Is Bristol the greenest city in the UK?

Well, according to a report recently released by Good Move, Bristol is the greenest city in the UK for 2019.

How did it come to this verdict? 
Well the choices and criteria are not perhaps the best and most exhaustive list in the world, but let's not overly criticise and take a bit of a further look....

Firstly, Good Move only looked at ten UK cities to begin with, and those were selected based on the ten with the most green space within them - which may be assumed to give them a head-start over other possible cities. Once they had that list, it seems they looked at four key criteria to rank them;

• Carbon emissions from the city
• Recycling rates (average domestic rate)
• Gas consumption (average per capita) - but not electricity?
• Number of Green Party councillors!?! 
• (Surely this is more of a reflection of how good / bad the local Green Party are at canvassing in that area - and also implies that no other party cares about the environment [which may or may not be true])

Anyway, what result did this lead to? 
Well the post title has kind of given that bit away - it was, of course, Bristol. And it's not that this is a bad choice per se; it topped the charts of their calculations, with an average 47% domestic recycling rate amongst other things. 

To be fair, it has done much in recent years to up its green credentials - it became a Fair Trade City in 2005; by 2014/15 it had carbon reductions of 38% from a 2005 baseline, meaning it hit its 2020 target five years early; and also in 2015, it got the European Green Capital Award - the first British city to win - recognising it as a happy, healthy and more environmentally friendly place to live and work.

Bristol was also one of the first local authorities to commit to purchasing renewable energy in its mix. It had an initial target of reaching 15% renewables by 2010, which it did in part by switching all 34,000 of its streetlights to this from January 2007. The council also committed to investing £1.4 m in improving the energy efficiency of its council properties through the '90s and '00s.

How did the other cities fair?
So we can see that Bristol did at least have some claim to be justified in winning this accolade, but what did the other British cities do right, and wrong (besides not having enough green space to be considered in the first place), to get their place in the top ten?

Edinburgh did enough to impress their way into second place, based in large part around their impressive 49 hectares of green space in the city - the most in the country. But at the other end you have London in 9th place, predominantly dragged that low by its huge carbon footprint (actually seven times higher than the city that eventually came in 10th!).

And who came at the bottom end?
That honour went to Birmingham! And they may feel hard done by for several reasons. Firstly, as mentioned above - their carbon emission rate was actually around seven times better than that of London. Birmingham's undoing in this ranking was due to its very poor domestic recycling rate (22%) and relatively low levels of green space compared to the other contenders (only 24.6 hectares). 

The second reason for the city to feel a bit peeved is that the way that this has been reported would imply that they are the least environmentally friendly city in the UK, rather than the worst from a list of ten (and based on somewhat spurious criteria).

The Good Move Top Ten:

1. Bristol
2. Edinburgh
3. Manchester (targeting being zero-carbon by 2038)
4. Sheffield
5. Bradford
6. Liverpool
7. Glasgow (had the first Low Emission Zone in Scotland)
8. Leeds (aiming to be carbon neutral by 2030)
9. London
10. Birmingham

Another version:
To contrast with the Good Move list, in early 2019, First Mile (a waste management company) put together their own list of greenest cities. So what conclusions did they come up with?

Well firstly, their list of criteria certainly appears a little deeper; the looked at the number of Electric Vehicle Charging Points (EVCPs), Recycling per capita, amount of green space, Air Quality, pollution levels, efforts around reduction of plastic use and also fast-fashion consumption.

So, how does their list compare? 
First thing to note is that only six of the cities that made the Good Move top ten, make it in here - and, they show up in quite a different order. London didn't even make the top ten - coming in at #11 - largely owing to its horrific air quality problems! But for the record, this is how the First Mile top ten looked;

1. Edinburgh
2. Aberdeen
3. Glasgow
4. York
5. Oxford
6. Bristol
7. Newcastle
8. Leeds
9. Sheffield
10. Birmingham

An incredible Scottish 1-2-3! Given the emphasis that the Scottish government appears to be giving Scotland as the place to come for sustainable businesses (presumably at least partially with an eye to the future, as North Sea oil/gas starts to decline) and the pride it has in its fantastic natural landscapes, this verdict is possibly not so surprising.

