The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) brings producers and processors together with manufacturers, retailers, banks, and NGOs, and has advocated a “multi-stakeholder approach” to reduce the environmental impact of the palm oil industry.

The RSPO presents a highly optimistic view of the sustainability of palm oil, and Darrel Webber, its chief executive, has said the body’s consensus-driven model is more geared towards “continuous improvement” than rapid change.

Even so, a new report from Greenpeace has underscored how little progress the palm oil industry has made in distancing itself from its ignoble track record of devastation and deforestation.

Forests on fire

But while palm oil’s grim environmental credentials draw increasing attention, another closely linked industry – paper – racks up ecological black marks with far less public notice.

The Greenpeace palm oil report focuses on Indonesia, where more than half of the world’s supply of palm oil is produced. While Indonesia is home to some of the most biodiverse tropical forests on Earth and a significant share of the world’s plant and animal species – including 10 percent of flowering plants, 12 percent of mammals, 15 percent of reptiles and amphibians, and 17 percent of birds – it also has one of the highest rates of deforestation, losing around one million hectares of forest early.

One of the main objectives of the RSPO has been to curb the fires linked with palm oil production.

The fastest and cheapest way for palm oil producers to clear land for oil palms has traditionally been to burn down the forests already occupying the land, to catastrophic effect: 80 percent of the fires in Indonesia are blamed on oil palm fields, and the country lost approximately 26 million hectares of tree cover (meaning 16 percent of its total forest land) between 2001 and 2018.

This burning destroys the diverse tropical forests but also releases gigatons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

Damning findings

While the RSPO claims to hold its members to ‘environmental and social criteria’ in order to claim their products as sustainable, Greenpeace’s report has unmasked a much more somber reality. Despite intense criticism for purchasing palm oil linked to fires in Indonesia, many of the world’s largest food companies have failed to distance themselves from culpable producers. 

According to the group, global food brands such as Unilever, Mondelez, and Nestlé all bought palm oil linked to this year’s spate of fires in Indonesia, as did traders from Cargill, Golden Agri-Resources (GAR), and Wilmar.

Greenpeace found that all of the major companies it evaluated – despite being RSPO members – were linked to anywhere between 6,300-9,900 fire “hotspots” in 2019. Each had links to tens of producers facing government or judicial action over the fires they had set. 

Greenpeace’s report adds to a mountain of evidence surrounding the unsustainable palm oil sector, but while there’s no disputing the damaging effects of oil palm monoculture, another serial offender – paper – has quietly passed under the radar, despite the fact that many of the same companies are involved in its production.

Paper production has arguably just as big an environmental effect as palm oil. Even so, and despite the fact that the environmental damage caused by the palm oil and paper industries are being committed in the same places at the same time and on the same scale, paper has largely skirted public scrutiny. 

Sinar Mas

This reality puts the lie to the idea of a “paperless revolution.” Although per capita paper consumption is declining in the USA and Europe, consumption is simply shifting, rather than reducing, especially with companies looking for alternative biodegradable alternatives to single-use plastic.

According to the UN Food and Agricultural Organization, 35-40 percent of trees cut for industrial purposes become paper products. While some of this wood comes from ‘forestry practices’, much of it comes from unsustainable deforestation in places like Indonesia.

The overlap between the palm oil and paper industries is demonstrated clearly by the global forestry giant Sinar Mas, parent group of both palm oil trader GAR (spotlighted in Greenpeace’s report) and Asia Pulp and Paper (APP), Indonesia’s largest pulp and paper company.

Allegations surrounding the company’s role with the destruction of forests for pulpwood previously forced Greenpeace to cut ties with the company after several years of collaboration on sustainability initiatives.

Sinar Mas’ footprint extends far past the tropical forests of Indonesia, with environmental controversies reaching well beyond Asia to make themselves felt as far afield as Europe, Canada, and Brazil.

Bolsonaro connection 

To try to distance themselves from its name and negative associations, Sinar Mas’s operations in Canada, for example, are grouped under a Netherlands-based company called ‘Paper Excellence.’

While ostensibly different entities, both APP and Paper Excellence are owned by the family of Sinar Mas founder Eka Tjipta Widjaja, one of Indonesia’s richest men until his death early this year. 

Paper Excellence’s first Canadian purchase, in 2007, was a pulp mill in Meadow Lake in Saskatchewan. From there, Paper Excellence carried out a string of purchases of existing assets, taking aim at Canada and Brazil.

