2013-05-18T15:04:56-04:00 David Nussbaum http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/author/index.php?author=david-nussbaum Copyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for David Nussbaum Good old fashioned elbow grease. tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1589825 2012-06-12T19:00:00-04:00 2012-08-12T05:12:06-04:00

David Nussbaum http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-nussbaum/
With Rio+20 on the immediate horizon, and a focus on water, energy and food, water will be an issue that world and business leaders are likely to find absorbed into their agendas - and rightly so. Water scarcity and stress is not only an issue of protecting ecosystem and biodiversity, but is also presents a real and present risk to local communities, business and world economies.

Our planet is two thirds covered with water, 97% of that is salt water in the oceans and most of the essential freshwater is locked up in ice-caps, glaciers and deep underground aquifers. Yet the necessity of accessible freshwater is clear to see - it is essential for all human activity, from the food we eat to the clothes we wear; and in the developing world, access to clean water can dramatically change the lives of individuals and transform the livelihoods of whole communities. On a global scale, water has tremendous potential to unlock economic growth if managed properly, as made clear by the findings of a new report published yesterday by HSBC.

The report, 'Exploring the Links Between Water and Economic Growth', commissioned by HSBC, reveals that by 2050, the world's 10 biggest river basins by population are expected to produce a quarter of global GDP - a figure greater than the combined future economies of the US, Japan and Germany - and a sharp increase from a current contribution of a tenth. However, the report also forecasts that by 2050, seven in 10 of those river basins face significant or severe water scarcity without a considerable improvement in water resource management, meaning the forecast economic growth in those river basins may not materialise.

Alongside this report, recent figures from our own Living Planet Report show that the biodiversity in freshwater ecosystems has declined by up to 70% in tropical regions, since 1970, and that already, 2.7 billion people are living in river basins that experience water shortages at least one month a year. These figures show that the effects of poor water management are being felt globally. If we fail to take immediate steps towards a more sustainable freshwater future, then this could grow substantially - it is estimated than almost half the world's population will be living in water scarcity by 2030.

If we are to tackle this water challenge, the time to act is now! Alongside two other NGO partners - WaterAid and Earthwatch- we're proud to be participating in the just-announced HSBC Water Programme - a new $100 million, five-year partnership with HSBC, which aims to tackle water risks in river basins; bring safe water and improved sanitation to over a million people; and raise awareness about the global water challenge.

As part of this programme, we'll help over a thousand businesses and hundred thousand fishers and farmers to promote more efficient use of water in their practices. We'll also be working with governments across the globe to advise on better river basin management which will help to secure water supplies for the future needs of both the human population and the environment.

We'll be working in five basins - the Yangtze, Ganges, Pantanal, Mekong and the African Rift Valley. These basins are home to a combined 1 billion people, some of the world's most endangered species including the finless porpoise and Irrawaddy river dolphin; and, they provide valuable services that support the local and global economy. If you take the Mekong as an example, it supplies 25% of the world's freshwater fish catch and at least 60 million people rely on the river basin to support their livelihoods.

The Yangtze is one of the top 10 rivers highlighted by the research whose contribution to global GDP is set to grow - yet it already provides 30 - 40% of China's GDP. We've worked in the Yangtze with HSBC for the past 10 years - with great success. Our local project with fish farmers has demonstrated how low impact fishing practices can help improve the water quality and local environment, while helping to increase income potential - in one of our projects there was a 30% increase in income.

It is the scaling up of projects such as this and adoption of more efficient management practices by government and business that will help us tackle this water challenge. Through this programme we will encourage greater collaboration by governments and organisations worldwide, to work together to take rapid effective action both in river basins and to bring safe water and sanitation to over a million people.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1451696 2012-04-25T19:00:00-04:00 2012-06-25T05:12:02-04:00

David Nussbaum http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-nussbaum/
On a day when Foreign Secretary William Hague and Energy Minister Greg Barker and both showed leadership on the need to tackle climate change through investment in clean energy sources, David Cameron remained conspicuously absent from the debate.

Six years ago, almost to the day, WWF took David Cameron on a trip to Svalbard in the Arctic. The trip, which included a visit to the Scott Turner glacier, was to be a turning point for Cameron and the Conservative party.

Pictures of him hugging a husky appeared in most British newspapers and the electorate saw it as a symbolic moment in the 'detoxification' of the party's brand. The message was clear: the Conservatives had changed; they were no longer the 'nasty party', and a deep commitment to tackling environmental problems was part of the package.

Back home, David Cameron also debunked the idea that environmentalism was a luxury that can be disposed of when the economic going gets tough, boldly stating that, "the truth is: it's not that we can't afford to go green - it's that we can't afford not to go green."

Now fast forward six years; David Cameron has been in Downing Street for nearly two years and the news that he was to deliver his first major speech on the environment as prime minister, at the third Clean Energy Ministerial (CEM) in London this week, had had the green sector buzzing with speculation.

But then, the rumours started circulating on Monday night that plans for a speech by Cameron had been scrapped, or at best 'downgraded' to a simple Q&A with ministers attending the CEM.

The news prompted howls of dismay from both environmentalists and those businesses investing in renewables and the green economy alike. The CEM throws a spotlight on the government's record on tackling climate change and promoting renewable energy in the UK - a record that worries me.