Fairly obviously, some of this will always be subjective too. I could devise a list with a completely different set of criteria and weighting factors and end up with another version. I haven't visited all of the cities mentioned here, in recent times, so giving too much of a subjective opinion now would not be all that fair. Spending a lot of time in Birmingham for work, I could say - is that really a better place than London? But that would neglect that when I visit London or Birmingham, it tends to only be to certain parts, and these lists look at the cities as a whole.

What do you think? What cities would you like to see in a top ten - and what criteria do you think should be used to judge?

Research:
https://goodmove.co.uk/blog/how-bristol-became-uks-greenest-city/ 
https://goodmove.co.uk/britains-green-cities/
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/uk-greenest-cities-scotland-top-three_uk_5c50392de4b0d9f9be69086e?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmluZy5jb20vc2VhcmNoP3E9Z29vZCttb3ZlK2dyZWVuZXN0K2NpdHkrdWsraHVmZitwb3N0JnFzPW4mZm9ybT1RQlJFJnNwPS0xJnBxPWdvb2QrbW92ZStncmVlbmVzdCtjaXR5K3VrK2h1ZmYrcG9zdCZzYz0xLTM2JnNrPSZjdmlkPUI3RTY1QjRENDE1MTQ5OTk4MDZDQTEwRjhERkZCNjQ5&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAKhKmAkIFJSZOSOR_j1f773yloi3kDnJxIym-lTkgZjfdq8xKP89CW38ZEg3i0ZPUhaLfnUbbT6CKH3mp9ojEMslM1HL7Dd0U8P6bCXu95h7mlizo4zGTP6Dw-Jp8aU2YJ9rSeu7iVe_AstL8g29k8MZQ5XiVwFQMSjhdehddsi4

Hope for the Jaguar and other migratory species

The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species (CMS) has held the 13th Conference of Parties Wildlife Summit in Gandhinagar, Gujurat, India, this week.

One of the big headlines has been around an initiative to help strengthen protections for the Jaguar across the Americas. It ranges across an area stretching from the southern US border with Mexico, down through Central America and into South America, where it can be found as far down as Paraguay and northern Argentina.

It has seen about 40% of its habitat lost over the last hundred years, and while laws exist in each country it can be found in, it is hoped that new measures for migratory species will strengthen protection for it (and other species) as it goes across international borders. Threats include deforestation and poaching.

The CMS covers all migratory species, including the jaguar, and its existence can help bring about protection to vital habitats, and maintaining vital wildlife corridors that allow animals to move between areas. Without these, animals can become isolated - once isolated, the chances of them facing extinction grow....

Jaguar (image: Wikipedia)

Rebecca Regney, Deputy Director for the Human Society International, hopes that the CMS will create a vital legal framework. "This will provide increased incentives and funding opportunities for this work and that is crucial for curbing habitat destruction, maintaining key migratory corridors and addressing killings for retaliation and trafficking."

Help for the Asian elephants - and more:

The CMS also provides hope for many other migratory species, including the Asian elephant. It too has faced loss of habitat, poaching, poisoning and disruption of its habitats, such as blockages by rail lines and the like.

India hosts around 60% of the remaining numbers of the species, but cross-border migration occurs with some of its neighbours, such as Bangladesh, Bhutan, Myanmar and Nepal. Mark Simmonds, also of the Humane Society International says of the CMS, "The highly migratory Asian elephant for example, is endangered throughout much of its substantial range, trying to survive in continually shrinking, degraded and fragmented habitats."