These acquisitions are purportedly part of the company’s strategy to ensure a steady supply of pulp for the production of paper and other products for customers in Asia. The company clearly sees the pristine forests in both Canada and Brazil as ripe for additional mills and production facilities. 

While Sinar Mas may have used a different name for its new markets, its subsidiaries do not appear to have changed their attitudes towards responsible forestry. In fact, one of Paper Excellence’s most recent claims to fame is its close relationship with the Bolsonaro family in Brazil, one of the worst global actors when it comes to protecting natural forests. 

Global conglomerates

While Western consumers are quick to speak out over deforestation in Southeast Asia, are we prepared to challenge global conglomerates once they start doing business in our own backyards?

The global outcry over palm oil has forced at least some action to clean up the palm oil supply chain. To save our planet’s tropical forests, it is high time to take action on paper as well.

This Author

Natasha Foote is an environmental journalist and writer, specialising in conservation and agriculture. She holds a BSc in Biological Sciences and an MA in Environment, Development and Policy.

The League Against Cruel Sports has welcomed the convictions of two men associated with the Kimblewick Hunt after they were sentenced today at Oxford Magistrates Court for animal cruelty offences.

Ian Parkinson and Mark Vincent were filmed brutally dragging out a fox trapped in an artificial earth, before releasing it in front of baying hounds to provide ‘sport’ for the hunt on New Year’s Day.

Both men were found guilty of causing unnecessary suffering to a protected animal under the Animal Welfare Act, and were today given a twelve week custodial sentence, suspended for twelve months. They were also ordered to undertake fifteen days rehabilitation activity and 120 hours unpaid work. Full costs of £960 were ordered to be paid by both men and both were ordered to pay a victim surcharge of £115.

Animal protection

The League is campaigning for stronger hunting laws, as well as lobbying for minimum animal welfare sentences to be increased.

Martin Sims, director of investigations at the League Against Cruel Sports and former head of the police’s National Wildlife Crime Unit, welcomed the sentence.

He said: “These two men associated with the disgraced Kimblewick Hunt were clearly flouting animal protection laws by dragging the fox out and then releasing it in front of a pack of hunting hounds which would then chase it and potentially tear it apart.

“Not only does it show hunting still takes place, fourteen years after the ban came in, but with a general election in full swing and with law and order an important issue, it’s time political parties were united against hunting and pledge to strengthen the Hunting Act.”

The judge said the offence was so severe that only a custodial sentence was justified. This is because it involved the use of a weapon, it was to assist in an illegal activity, and there was risk of further suffering to the fox.

This Article 

Brendan Montague is editor of The Ecologist. This article is based on a press release from the League Against Cruel Sports. 

The Prime Minister could be “empty-chaired” during a televised climate change debate on Thursday.

Boris Johnson and Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage have yet to respond to a request to attend the hour-long Emergency On Planet Earth debate on Channel 4 News, which will focus solely on climate change.

The broadcaster said the debate will take place even if they are unable to take up the invitation.

Seriously

Channel 4 has invited seven party leaders to the discussion, but so far only Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, Scottish First Minister and SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon, Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson and Green co-leader Sian Berry have accepted the invitation.

Rebecca Newsom, head of politics at Greenpeace UK, said if the Prime Minister fails to attend the debate it would show the Tories “aren’t taking the climate crisis seriously enough”.

She added: “This Thursday’s climate debate is a monumental moment in an election campaign that should have the climate and nature emergencies at its heart.

“The pitiful 45 seconds given to the topic in the last head-to-head was an absolute joke. And while Boris Johnson acknowledged that the climate emergency is a colossal issue for the entire world, his failure to commit to this ‘oven-ready’ climate debate raises question marks over his sincerity.

“An empty chair on Thursday night would confirm his party aren’t taking the climate crisis seriously enough.

Fast cars

“The Prime Minister cannot afford to run scared of public scrutiny on the defining issue of our generation. This is a test of leadership anyone wishing to run the country must pass.”

Ben de Pear, editor of Channel 4 News, said: “There is no more urgent issue facing the planet and we are delighted to open the whole of our programme for all the party leaders to show what plans they have to confront it.”

Presenter Krishnan Guru-Murthy added: “It is a huge privilege to be hosting the people who want to run the country debating the most important issue in the world.