At a time when we are seeing increasing disarray in the government's climate and energy policies on both domestic and European policy areas, it seems clear that the prime minister is struggling to co-ordinate his ministers, party and MEPs on these issues.

The mere fact that he hasn't made any major speech on the environment yet, and has largely refrained from intervening in what is becoming an increasingly negative debate among members of the cabinet and his back benches, has inevitably led many to question David Cameron's personal commitment to lead the "greenest government ever."

On clean renewable sources specifically, some parts of the government have given out mixed messages, with the result that investor confidence has been seriously weakened. This is in stark contrast to other countries, such as Denmark and Germany, where a strong policy framework and consistent political signals have encouraged inward investment and hundreds of thousands of jobs.

Investor confidence has, for example, been hit by the bungled move to reduce solar feed-in tariffs (FiTs); whilst we agree that tariffs should fall in line with technology cost reductions, the short-notice cuts to solar FiTs hit businesses hard and resulted in a judicial review that the Government lost.

Elsewhere, a letter to the prime minister from over one hundred, almost exclusively Conservative, backbenchers attacking wind power, and recent comments by DECC minister Greg Barker reported as suggesting that Britain does not need more onshore wind farms, have also hit business confidence hard.

The government also recently announced that a planned Emissions Performance Standard (EPS) designed to address emissions from the power sector would not apply to new gas-fired stations until 2045. This would be a remarkable 'free pass' for the gas sector - especially given the fact that the UK's reliance on expensive imported gas is the main reason for soaring energy bills.

The fossil fuel sector has, in contrast, received numerous boosts. In the recent Budget, the Chancellor George Osborne granted up to 75% tax relief for decommissioning oil rigs in the North Sea and new allowances including a £3 billion new oil field allowance for "large and deep fields" to be opened up west of Shetland - despite the clear risks to the environment.

In short, the coalition government has effectively boosted subsidies for oil, gas and nuclear energy while the prime minister's backbench MPs complain vigorously about subsidies for renewables.

This week, the prime minister had a major opportunity to redress the impression that he has gone soft on the environment, to stop the perceived 're-toxification' of the Conservative party and counter the negative rhetoric coming from opponents in his own party.

Six years ago, on his return from the Arctic, he seemed engaged, determined and clear about the need to tackle environmental problems. What has happened to that engagement, determination and clarity of vision? We are left asking, above all, "where is the prime minister on the environment?"]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1369928 2012-03-21T11:32:50-04:00 2012-05-21T05:12:01-04:00

David Nussbaum http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-nussbaum/
Today's package was one of confidence and assurances for high-carbon infrastructure and fossil fuels, with an alarming pledge to drill 'large and deep' to reach oil and gas reserves to the west of the Shetlands. As the disaster in the Gulf of Mexico proved, hard-to-reach oil is a difficult and dangerous way forward with the potential for a messy and costly outcome.

According to the Chancellor, 'gas is cheap'. When one takes into account the grave costs to our environment and climate of failing to meet our targets to reduce carbon emissions, I beg to differ.

The government rightly held firm on air passenger duty (APD). The long-awaited Green Investment Bank opens next month (but its ability to borrow remains unclear). However, with signals that they may increase airport capacity in the South East, build more roads and reduce environmental safeguards in planning, this is a Government backing the wrong horses for economic recovery.

Last weekend WWF joined more than 50 leading businesses, trades unions and other groups in a letter to George Osborne in support of a greener economy, pointing out that smart regulation can actually reduce business costs and drive much-needed innovation and growth. Economics and ecology are interdependent - now more than ever before - as the consequences of poor environmental management and over-consumption of our stock of natural resources are posing real constraints on business.

But it is no longer just environmental campaigners and scientists sounding this warning. Both McKinsey & Co and Accenture have recently warned of a looming disaster if we don't break the nexus between economic value creation, environmental damage and over-reliance on scarce resources.

I find it very odd that a government that's tightened financial regulation to prevent systemic failure is simultaneously loosening environmental regulation, without any apparent regard for the environmental or longer-term economic consequences. Our environmental risks are increasingly systemic, and in some areas the threats of ecosystem failures are very real.

This sidelining of environmental regulation to me reflects the persistence of the 'flat earth' mentality within the Treasury and certain parts of the Conservative party who seem to refute that environmental protection and economic growth can be compatible goals. This constituency see the environment solely as a cost to business and the economy, and fail to recognise the opportunities to grow new industries, jobs, exports and wealth by fostering a strong domestic clean technology sector. In contrast, Finland and Denmark have joined Germany in establishing 'cleantech' as a vital part of their foreign investment drive. Instead, this government's solution for putting the UK in a leadership position seems to be based on building a new airport.

Before the 2010 election, David Cameron seemed to 'get' the need for truly sustainable development - that respects the needs of future generations as much as those of today. I still believe in his heart he wants to show real leadership. But, as Steve Hilton obviously found, there are many powerful forces in the Treasury and in parts of the Conservative Party to whom the very concept of 'natural capital' is foreign. It's time for the prime minister to re-engage and live up to his ambition to lead the 'greenest government ever'.

However, at a time when the green economy offers a clear path to recovery, the Chancellor seems to remain firmly in the old Treasury mindset of supporting old, dirty industries at the expense of clean, green ones. From his speech, you'd think the only emissions he's keen on tackling are those from smokers.]]>