (Thuja plicata) found to be the top performing.

Tijana Blanusa, Principal Horticultural Scientist, at the RHS said: “In a world that is rapidly urbanising and where there is pressure on land use through the increased densification of cities, the relatively compact nature of the urban hedge may have a pivotal role in ensuring our cities remain ‘liveable’, through its various ecosystem benefits.”

This Article 

This article is based on a press release from RHS. 

Environmental lawyers ClientEarth have criticised a leak of Germany’s draft coal phase-out law as put together by the Ministry for Economic Affairs, calling it out of touch and piecemeal, and lambasting the failure to tie it to climate protection goals.

Prof. Dr. Hermann Ott, Head of ClientEarth – Anwälte der Erde, said: “The long-awaited draft of Germany’s phase-out law is a shambles. The policy is riddled with unanswered questions, guarantees an unacceptably tardy coal exit and fails completely to acknowledge how urgently we need to decarbonise to address climate change.

“Those writing the policy seem to be existing in a parallel universe where coal is still profitable, people aren’t being forced out of their homes for mining, and the climate catastrophe isn’t unfolding around us.”

‘Incoherent policymaking’

Ott continued: “We are still faced with the total failure to tackle the phase-out of lignite, the most polluting form of coal, suggesting that Germany is still in thrall to vast energy companies which are still expanding mines and committing major rights infringements.

“And far from a logical approach to securing energy as coal is phased out, we’re actually seeing obstacles to renewable energy growth, which puts the entire phase-out at risk.

“Germany is one of Europe’s leading economies, and it is embarrassing to see such totally incoherent policymaking at a time we’ve never needed strong, solid climate action more.”

Key issues 

The main reason Germany’s ‘Coal Commission’ was formed was to decide how to manage a coal phase-out to cut carbon emissions in order to protect the climate. But this rationale is not made explicit in the law as it stands – and without climate protection as a guiding principle, the law is much less likely to perform against its intended objectives.

The leaked law contains provisions on how to phase out the first Gigawatts (GW) of hard coal to 2026 via tender procedures. If these do not reach the intended GW reduction, no possibility of state-enforced closures is planned in the law, which puts the phase-out path at risk entirely.

The law leaves the GW-reduction path for hard coal for the period from 2027 to 2038 (or earlier) to be determined by a future government by 2022. The already late end date of 2038 will only be assessed for the first time in 2032; earlier assessments by an expert committee, according to the draft, would only result in recommendations to the government and no commitments.

The draft law still needs to pass the cabinet next Monday and only then will pass on to the parliament, but presumably not before the end of this year. The law also does not yet contain any details on how the phase-out of lignite in Germany will take place, which is extremely bad news for those in Germany who stand to lose their villages for coal mining.

The leaked draft of the coal phase-out law contains changes to many other laws, too, among them a provision in construction law that in the future would limit the expansion of wind energy considerably.

This Author

Brendan Montague is editor of The Ecologist. This article is based on a press release from ClientEarth. 

Environmental lawyers ClientEarth have criticised a leak of Germany’s draft coal phase-out law as put together by the Ministry for Economic Affairs, calling it out of touch and piecemeal, and lambasting the failure to tie it to climate protection goals.

Prof. Dr. Hermann Ott, Head of ClientEarth – Anwälte der Erde, said: “The long-awaited draft of Germany’s phase-out law is a shambles. The policy is riddled with unanswered questions, guarantees an unacceptably tardy coal exit and fails completely to acknowledge how urgently we need to decarbonise to address climate change.

“Those writing the policy seem to be existing in a parallel universe where coal is still profitable, people aren’t being forced out of their homes for mining, and the climate catastrophe isn’t unfolding around us.”

‘Incoherent policymaking’

Ott continued: “We are still faced with the total failure to tackle the phase-out of lignite, the most polluting form of coal, suggesting that Germany is still in thrall to vast energy companies which are still expanding mines and committing major rights infringements.

