Number 10.

The point where sustainability in the future is no longer looked at as a possibility but a must. This point is not taken seriously enough, our economy is on a tightrope as is our climate.

"A new report says the government should not just be trying to prevent the effects of climate change, but should focus on adapting to its inevitable impact."-Channel 4 (2009)

Already the thought of trying to be sustainable is being cast aside, there are bigger problems to face at the moment in the governments eyes and it is these issues that will be our downfall.

The thought of nuclear power is quite appealing to most, but it is a quick fix in comparison to what we could do and how much power we could generate with what we already have freely working on this planet (water, wind and solar radiation.)

It does seem as though we are all big children with no adult to tell us when we've played enough and now its time to do our homework, with the inevitable consequence of not having the future we want. Sustainability has a stigma attached to it, people don't like to think of reusing stuff for the better, there is a need for constant fresh and new without a thought as to where it comes from. This attitude has become apparent due to the standard of life we have all become used to and we don't necessarily need.

So the main threat then is every bodies attitudes to what is really important, the governments attitudes to what is priority, is it the economy, war, or our future? Some could say that economy and war will decide our future, but if thought about on a more broader scale; We're at war due to oil, oil is for our energy, the war costs us billions which could go into our economy. Therefore, if there was no war for oil, the economy would be in a better state and there would be more money for the development of renewable resources, no?

The development of the hydro engine has been tried and tested, as has the electric car, but oil companies have so much money invested into governments and economies that new ways of energy on a large scale are just not possible. Oil companies with their BILLIONS of pounds and dollars coming in and out of the country are not going to have that money circulating within a country that does not buy enough of their product.

So its not really "when will there be a change in our attitude" that's going to be the decider anymore its going to be "when there is a huge change in the climate" that we will change our attitude.

http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/science_technology/climate+change+uk+must+adapt+to+the+inevitable/2946957

How sustainable is your home?

There isn't a specific statement that describes a sustainable community, a sustainable community is built up of several different factors that make it sustainable and give it the rightfully earned title. It must however take into consideration, the Economic, Social and Environmental issues involved within its surrounding to achieve this status.

It was a nice surprise to learn when I visited the Office for national statistics website and tapped in my postcode that my Super output area (SOA) stats are above average for my region (southeast).

Apparently within my SOA which is 'Test Valley 005D' we have an above average economic activity rate per person (86.7%) than the southeast (82%) or the whole country (78.6%).
This is impressive because it means that there is an above average amount of people in jobs and participating towards society which is the first step towards prosperity of a fully functioning community.

The unemployment rate was also lower than average for the district than it was for both the southeast and the country, hitting 3.1% for the district, 4.5% for the region and 5.5% for the country. This is good news for my SOA in particular, as unemployment can lead to other social dilemmas such as homelessness and crime and so with a low unemployment rate it shows that there is a healthy social atmosphere with less money and thought going into these problems because they simply aren't there and money being channelled into more constructive projects will then continue to provide jobs and housing for a growing community.

Another useful statistic is the actual amount of people who are unemployed in comparison to others in certain types of jobs, this is the break down for 'test valley 005D':

AB: Higher and intermediate managerial / administrative / professional (Persons) : 340

C1: Supervisory, clerical, junior managerial / administrative / professional (Persons) : 358

C2: Skilled manual workers (Persons) : 253

D: Semi-skilled and unskilled manual workers (Persons) : 172

E: On state benefit, unemployed, lowest grade workers (Persons) : 99

These figures are good to show that there is a diversity in job choices within the SOA, its good to see that managerial and supervisory/professional jobs are the majority factor, when it comes to unskilled and unemployed there is a considerable difference showing that there are plenty of opportunities and services for my area.

I believe that these figures are correct, I have lived in other areas of my town where I know the figures would show differences and particularly worse circumstances, it is obvious that there is alot of difference in one town as my area is thriving and is economically sound.
I personally know that other parts are worse off, which leads me to believe these stats are correct, I am happy with my area, I know other people who live there care about it and choose to spend time to keep it the way it is. We have a small council which looks after the grass and woodland areas, and also a neighbourhood watch system. Most people are reasonably well off and are considerate and active members of the community.

I can say that it is a lot better than the other areas I have lived in in town and is certainly a nice living environment for all involved.


http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/LeadAreaSearch.do?a=3&r=1&i=1001&m=0&s=1236537002885&enc=1&areaSearchText=SP10+3DF&extendedList=false&searchAreas=Search

Sustainably educated?

Personally I believe that if something is present in someones life, whether or not it makes an impact, it is still present and is so still thought about.

When it comes to education this is probably a good example; less and less people are interested in politics and voting because they either do not know or understand what politicians are there for and how their vote will make an impact.
So if the curriculum was to teach politics from an earlier age there would probably be a more understanding and interested generation of people to follow on from the last, politically.