“How much do we need to change the way we live? Is it the end of fast fashion, fast cars, foreign holidays and red meat? Do any of them have a credible plan to cut our net emissions to zero?”

The debate will take place on Thursday at 7pm and will begin with a short opening statement from each leader.

This Author

George Ryan is the PA political reporter.

Levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere have reached another record high, the World Meteorological Organisation has warned.

Concentrations of carbon dioxide, the main gas driving global warming, reached new highs of 407.8 parts per million in 2018, up from 405.5 parts per million (ppm) in 2017, a report by the UN body shows.

That is well above the level of around 280 ppm seen before the industrial revolution and the start of large scale burning of fossil fuels for energy and transport, which have driven up carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Welfare

The rise is close to the increase seen between 2016 and 2017 and just above the annual average over the last decade, continuing of a long term trend set to drive increasingly severe impacts of climate change, the WMO said.

Concentrations of other climate-warming greenhouse gases methane and nitrous oxide also surged by higher amounts in 2018 than in the past decade, the observations from the global atmosphere watch network show.

WMO secretary-general Petteri Taalas said: “There is no sign of a slowdown, let alone a decline, in greenhouse gases concentration in the atmosphere despite all the commitments under the Paris Agreement on Climate Change.

“We need to translate the commitments into action and increase the level of ambition for the sake of the future welfare of the mankind,” he said.

Scientists

He said the last time Earth experienced comparable concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was three to five million years ago, when temperatures were 2C to 3C warmer and sea levels were 10-20 metres higher than today.

Human activity is creating greenhouse gas emissions, which are driving up the concentrations of the gases such as carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, where they have a warming effect on the Earth’s climate.

This global warming is driving impacts such as melting glaciers and sea level rise, more extreme droughts, heatwaves and storms and posing a threat to food security, water supplies and wildlife.

But the WMO warns that even with the pledges made by countries under the international Paris deal, global emissions are not estimated to peak by 2030, let alone by the 2020 date that scientists have said is necessary to curb dangerous climate change.

Preliminary findings for 2018 suggest greenhouse gas emissions continued to rise last year.

This Author

Emily Beament is the PA environment correspondent.

Living in a more polluted area is associated with a greater likelihood of having glaucoma, a debilitating eye condition that can cause blindness, a new UCL-led study in the UK has found. 

People in neighbourhoods with higher amounts of fine particulate matter pollution were at least 6 percent more likely to report having glaucoma than those in the least-polluted areas, according to the findings published in Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science.

Professor Paul Foster (UCL Institute of Ophthalmology and Moorfields Eye Hospital), the study’s lead author, said: “We have found yet another reason why air pollution should be addressed as a public health priority, and that avoiding sources of air pollution could be worthwhile for eye health alongside other health concerns.” 

Irreversible blindness

Foster continued: “While we cannot confirm yet that the association is causal, we hope to continue our research to determine whether air pollution does indeed cause glaucoma, and to find out if there are any avoidance strategies that could help people reduce their exposure to air pollution to mitigate the health risks.”

Glaucoma is the leading global cause of irreversible blindness and affects over 60 million people worldwide.

It most commonly results from a build-up of pressure from fluid in the eye, causing damage to the optic nerve that connects the eye to the brain. Glaucoma is a neurodegenerative disease.

Professor Foster said: “Most risk factors for glaucoma are out of our control, such as older age or genetics. It’s promising that we may have now identified a second risk factor for glaucoma, after eye pressure, that can be modified by lifestyle, treatment or policy changes.” 

The findings were based on 111,370 participants of the UK Biobank study cohort, who underwent eye tests from 2006 to 2010 at sites across Britain. The participants were asked whether they had glaucoma, and they underwent ocular testing to measure intraocular pressure, and spectral-domain optical coherence tomography imaging (a laser scan of the retina) to measure thickness of their eye’s macula (central area of the retina).

Toxic

The participants’ data was linked to air pollution measures for their home addresses, from the Small Area Health Statistics Unit, with the researchers focusing on fine particulate matter (equal or less than 2.5 micrometres in diameter, or PM2.5).

The research team found that people in the most-polluted 25 percent of areas were at least 6 percent more likely to report having glaucoma than those in the least-polluted quartile, and they were also significantly more likely to have a thinner retina, one of the changes typical of glaucoma progression.