“And far from a logical approach to securing energy as coal is phased out, we’re actually seeing obstacles to renewable energy growth, which puts the entire phase-out at risk.

“Germany is one of Europe’s leading economies, and it is embarrassing to see such totally incoherent policymaking at a time we’ve never needed strong, solid climate action more.”

Key issues 

The main reason Germany’s ‘Coal Commission’ was formed was to decide how to manage a coal phase-out to cut carbon emissions in order to protect the climate. But this rationale is not made explicit in the law as it stands – and without climate protection as a guiding principle, the law is much less likely to perform against its intended objectives.

The leaked law contains provisions on how to phase out the first Gigawatts (GW) of hard coal to 2026 via tender procedures. If these do not reach the intended GW reduction, no possibility of state-enforced closures is planned in the law, which puts the phase-out path at risk entirely.

The law leaves the GW-reduction path for hard coal for the period from 2027 to 2038 (or earlier) to be determined by a future government by 2022. The already late end date of 2038 will only be assessed for the first time in 2032; earlier assessments by an expert committee, according to the draft, would only result in recommendations to the government and no commitments.

The draft law still needs to pass the cabinet next Monday and only then will pass on to the parliament, but presumably not before the end of this year. The law also does not yet contain any details on how the phase-out of lignite in Germany will take place, which is extremely bad news for those in Germany who stand to lose their villages for coal mining.

The leaked draft of the coal phase-out law contains changes to many other laws, too, among them a provision in construction law that in the future would limit the expansion of wind energy considerably.

This Author

Brendan Montague is editor of The Ecologist. This article is based on a press release from ClientEarth. 

Environmental lawyers ClientEarth have criticised a leak of Germany’s draft coal phase-out law as put together by the Ministry for Economic Affairs, calling it out of touch and piecemeal, and lambasting the failure to tie it to climate protection goals.

Prof. Dr. Hermann Ott, Head of ClientEarth – Anwälte der Erde, said: “The long-awaited draft of Germany’s phase-out law is a shambles. The policy is riddled with unanswered questions, guarantees an unacceptably tardy coal exit and fails completely to acknowledge how urgently we need to decarbonise to address climate change.

“Those writing the policy seem to be existing in a parallel universe where coal is still profitable, people aren’t being forced out of their homes for mining, and the climate catastrophe isn’t unfolding around us.”

‘Incoherent policymaking’

Ott continued: “We are still faced with the total failure to tackle the phase-out of lignite, the most polluting form of coal, suggesting that Germany is still in thrall to vast energy companies which are still expanding mines and committing major rights infringements.

“And far from a logical approach to securing energy as coal is phased out, we’re actually seeing obstacles to renewable energy growth, which puts the entire phase-out at risk.

“Germany is one of Europe’s leading economies, and it is embarrassing to see such totally incoherent policymaking at a time we’ve never needed strong, solid climate action more.”

Key issues 

The main reason Germany’s ‘Coal Commission’ was formed was to decide how to manage a coal phase-out to cut carbon emissions in order to protect the climate. But this rationale is not made explicit in the law as it stands – and without climate protection as a guiding principle, the law is much less likely to perform against its intended objectives.

The leaked law contains provisions on how to phase out the first Gigawatts (GW) of hard coal to 2026 via tender procedures. If these do not reach the intended GW reduction, no possibility of state-enforced closures is planned in the law, which puts the phase-out path at risk entirely.

The law leaves the GW-reduction path for hard coal for the period from 2027 to 2038 (or earlier) to be determined by a future government by 2022. The already late end date of 2038 will only be assessed for the first time in 2032; earlier assessments by an expert committee, according to the draft, would only result in recommendations to the government and no commitments.

The draft law still needs to pass the cabinet next Monday and only then will pass on to the parliament, but presumably not before the end of this year. The law also does not yet contain any details on how the phase-out of lignite in Germany will take place, which is extremely bad news for those in Germany who stand to lose their villages for coal mining.