Representatives of 130 nations have signed the CMS, which will increase the conservation status of many species, including;

• Oceanic whitetip shark - now one of the most endangered shark species
• Great Indian bustard
• Antipodean albatross

Getting giraffes off the endangered list:

A century ago, there were over one million giraffes in sub-Saharan Africa. They used to roam at least 28 countries, but are now extinct in at least seven of them (Burkina Faso, Eritrea, Guinea, Mali, Mauritania, Nigeria and Senegal). There are now estimated to only be around 100,000 left, and they are generally in fragmented populations.

This massive decline, 40% in just the last 30 years, has seen the species as a whole labelled as 'vulnerable' on the IUCN Red List. Two sub-species, the Nubian and Kordofan giraffes, are now 'critically endangered'; while two more, the Reticulated and Masai giraffes, are 'endangered'.

Nubian giraffe (image: Wikipedia)

What is the IUCN Red List?

Established in 1964, the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s Red List of Threatened Species has evolved to become the world’s most comprehensive information source on the global conservation status of animal, fungus and plant species.

The IUCN Red List is a critical indicator of the health of the world’s biodiversity. Far more than a list of species and their status, it is a powerful tool to inform and catalyze action for biodiversity conservation and policy change, critical to protecting the natural resources we need to survive. It provides information about range, population size, habitat and ecology, use and/or trade, threats, and conservation actions that will help inform necessary conservation decisions.

As part of an effort to halt this decline, conservation measures have been submitted by six of the countries where giraffes can still be found; Cameroon, Chad, Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania and Zimbabwe. They cite a number of issues faced by giraffes across their range:

• Fragmentation of habitat - roads, railways, power lines etc. all hinder their migration.
• Habitat loss - wildfires, livestock encroachment and human spread all increase this issue.
• Poaching / snaring - for bushmeat, skins and traditional medicine.

These issues are all further exacerbated by factors like disease, war and a lack of awareness and knowledge of the issues. The 'Concerted Action for the Giraffe' is calling for an Africa-wide strategy, with much more trans-boundary collaboration, better exchange of information and the creation of an international database. This, it is hoped, will lead to better legal protection, more research and ultimately a raising of awareness around the issues, which in itself may help to push it up the priority list for various governments.

Other stories from the Convention:

There is a commitment to evaluate the impacts of climate changes on migration, specifically through the lens of some focal species and ecosystems. It is hoped this will help animals adapt to a warming world, especially as January was the hottest one globally on record. This year it reached a point where it was 1.14°C above the global average for the twentieth century.

Ethiopia this week signed the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on the Conservation of Migratory Birds of Prey in Africa and Eurasia (luckily more commonly known as the Raptors MOU). It was signed on behalf of the Ethiopian government by Kumara Wakjira, the Director General of the Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Authority - bringing the total number of signatories to 61.

Wakjira said, on his country signing, "The country is a staging post for migratory birds, including raptors. Most species are coming from Europe and Asia for wintering. Nonetheless, due to growing habitat threats, the distribution and status of raptor species is declining. Ethiopia is thus pleased to sign the Raptors MOU to strengthen the protection of raptors."

Ethiopia is indeed a strategically important country for this, especially as it is located on the East African flyway, a significant route for millions of migrating birds of prey. 40 of the 93 species featured in the MOU can be found in Ethiopia, including the Steppe eagle, Sakar falcon and Egyptian vulture.

Research:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-51561697 

https://www.cms.int/en/news 

https://www.cms.int/en/news/africa-wide-conservation-strategy-giraffe 

https://www.cms.int/en/news/cms-raptors-mou-welcomes-ethiopia-signatory 

https://www.iucnredlist.org/about/background-history 

Losing the conker fight?

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUNC) has been doing the research to update its Red List for endangered species, which gives us a picture of biodiversity health.

The research brought together over 150 experts from across Europe to contribute to the project, which was funded by organisations like the European Council, British Entomological Society and National Parks & Wildlife Service Ireland, as well as individual nations like Luxembourg, Switzerland and Netherlands.

One of the headlines of the 2019 update in the UK, published this month, is that the iconic horse chestnut tree is now one of many species on the vulnerable list, as moths and disease take their toll.