Eye pressure was not associated with air pollution, which the researchers say suggests that air pollution may affect glaucoma risk through a different mechanism.

Dr Sharon Chua (UCL Institute of Ophthalmology and Moorfields Eye Hospital), the study’s first author, said: “Air pollution may be contributing to glaucoma due to the constriction of blood vessels, which ties into air pollution’s links to an increased risk of heart problems. Another possibility is that particulates may have a direct toxic effect damaging the nervous system and contributing to inflammation.” 

Exposure and prevention 

Air pollution has been implicated in elevated risk of pulmonary and cardiovascular disease as well as brain conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease and stroke. Particulate matter exposure is one of the strongest predictors of mortality among air pollutants.

This study adds to previous evidence that people in urban areas are 50 percent more likely to have glaucoma than those in rural areas, suggesting now that air pollution may be a key contributor to that pattern.

Professor Foster said: “We found a striking correlation between particulate matter exposure and glaucoma. Given that this was in the UK, which has relatively low particulate matter pollution on the global scale, glaucoma may be even more strongly impacted by air pollution elsewhere in the world. And as we did not include indoor air pollution and workplace exposure in our analysis, the real effect may be even greater.”

Co-principal investigator of the study, Mr Praveen Patel (NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust & UCL Institute of Ophthalmology), added: “Our study shows the potential of new retinal imaging techniques to identify disease and to understand how diseases develop so that we can improve health care and find new ways to prevent blindness.”

This Article 

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

The study was conducted by researchers at UCL, Moorfields Eye Hospital, Cardiff University and Topcon Healthcare Solutions, and supported by Moorfields Eye Charity, the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, the Alcon Research Institute, and the International Glaucoma Association

The Conservative Party has recently boasted about its achievements in protecting marine habitats through its ‘Blue Belt Programme’, and went further to pledge a new ‘Blue Planet Fund’ ahead of the upcoming general election.

But, upon closer inspection, the claims of how much ocean has actually been properly protected are more dubious. 

The government’s 25 Year Environment Plan promises that a series of ‘Blue Belts’ will be established in the UK Overseas Territories (UKOTs). This will occur through the ‘Blue Belt Programme’, an initiative that aims to design conservation areas around the UKOTs based on the best scientific evidence and local use of the oceans, and support their effective ongoing management, monitoring and enforcement by UKOT authorities.

Blue belt

Within these Blue Belts, human activity that damages the environment will be restricted, so to allow the marine environment and its wildlife to recover. The target adopted was to establish  four million square kilometres (km2) of ‘Blue Belt’ by 2020 – the equivalent of protecting 32 percent of UKOT waters. 

This is a very welcome ambition, given that 95 percent of unique British species and 90 percent of British marine biodiversity are found in the UKOTs.

Earlier this year, the government stated that just over three million of the target of four million km2 had been protected, through the creation of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). 

MPAs are areas of ocean that are established that restrict certain activities. However, MPAs can take very different forms, with varying success in conserving the marine environment.

For instance, more ambitious MPAs often restrict all fishing activities to safeguard fish populations (‘no-take zones’), whilst other MPAs may still allow commercial fishing activities.

In practice

The Blue Belts around different UKOTs are made up of different MPAs, allowing some activities within one bit of a Blue Belt but not others. Whilst three million square kilometres of UKOT ocean is currently covered by MPAs, much of it in fact has very little protection,

Helpfully, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the international authority that advises on best conservation practices, has created a ‘Protected Areas Categories System’ to judge the strength of protected areas (including MPAs).

The most protective type of MPA is a category ‘Ia’ Protected Area, which is a ‘strict nature reserve’ that prohibits most human activity, protects biodiversity and landscape features, and is thoroughly monitored and enforced.

The weakest kind is category ‘VI’on IUCN’s scale, which is a ‘protected area with sustainable use of natural resources’ that seeks to protect areas through preserving natural processes and allowing most kinds of human activity to continue occurring, but in a sustainable way. 

Industrial fishing

The Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of the UKOT South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands – an area of ocean that is 1.04 km2 in size – was declared in 2012 to be a category ‘IV’ MPA on the IUCN’s scale. 

However, following a review, the IUCN’s verdict was that only 2 percent of the declared MPA was of this standard, largely because the remaining part of the MPA still permitted industrial fishing. 

Despite this, the South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands EEZ is included in the Government’s claim that it has protected over three million kilometres squared of UKOT marine habitat. 