The leaked draft of the coal phase-out law contains changes to many other laws, too, among them a provision in construction law that in the future would limit the expansion of wind energy considerably.

This Author

Brendan Montague is editor of The Ecologist. This article is based on a press release from ClientEarth. 

Environmental lawyers ClientEarth have criticised a leak of Germany’s draft coal phase-out law as put together by the Ministry for Economic Affairs, calling it out of touch and piecemeal, and lambasting the failure to tie it to climate protection goals.

Prof. Dr. Hermann Ott, Head of ClientEarth – Anwälte der Erde, said: “The long-awaited draft of Germany’s phase-out law is a shambles. The policy is riddled with unanswered questions, guarantees an unacceptably tardy coal exit and fails completely to acknowledge how urgently we need to decarbonise to address climate change.

“Those writing the policy seem to be existing in a parallel universe where coal is still profitable, people aren’t being forced out of their homes for mining, and the climate catastrophe isn’t unfolding around us.”

‘Incoherent policymaking’

Ott continued: “We are still faced with the total failure to tackle the phase-out of lignite, the most polluting form of coal, suggesting that Germany is still in thrall to vast energy companies which are still expanding mines and committing major rights infringements.

“And far from a logical approach to securing energy as coal is phased out, we’re actually seeing obstacles to renewable energy growth, which puts the entire phase-out at risk.

“Germany is one of Europe’s leading economies, and it is embarrassing to see such totally incoherent policymaking at a time we’ve never needed strong, solid climate action more.”

Key issues 

The main reason Germany’s ‘Coal Commission’ was formed was to decide how to manage a coal phase-out to cut carbon emissions in order to protect the climate. But this rationale is not made explicit in the law as it stands – and without climate protection as a guiding principle, the law is much less likely to perform against its intended objectives.

The leaked law contains provisions on how to phase out the first Gigawatts (GW) of hard coal to 2026 via tender procedures. If these do not reach the intended GW reduction, no possibility of state-enforced closures is planned in the law, which puts the phase-out path at risk entirely.

The law leaves the GW-reduction path for hard coal for the period from 2027 to 2038 (or earlier) to be determined by a future government by 2022. The already late end date of 2038 will only be assessed for the first time in 2032; earlier assessments by an expert committee, according to the draft, would only result in recommendations to the government and no commitments.

The draft law still needs to pass the cabinet next Monday and only then will pass on to the parliament, but presumably not before the end of this year. The law also does not yet contain any details on how the phase-out of lignite in Germany will take place, which is extremely bad news for those in Germany who stand to lose their villages for coal mining.

The leaked draft of the coal phase-out law contains changes to many other laws, too, among them a provision in construction law that in the future would limit the expansion of wind energy considerably.

This Author

Brendan Montague is editor of The Ecologist. This article is based on a press release from ClientEarth. 

Environmental lawyers ClientEarth have criticised a leak of Germany’s draft coal phase-out law as put together by the Ministry for Economic Affairs, calling it out of touch and piecemeal, and lambasting the failure to tie it to climate protection goals.

Prof. Dr. Hermann Ott, Head of ClientEarth – Anwälte der Erde, said: “The long-awaited draft of Germany’s phase-out law is a shambles. The policy is riddled with unanswered questions, guarantees an unacceptably tardy coal exit and fails completely to acknowledge how urgently we need to decarbonise to address climate change.

“Those writing the policy seem to be existing in a parallel universe where coal is still profitable, people aren’t being forced out of their homes for mining, and the climate catastrophe isn’t unfolding around us.”

‘Incoherent policymaking’

Ott continued: “We are still faced with the total failure to tackle the phase-out of lignite, the most polluting form of coal, suggesting that Germany is still in thrall to vast energy companies which are still expanding mines and committing major rights infringements.

“And far from a logical approach to securing energy as coal is phased out, we’re actually seeing obstacles to renewable energy growth, which puts the entire phase-out at risk.

“Germany is one of Europe’s leading economies, and it is embarrassing to see such totally incoherent policymaking at a time we’ve never needed strong, solid climate action more.”