Horse Chestnut (photo: Wikipedia)

The IUCN have assessed 454 native tree species across Europe to gauge them for a risk of extinction, and found that 42% of them face being lost completely (rated as - Vulnerable, Endangered or Critically Endangered). The rate is at 58% for endemic species - that is, species that are only found in a specific area; 15% of endemic species (66) are at the Critically Endangered end of the list.

As well as our beloved conker tree, around three-quarters of the 170 or so members of the family that includes Rowan (Sorbus), are assessed as being threatened, and especially Mountain Ash (Sorbus aucuparia) and Crimean Rowan (Sorbus tauricola).

Going back to the conker (Aesculus hippocastanum); listed as being Vulnerable, it has suffered at the hands (or mouths) of the leaf-miner moth. This is an invasive species found in isolated and mountainous parts of Europe like the Balkans. The moth has added to the existing pressure of logging, forest fires and tourism pressure.

"Trees are essential for life on Earth and European trees in all their diversity are a source of food and shelter for countless animal species such as birds and squirrels, and play a key economic role," says Craig Hilton-Taylor, the head of the IUCN Red List Unit.

What's to blame?
There are a wide range of threats and reasons that are causing the danger to these trees (and other species), which include some, or all, of the following;

• Pest and disease
• Competition from invasive species
• Deforestation - and unsustainable logging practices
• Climate change
• Agricultural practices

Dr Steven Bachman, at the Royal Botanical Gardens in Kew, says, "The results reveal a disturbingly high level of extinction risk that requires urgent and effective conservation action at all levels."

What else is at risk?
The new research has also found that almost half of European shrub species are in trouble, as are a fifth of terrestrial molluscs (snails etc.) and bryophytes (things like mosses and liverworts). Mike Seddon, the Chief Executive for Forestry England, says that the climate crisis is posing a real threat to our woodlands. "Our efforts to have resilient forests include planting a greater variety of trees, including native species only grown in the UK."

Terrestrial molluscs play a key role in soil regeneration, and are seen as a good indicator of soil health. They also provide a vital source of food for birds and mammals. 90% of native European  mollusc species are also endemic, so it is worrying that 22% of the 2,469 species are at risk.

"The impact of human-led activities is resulting in population declines and a heightened risk of extinction of important species across Europe. This report has shown how dire the situation is for many overlooked, undervalued species that form the backbone of Europe's ecosystems and contribute to a healthy planet. We need to mitigate human impact on our ecosystems and prioritise the protection of these species."

Luc Bas - Director of IUCN European Regional Office

Research:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49838650 
https://www.iucn.org/news/species/201909/over-half-europes-endemic-trees-face-extinction 

Murky waters for our Coral Reefs

Coral reefs only take up around 0.1% of the world's oceans, but account for about one third of all marine biodiversity. And they are under severe threat....

The most iconic reef of them all must be the Great Barrier Reef. This incredible structure is 2,300km long and sites off of the east coast of Australia, and has been a World Heritage Site since 1981. Australian law dictates that the managing Park must submit a report on its condition every 5 years. This year has seen its status officially downgraded from 'poor' to 'very poor' as a result of climate change.

Human aided global warming has caused sea temperatures to rise, putting stress on the reef, and now UNESCO are considering adding it to their 'in danger' list of sites.

• The 2009 report found the Barrier Reef at a "crossroads between a positive, well-managed future and a less certain one."
• By 2014 it was being seen as an "icon under pressure."
• The 2019 edition is even less rosy, saying that the Barrier Reef is, "changed and less resilient."

  

  Flynn Reef, Great Barrier - quite likely to have been hard hit in the bleaching events of 2016-17
  (photo: commons.wikimedia)

Mass bleaching events in 2016 and 2017 really took their toll - in fact estimates show that between 30 and 50% of all coral was lost in those two years! The current report states clearly that, "the window of opportunity to improve the Reef's long-term future is now." It found that new coral populations had crashed by 89% along a 1,500km stretch (around two-thirds) from the effects of these bleaching events.