So, simply put, three million km2 of UKOT ocean has not been fully protected. At the very least, the Government should seek IUCN reviews of all UKOT MPAs against their criteria, to validate these claims, identify where protections could be strengthened, and truly protect our oceans. 

This Author 

William Nicolle is an energy and environment researcher at the political think tank Bright Blue. Twitter: @WRNicolle. 

The RSPB is reminding Christmas dinner chefs not to put the cooking fat from their festive roast out for garden birds as the greasy mixture can damage their feathers.

Christmas is a time for feasting and living off the fat of the land, not least for garden birds. But doing so  could prove fatal for our feathered friend. In winter, they need high-energy food to keep themselves warm. With insects and natural food sources in short supply, laying on a festive spread for your feathered neighbours is a great idea.

But, as with any dinner guest, it’s essential to adhere to their dietary requirements. Birds will happily polish off leftover Christmas cake or crumbs of biscuit and mince pie, but cooked turkey fat and anything too salty can be dangerous.

Breeding ground

Cooled fat mixed with roasted meat juices can easily smear onto birds’ feathers and interfere with their waterproofing and insulation.

Birds need to keep their feathers clean and dry if they are to survive the cold winter weather, but a layer of grease would make this virtually impossible.

In addition, fat from roasting tins can quickly go rancid if it’s left in a warm kitchen before being put outside. This forms the ideal breeding ground for salmonella and other food poisoning bacteria and, just like people, this can be fatal to birds.

Christmas cake

RSPB Wildlife Advisor Katie Nethercoat said: “Many people wrongly believe that leaving cooked turkey fat outside is beneficial for birds, but in fact it can have disastrous effects.

“The consistency of the fat makes it prone to smearing, which is detrimental for birds’ feathers, along with the fat providing perfect conditions for breeding bacteria.

“Only pure fats such as lard and suet should be used to make homemade fat balls which will give birds’ the energy and nutrients to survive the cold winter months.”

“Putting out some of the recommended festive treats will encourage birds such as blackbirds, robins and wrens, as well as some of our winter visitors such as fieldfare and redwing, into the garden just in time for the Big Garden Birdwatch in January.”

If you’d like to treat your garden birds to their own Christmas cake, the RSPB suggests mixing bird seed, nuts and raisins together with lard, squashing it in and around a pinecone, then hanging it with string from a suitable tree.

This Article 

This article is based on a press release from the RSPB. 

Image: Ben Andrew.

Environmental activist Greta Thunberg has signed up to guest edit the Today programme.

The 16-year-old is one of five people who will take over the BBC Radio 4 show during the Christmas and New Year period.

Supreme Court president Lady Hale, who delivered the ruling that Boris Johnson’s decision to suspend Parliament was unlawful, has also signed up.

Strikes

Artist Grayson Perry, rapper George The Poet and Charles Moore, a critic of the BBC, will also guest edit the high-profile news show.

Each programme will include an interview with the guest editor.

Nobel Peace Prize nominee Greta, who has spearheaded a global movement and school strikes around the world, will speak to leading climate change figures and hear from indigenous, frontline activists.

She has commissioned reports from the Antarctic and Zambia and an interview with Mark Carney, the Governor of the Bank of England.

Lady Hale gives the programme a tour of the Supreme Court and has asked Today to explore the issue of coercive control – extreme psychological and emotional abuse.

Poet

Previous guest editors have included the Duke of Sussex, Angelina Jolie, John Bercow, Sir Lenny Henry and Professor Stephen Hawking.

Spoken word artist George The Poet will report from Uganda and explore issues around identity.

Turner Prize winner Perry will examine stereotypes and Moore, former editor of The Daily Telegraph, will focus on freedom of expression.

They will each guest edit the programme between December 26 and 31.

The Today guest editors are part of the BBC Radio and Sounds Christmas line up, which is fully unveiled on Monday.

This Author

Sherna Noah is the PA senior entertainment correspondent. Image: European Parliament. 
 

The Conservatives have pledged £9.2 billion to improve the energy efficiency of homes, schools and hospitals, as they make a pitch to voters concerned about the environment.

Funding will include £6.3 billion to install energy saving measures to cut bills in 2.2 million homes, with a focus on social housing and people in fuel poverty, the Tories say.

The plans are part of efforts to meet the legal target to cut greenhouse gas emissions to zero overall by 2050 to tackle climate change.