Key issues 

The main reason Germany’s ‘Coal Commission’ was formed was to decide how to manage a coal phase-out to cut carbon emissions in order to protect the climate. But this rationale is not made explicit in the law as it stands – and without climate protection as a guiding principle, the law is much less likely to perform against its intended objectives.

The leaked law contains provisions on how to phase out the first Gigawatts (GW) of hard coal to 2026 via tender procedures. If these do not reach the intended GW reduction, no possibility of state-enforced closures is planned in the law, which puts the phase-out path at risk entirely.

The law leaves the GW-reduction path for hard coal for the period from 2027 to 2038 (or earlier) to be determined by a future government by 2022. The already late end date of 2038 will only be assessed for the first time in 2032; earlier assessments by an expert committee, according to the draft, would only result in recommendations to the government and no commitments.

The draft law still needs to pass the cabinet next Monday and only then will pass on to the parliament, but presumably not before the end of this year. The law also does not yet contain any details on how the phase-out of lignite in Germany will take place, which is extremely bad news for those in Germany who stand to lose their villages for coal mining.

The leaked draft of the coal phase-out law contains changes to many other laws, too, among them a provision in construction law that in the future would limit the expansion of wind energy considerably.

This Author

Brendan Montague is editor of The Ecologist. This article is based on a press release from ClientEarth. 

Environmental lawyers ClientEarth have criticised a leak of Germany’s draft coal phase-out law as put together by the Ministry for Economic Affairs, calling it out of touch and piecemeal, and lambasting the failure to tie it to climate protection goals.

Prof. Dr. Hermann Ott, Head of ClientEarth – Anwälte der Erde, said: “The long-awaited draft of Germany’s phase-out law is a shambles. The policy is riddled with unanswered questions, guarantees an unacceptably tardy coal exit and fails completely to acknowledge how urgently we need to decarbonise to address climate change.

“Those writing the policy seem to be existing in a parallel universe where coal is still profitable, people aren’t being forced out of their homes for mining, and the climate catastrophe isn’t unfolding around us.”

‘Incoherent policymaking’

Ott continued: “We are still faced with the total failure to tackle the phase-out of lignite, the most polluting form of coal, suggesting that Germany is still in thrall to vast energy companies which are still expanding mines and committing major rights infringements.

“And far from a logical approach to securing energy as coal is phased out, we’re actually seeing obstacles to renewable energy growth, which puts the entire phase-out at risk.

“Germany is one of Europe’s leading economies, and it is embarrassing to see such totally incoherent policymaking at a time we’ve never needed strong, solid climate action more.”

Key issues 

The main reason Germany’s ‘Coal Commission’ was formed was to decide how to manage a coal phase-out to cut carbon emissions in order to protect the climate. But this rationale is not made explicit in the law as it stands – and without climate protection as a guiding principle, the law is much less likely to perform against its intended objectives.

The leaked law contains provisions on how to phase out the first Gigawatts (GW) of hard coal to 2026 via tender procedures. If these do not reach the intended GW reduction, no possibility of state-enforced closures is planned in the law, which puts the phase-out path at risk entirely.

The law leaves the GW-reduction path for hard coal for the period from 2027 to 2038 (or earlier) to be determined by a future government by 2022. The already late end date of 2038 will only be assessed for the first time in 2032; earlier assessments by an expert committee, according to the draft, would only result in recommendations to the government and no commitments.

The draft law still needs to pass the cabinet next Monday and only then will pass on to the parliament, but presumably not before the end of this year. The law also does not yet contain any details on how the phase-out of lignite in Germany will take place, which is extremely bad news for those in Germany who stand to lose their villages for coal mining.

The leaked draft of the coal phase-out law contains changes to many other laws, too, among them a provision in construction law that in the future would limit the expansion of wind energy considerably.

This Author

Brendan Montague is editor of The Ecologist. This article is based on a press release from ClientEarth. 