Despite Australia pledging A$500m to help with protection measures for the reef in 2018, Imogen Zethoven, Director of Strategy at the Australian Marine Conservation Society, says that more is needed from the country's leaders - "saving it means being a leader here and internationally to bring greenhouse (GHG) emissions down."

What is coral bleaching?

Bleaching occurs when sea temperatures rise, causing coral polyps to expel the vital symbiotic algae living in its tissues. When this algae is gone, the tissues start to die and the vibrant colours disappear, and get so brittle that bits break off from the coral skeleton. This can be so severe that scientists refer to this as 'Ghost Coral', because there is almost nothing left of it.

Bleached coral (photo: theconservation.com)

Situation globally:

A report released in Science Magazine in January 2018 (T.P. Hughes et al), reflected on studies of 100 coral reefs globally, between 1980 and 2016.

They discovered that these bleaching events had only occurred once every 25-30 years up to the early 1980's, but by now could be expected, on average, once every 6 years. And more than that, bleaching events used to only be a very local scale, measured in tens of kilometre's, and generally caused by local stress factors like sedimentation. They could then see these regional scale bleaching events occur in the growth bands of old coral - they particularly noted the Mesoamerican reef in the Caribbean, which developed stress bands along a 400km stretch after some particularly hot conditions.

Coral and climate change:

Recent studies have shown that after a heat event, big sea temperature rises are decaying reefs at a much quicker rate than previously thought. These events can weaken the coral by up to 15%, which as previously mentioned starts to make them brittle and fragments fall off.

Dr Mark Eakin at the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) told BBC News in 2018, "The acceleration in the return rate of bleaching events matches up very well with what the climate models have been telling us. They predict that by mid-century most of the world's coral reefs will be suffering from yearly, or near-yearly heat stress."

It is also worth noting that the 'cold' phases of the La Nina - El Nino cycle, are now actually warmer than the 'hot' phases were just three decades ago! So overall, cool water almost doesn't exist any more - just variations of warm and warmer.

Other threats to coral:

• Pollution from sewage and improperly treated wastewater adds additional nutrients, chemicals and bacteria to the ocean, which greatly upsets the delicate balance of coral reefs.
• Habitat destruction can come from marine debris from boats and trawlers, from mining coral for roadfill, taking prettier corals to sell to tourists, and blast fishing that is practised in some areas.
• Over-fishing affects as much as 55% of the world's reefs (Coral.org), and unchecked will remove the herbivorous species like Parrotfish and Surgeonfish that feed on the reefs. Without them, macroalgae can thrive and end up smothering reef sections.

Indirect impacts of reef destruction:

Reefs offer a great deal of coastal protection from big waves, storms and flooding. They provide the spawning and nursery grounds for a number of economically important fish stocks.

And while, tourism can cause damage to reefs (poor diving techniques, removing coral for sale etc.) - it provides a huge boon to many parts of the world. Reefs generate $billions in revenue and sustain hundreds and thousands of jobs in over one hundred countries. A 2002 estimate showed that reefs had a value of $10bn globally, with $360m a year in direct economic benefits.

As an example, the small Caribbean island of Bonaire can generate around $23m a year in revenue from tourism around its reefs, but it only costs them around $1m to manage the Park the reefs lie in.


So, the future looks fairly bleak for our coral reefs. Such an incredibly beautiful and vitally important part of our planet, which anyone of can summon up an image of even if we have never been to one, could be all but wiped from the seafloors by 2050 or so. Even if we keep global warming to around 1.5 to 2°C by then, in line with the Paris Agreement, 75% or more could be gone. Leave global warming relatively unchecked to rise up to 3, 4°C or more - they could be gone forever.

Research:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-49520949
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49255642
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-42571484
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6371/80
https://coral.org/coral-reefs-101/reef-threats/
https://coral.org/adapt/
https://coral.org/coral-reefs-101/reef-threats/direct/
https://coral.org/coral-reefs-101/why-care-about-reefs/tourism/