I think this is largely the case when it comes to sustainable development, the everyday average Joe doesn't know how much of an impact they are having when it comes to recycling or any other sustainable change is made in their lives, and so the outcome is... They don't make the change.

If Sustainable development is introduced to children at an early age, it is more likely that they will understand why they are doing it and probably carry it on through their lives if not for any other reason by habit.
For example; teaching children to put certain waste items in certain bins will teach them to go home and teach their parents, if councils and schools worked together to create a scheme where schools teach children and councils provide the bins, the step forward has already been made.
And as we learn the most when we are young why not catch the children as early as possible so they know no different?

Skip forward fifteen years... These children that were merely taught to put different items in different bins now have a full and more broad understanding of sustainable living and the environment, surely this will have an impact on education and job choices? Choosing to go to University to study Sustainable development or Waste management because they KNOW its a big deal, because they've been taught all their lives that it matters.

So to answer the first question: I think that Sustainable development is very valuable in education and that if the U.N can keep their word then we have a brighter future.

I also agree with Haigh's statement that Geography is best placed to deliver this curriculum. It could have its own individual place, but when it comes to higher education I think that Geography needs Sustainable development, simply because of how versatile a subject Geography has become, from being about 'colour by numbers' which alot of people I have noticed believe it is (unfortunately) to the more recent Human Geographies.
Sustainable development makes a good bridge between the natural and the social aspects and has a rightful place to be taught there to give people that link between us and the Earth.

So far I am enjoying this module, I think it is very informative and has a very interesting and important message to deliver.
I like the way it covers all angles, from showing the global scale of the problems (the use of the U.N meeting) to the more local problems and solutions (the travel plan assignment) I think it is an important module to have and believe it should be taught more widely than just Geography at degree level.

To comfortable in credit.

I have the opinion that we are all to comfortable in our lives today.
We expect to much for to little, we take everything for granted and have no thought for those worse off than ourselves as long as we are comfortable.

To imagine a world without humans would be to imagine a world that works entirely in sync with itself, with multiple food chains working thier cycle as well as nature working its magic with noone putting thier foot in and changing it... to imagine this place would almost have the label 'paradise'.

Thats all we have been doing since we evolved past the stage of living with the planet.
Every other organism has it place and has its job, we have decided that we dont need natures place because we are more 'intellegent' and we can do better... we have become parasites.

The 'credit crunch' has come around because we have given back to little and taken to much when it comes to our society, why could we not work for what we have? Why have to borrow? Why not live off the fat of the land and trade for what we need instead of having mortgages at rediculous rates and debts that keep people under until they hit middle age? Because we all want more.
We're a species based on greed, and we have no problem trampling the weak and hurdling the dead to get what we want.
I believe in survival of the fittest, so let the credit crunch happen, hopefully we might open our eyes to what we're doing to our own societies and then in turn, to the world.

Isnt it funny how something like this has turned up just as we have decided that our environment may take a turn for the worse which we wont be able to change, coincidence?

Make people work for what they have and learn to share to get by, we live in a very greedy world its about time we learnt our lesson.

Sustainable survey...

Our survey commenced at a refreshing 8am on a thursday morning.
We had to get up and out earlier as one member of our group forgot to pick up the equipment from Faith.
This did not impress Faith as she had to rearrange her morning for us to collect it.

Two of our members went and played with the traffic while the rest of us split the surveys into eaual amounts and went and hassled students from the University so they would take part.

We were able to stay in the warm for the majority of the time because most people at that time in the morning were in the restaurant or the library :)

It was easy to establish conversation and get people to think about what we asking them, especially as they had just travelled to Uni.

Alot of people asked did not live on campus, they drove usually alone to Uni and thought they shouldnt have to pay for parking.
They also thought that if an easier method was available they probably wouldnt use it as they like to drive in.

I also found that when asked if they were concerned about thier impact on the environment there was alot of hesitation. This was easily sorted by me telling them they could say 'no' - unless they were doing applied sciences then they would usually say 'yes'.

I thought the survey covered a varied and useful amount of information and was set out easily which helped to cover it quickly and effeciently.

Although it was early in the morning this was quite an enjoyable and informative task.

Little rant about an unsustainable Xmas.

Just remembered this...

One night I was on my way home from a jolly night at the local boozer with my chums.

I was about to walk in my front door and it occurred to me 'Why has everyone STILL got their Christmas lights on?'

It was about 4am and it was on the back end of Christmas, probably around the 29th of Dec.

I noticed which houses that were the culprits for such awful light pollution at this time of the
year, thinking that their houses look good and festive with blow up bloody Santa sat on their roof, it was the wealthier side of the coin to! So you'd expect them to have some taste.

It looks crap.

Not only that but its using up LOADS of energy to look crap.

Just thought id put that out there.

Happy New Year :)