Free markets

The target is a less ambitious goal than other parties have set out, with the Lib Dems promising net zero emissions by 2045 and Labour pledging to deliver the substantial majority of greenhouse cuts by 2030.

But the 2050 net zero target, which became law in the summer, is backed by the Government’s advisory Committee on Climate Change as feasible – though the committee has warned the UK is off track to meet existing carbon-cutting goals in the 2020s and 2030s.

The manifesto seeks to highlight a different approach to tackling climate and environment crises from Labour, saying the Tories believe “free markets, innovation and prosperity can protect the planet”.

Deal

It pledges to work with the market to deliver two million jobs in clean growth in a decade.

The Tories say their first budget will prioritise the environment, with funding for research and development, cutting carbon and an extra £4 billion for flood defences, as well as a national plug-in network for electric vehicle charging and a “gigafactory” for building the batteries those cars will need.

After bringing in a moratorium on fracking following tremors in Lancashire where the controversial process was taking place, the Tories also say they “will not support fracking unless the science shows categorically it can be done safely”.

And there is support for a range of clean technologies, including for 40 gigawatts of offshore wind by 2030 – a significant increase on the 30 gigawatts set out with the industry in a sector deal earlier this year.

Fact-checker Full Fact has accused Boris Johnson of being economical with the truth after the unveiling of his election manifesto.

Trust

Chief executive Will Moy said the Conservative Party could “do more to meet the standards we expect” after investigating its pledges on paving the way for 50,000 new nurses and limiting day-to-day spending increases to only £3 billion, despite promising a litany of public services investment.

Full Fact said the Tories had not been upfront about the full cost of their initiatives in the 59-page document, titled Get Brexit done, unleash Britain’s potential.

“While the Conservatives plan to increase annual current spending by £3 billion compared to what’s already been announced, the Conservatives plan to spend a lot more than £3 billion extra per year than we spend today,” said Full Fact.

“For example, the Conservative manifesto spending list omits its headline pledges on school funding, the NHS, and (creating 20,000 more) police officers.”

Mr Moy said voters deserved information that was “accurate and honest” before making their minds up on December 12. “Candidates and parties are asking voters for their trust for the next five years, and like the other main parties, the Conservatives can do more to meet the standards we expect,” said the Full Fact boss.

This Author

Emily Beament is the PA environment correspondent. Patrick Daly is the PA political correspondent. 

Hundreds of thousands of people have signed up to a mass tree-planting campaign to tackle climate change, the Woodland Trust said.

The Trust launched its Big Climate Fightback campaign in September after what it said was repeated failures by the government to reach its tree planting targets.

Since the launch, hundreds of thousands of people have signed up to plant trees on or around November 30, the conservation charity said.

Footprint

Hundreds of community groups, businesses and schools have set up planting events, individuals have signed up to plant saplings in their garden and the Woodland Trust is also hosting events around the country.

In total, close to a million trees will go into the ground during the campaign, the Trust said.

Darren Moorcroft, the Woodland Trust’s chief executive said: “Since we launched the Big Climate Fightback the response has been remarkable. “

He said the Big Climate Fightback aimed to give people of all ages, wherever they lived, a simple way to make a difference on climate change by planting a tree.

“Trees are the natural solution – they soak up carbon dioxide and deliver oxygen. They are of course not the only solution though, every one of us could also do our bit by recycling more and reducing our carbon footprint.”

Inspire

He added: “When we see so many people coming together on November 30 to plant trees it will be a proud moment. Each one of the trees planted will contribute to make our country that bit greener and healthier.”

The campaign aims to reverse the low planting rates of new trees, with England seeing just 1,420 hectares (3,500 acres) of woodland created in the past year, against a Government ambition of 5,000 a year (12,000 acres).

The government’s advisory Committee on Climate Change has warned there must be dramatic increases in planting rates to help meet legal targets to end the UK’s contribution to climate change by 2050.

The Trust’s flagship planting event is at Mead, the site of the new Young People’s Forest, with around 15,000 trees planted on November 30 and more than 1,000 people taking part.

Former JLS popstar turned presenter JB Gill, who has been to the site and is backing the campaign, said: “I hope this campaign inspires people of all ages and backgrounds to take direct action and plant trees. Every tree counts.”

This Author

Emily Beament is the PA environment correspondent.