The concept of a canary in a coal mine – a sensitive species that provides an alert to danger – originated with British miners, who carried living canaries underground through the mid-1980s to detect the presence of deadly carbon monoxide gas.

Today another bird, the Emperor Penguin, is providing a similar warning about the planetary effects of burning fossil fuels.

As a seabird ecologist, I develop mathematical models to understand and predict how seabirds respond to environmental change. My research integrates many areas of science, including the expertise of climatologists, to improve our ability to anticipate future ecological consequences of climate change. 

Warming planet 

Most recently, I worked with colleagues to combine what we know about the life history of Emperor Penguins with different potential climate scenarios outlined in the 2015 Paris Agreement, to combat climate change and adapt to its effects.

We wanted to understand how climate change could affect this iconic species, whose unique life habits were documented in the award-winning film “March of the Penguins.” 

Our newly published study found that if climate change continues at its current rate, Emperor Penguins could virtually disappear by the year 2100 due to loss of Antarctic sea ice. However, a more aggressive global climate policy can halt the penguins’ march to extinction. 

As many scientific reports have shown, human activities are increasing carbon dioxide concentrations in Earth’s atmosphere, which is warming the planet. Today atmospheric CO2 levels stand at slightly over 410 parts per million, well above anything the planet has experienced in millions of years. 

If this trend continues, scientists project that CO2 in the atmosphere could reach 950 parts per million by 2100. These conditions would produce a very different world from today’s. 

Living indicators 

Emperor Penguins are living indicators whose population trends can illustrate the consequences of these changes. Although they are found in Antarctica, far from human civilization, they live in such delicate balance with their rapidly changing environment that they have become modern-day canaries. 

I have spent almost twenty years studying Emperor Penguins’ unique adaptations to the harsh conditions of their sea ice home.

Each year, the surface of the ocean around Antarctica freezes over in the winter and melts back in summer. Penguins use the ice as a home base for breeding, feeding and molting, arriving at their colony from ocean waters in March or April after sea ice has formed for the Southern Hemisphere’s winter season. 

In mid-May the female lays a single egg. Throughout the winter, males keep the eggs warm while females make a long trek to open water to feed during the most unforgiving weather on Earth.

When female penguins return to their newly hatched chicks with food, the males have fasted for four months and lost almost half their weight. After the egg hatches, both parents take turns feeding and protecting their chick. In September, the adults leave their young so that they can both forage to meet their chick’s growing appetite. In December, everyone leaves the colony and returns to the ocean. 

Emperor Penguin fathers incubate a single egg until it hatches.

Throughout this annual cycle, the penguins rely on a sea ice “Goldilocks zone” of conditions to thrive. They need openings in the ice that provide access to the water so they can feed, but also a thick, stable platform of ice to raise their chicks. 

Population trends

For more than sixty years, scientists have extensively studied one Emperor Penguin colony in Antarctica, called Terre Adélie. This research has enabled us to understand how sea ice conditions affect the birds’ population dynamics.

In the 1970s, for example, the population experienced a dramatic decline when several consecutive years of low sea ice cover caused widespread deathsamong male penguins. 

Over the past ten years, my colleagues and I have combined what we know about these relationships between sea ice and fluctuations in penguin life histories to create a demographic model that allows us to understand how sea ice conditions affect the abundance of Emperor Penguins, and to project their numbers based on forecasts of future sea ice cover in Antarctica.

Once we confirmed that our model successfully reproduced past observed trends in Emperor Penguin populations around all Antarctica, we expanded our analysis into a species-level threat assessment.

Global community

When we used a climate model linked to our population model to project what is likely to happen to sea ice if greenhouse gas emissions continue on their present trend, we found that all 54 known Emperor Penguin colonies would be in decline by 2100, and 80 percent of them would be quasi-extinct.

Accordingly, we estimate that the total number of Emperor Penguins will decline by 86 percent relative to its current size of roughly 250,000 if nations fail to reduce their carbon dioxide emissions. 

However, if the global community acts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and succeeds in stabilizing average global temperatures at 1.5 degrees Celsius (3 degrees Faherenheit) above pre-industrial levels, we estimate that Emperor Penguin numbers would decline by 31% – still drastic, but viable.

Less-stringent cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, leading to a global temperature rise of 2°C, would result in a 44 percent decline. 

Our model indicates that these population declines will occur predominately in the first half of this century. Nonetheless, in a scenario in which the world meets the Paris climate targets, we project that the global Emperor Penguin population would nearly stabilize by 2100, and that viable refuges would remain available to support some colonies. 

Curbing emissions

In a changing climate, individual penguins may move to new locations to find more suitable conditions.

Our population model included complex dispersal processes to account for these movements. However, we find that these actions are not enough to offset climate-driven global population declines.

In short, global climate policy has much more influence over the future of Emperor Penguins than the penguins’ ability to move to better habitat.

Our findings starkly illustrate the far-reaching implications of national climate policy decisions. Curbing carbon dioxide emissions has critical implications for Emperor Penguins and an untold number of other species for which science has yet to document such a plain-spoken warning.

This Author 

Stephanie Jenouvrier is an associate scientist at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.

This article was first published The Conversation. Image: Christopher Michel, Flickr. 

Winter is coming. Millions of zombie-like gas boilers are roaring into life as we attempt to ward off the cold in our draughty homes.

For a country that moans more about the weather than Jon Snow in the Game of Thrones, our homes are poorly prepared for the seasonal chill. Worse still we have ignored the predictions of scientists and continued to build homes whose worth is measured in granite worktops and Zoopla estimates rather than warmth, comfort and energy efficiency.

The average UK home has a net energy demand of 18,800 KwH – for heat and power. The current standard for new build homes would reduce that by about half. But there’s still a long way to go before our homes make a positive contribution to net zero by 2050. 

Real culprit

The average household pays £1,385 per year in energy costs. Current standards make quite a dent in that bill but what if we could reduce that energy demand not by 50 percent but by 93 percent? 

Instead of blaming rising energy bills on renewables, we should recognise that the real culprit is a lack of investment in greener, better homes that need less energy in the first place.

The dichotomy is often seen in terms of consumer choice versus cost. For most people buying or building a green home is like buying a Tesla; rare, green bling for the few not the many.

The assumption is that being green doesn’t pay and that a world of cheap green measures is still a way off. Developments like Goldsmith Street in Norwich are lauded because they are the exception that proves the rule.

Not unlike Jon Snow, we know nothing. 

Greener homes

The real problem stopping us building greener homes now, rather than at varying future dates now being promised in different parties’ election campaigns, is money.

Specifically, the way developers make money from financing new homes. Since the middle of the twentieth century the pace of house building has been largely driven not by market demand but by the cost and availability of credit based on the current and future market value of homes. 

For developers, every second counts once a home has been built to get it sold and book the profits to move onto the next development.

Anything that is perceived to be a cost (rather than creating long term value) is avoided in the name of profit – whether that is greener building standards or percentages of affordable homes haggled over in planning negotiations. 

Changing the rules

A pioneering housing developer, Octevo, has decided to change the rules of the ‘game of homes’ and build affordable homes for rental using a finance model based on long term value rather than short term speculation.

Their latest project Liverpool Community Homes will build 37 affordable homes incorporating a raft of green measures, including ground source heat pumps, solar panels, water efficiency and energy efficiency improvements, that reduce each home’s energy use by 80 to 93 percent compared with the average.

So not only is the rent affordable but the bills are too. Savings of a thousand pounds a year can make a real difference to families and add up to a lot over the life of a home. 

My company Abundance has a long term relationship with Octevo; we helped them raise funds for two previous social housing developments in the Liverpool area. This is their greenest yet and is a response to feedback from our customers as well as their financial support. It shows we can create affordable homes that make low carbon living possible for everyone. 

This Author 

Bruce Davis is managing director of Abundance Investment, which advertises with The Ecologist.