Never the ‘Right Time’ …Changing the World

Inflating expectation in a world that overstates most ideas has a horrible tendency to rebound on the proposer.

Contrastingly, we have reached a ‘tipping point’ in the debate on environmental sustainability that means we need to be radical.

It may be that it is too late to avert much of the consequence of neglect and indifference. Perhaps we should be reconciled to mitigation as the most that can be achieved. 

Announcing the MASCo Walcot PLAN

Human resolve and the probability that we can apply technology and science to avert the predicted problems of environment and resource efficiency is always a possibility.

We are going to look very foolish if as yet undiscovered solutions, delivered by research, fail to materialise.

In the meantime to give credence to a personal belief that analysis and negativity are valueless without commitment  to changing  and struggling  against problems that confront society,  MASCo Walcot have a Plan and the resolve to do our part to address the challenge.

Our Grand Experiment gathers momentum

The acquisition of the Walcot Street Yard in Bath enables  a ‘Grand Experiment’.

The Architectural Salvage yard at 108 Walcot  Street will continue to function as a resource for architectural features and period and traditional materials.

Together with conservation skills to support the City of Bath’s status as a World Heritage Site we intend to make the yard a centre of excellence for Architecture, Design and Sustainability .

A Sustainable Plan – but yet to be revealed

The Plan includes a scheme which will change the way Sustainability effects all aspects of our built environment.

It is too soon to expand on the detail of our scheme, there is much to do and lots of work ahead before our exciting proposals can be revealed in-depth. It is never the “right time” to over-hype an intention, but we  believe the need exists to engender both urgency and optimism for change through action.

It is our intention to extend the institution of Walcot created by Rick and Jane Knapp to become a pivotal element in all things of environmental excellence to bring about the change that will alter the way we regard integrated environmental thinking.

Watch this space.

Three new appointments next week…names to be announced !

A 21st century perspective – how sustainability changes the rules

 

 

Steve Tomlin’s article: due to be published in Demolition & Dismantling Magazine later this year.

Transforming demolition and reclamation

The Demolition and Reclamation industries are inseparably engaged in a debate that will transform our respective sectors beyond all recognition in the next twenty years.

The  irony may be that neither side is overtly aware that both stand on the threshold as the principal protagonists of the most important debate: how we become a sustainable society.

This is no vanity on our part and may sound incredible from the perspective of this moment in time.

Why are the Demolition and Reclamation industries so significant today?

It is highly unlikely that anyone in 1910 would have any truck with a description of how the late twentieth century would conclude. Similarly, it may be difficult to appreciate why the Demolition and Reclamation industries are such significant components of the sustainability debate.

Setting aside as temporary any of the recessionary issues that have affected the scale of the  economy in the last year, the future for the demolition industry from now will be dramatically different from its experience over the last thirty years.

The cost of exhausting our raw materials

The world’s resources of raw materials are being rapidly exhausted and increasingly commanded by market forces in the name of the Chinese and other fast-growing economies.

We simply cannot obtain sufficient virgin material to replace the materials we profligately send to landfill. The cost of replacement is reducing our competitiveness and, as a nation, we cannot fulfill our treaty obligations to reduce our carbon footprint if we continue to concentrate on Recyclates and Energy Recovery from waste.

Not for one minute do I believe that the quantum change required is so imminent that demolition will be transformed overnight, but if we do not redirect our approach to material recovery we will be like the WWI Generals who denied the possibility the horse could ever be replaced by armoured vehicles.

Even if it takes thirty or forty years, these changes will come about or our economy will be completely bankrupted. This does not even consider the environmental disaster and consequences that change could mitigate.

Let me take these thoughts out of the abstract and address, directly, the issues.

The issues of Recycling vs Reuse

When we recycle and make claims of 80% plus achieved targets, allowing politicians to boast ‘green credentials’ and the general public to feel reassured by such utterances, we display a complete failure to understand the truth.

If  you floor a steel frame building and save 99% of the volume of steel by sending the skipped materials to the local metal brokers, you recover only 7% of the embodied carbon. If you dismantle the steel for reuse then you recover 100% of the embodied carbon, less the costs of dismantling.

The politicians like the former process because they can tell the public they have achieved very high recovery levels which sounds good and wins votes from the gullible. In fact, it represents a deception justified by pragmatism and a belief that it is the only way forward. BUT, it doesn’t stop the problem of wasted embodied carbon.

We need to recover higher embodied carbon values

The industry needs a change of attitude and an altered perception and understanding of why we demolish and where we should be heading. Yes, we will continue to need bulk aggregate (recyclates) and inevitably some materials will  be designated  for incineration (energy from waste).  However, we need to segregate more materials and recover higher embodied carbon values from construction materials.

The old chestnut defence of most demolition contractors that many buildings are not recoverable begs the question, and points in the direction, of one vital change that must be given priority: we need to design out waste in our future architectural and planning practice and build for deconstruction and material recovery.

In the meantime, as we plan for change ahead, we need to ensure pre-demolition audits become accurate and sincerely attempt to identify materials available for higher recovery.

Who will pay for this?

Again I hear the cry “who will pay for this?” and ”how can we overcome time constraints defined by clients unsympathetic or ignorant of the need to change traditional practice?”.

The reality is to improve voluntarily or face inevitable financial penalties from the European Waste directives in the form of waste disposal increased charges and the removal of existing recovery note credits.

MASCo’s Sustainability investigations

Before others object that all this is fanciful, MASCo Sustainability has just completed exhaustive two year long trial investigations into major demolition projects. Results show that by planning, pre-demolition auditing, and buy-back supply line strategies, we have saved one of the largest UK retail chains massive savings by ending traditional demolition practice.

The combination of future elimination of waste by end-of-lifecycle designing, and the changes briefly described above, means demolition will become primarily deconstruction and material recovery in the next fifty years.

Coping with commercial volumes, skilling up, going forward

The greatest challenge for the reuse and reclamation side of this equation is the inadequate capacity and capitalisation to be able to cope with the commercial volumes. The National Federation of Demolition Contractors (NFDC) has been exemplorary in its encouragement of the deconstructors to skill up and obtain nationally recognised qualifications.

Central government will need to address these problems of capacity and skill or all ambition will fall at the first hurdle.

This should be a huge opportunity for the big demolition players to establish deconstruction teams, provide skills training, and direct capital to the creation of material stockholding centres.

The demolition industry more than any comparable trade has transformed itself faster and more comprehensively in the last thirty years; the challenge now is to go further and advance again.

Steve Tomlin is the owner and Managing Director of MASCo Architectural Salvage and Walcot Reclamation. National Chairman of the Reclamation Industry Trade Association (RITA UK); Stakeholder in material recovery projects with BRE and Bio Regional; Contributor to the Sustainability Agenda for the 2012 Olympics; Public speaker on all matters of Environmental Sustainability; Principal advisor on matters of future commercial sustainability to one of the UK’s largest retailers; Advocate of Demolition by deconstruction.

EcoBuild 2010: MASCo speaks on Sustainability

 

 

Steve Tomlin, MASCo MD, attended EcoBuild at Earl’s Court on 2nd March. Here is a blog version of his speech:

Sustainability, like the use of the word recycling, has come to mean all things to all people.

The danger of buzz words and their proliferation is that everybody comes to believe that prolific use and repetition are the same as meaningful change and real progress.

Sometimes it helps to reduce things to fundamentals. Our planet and its resources are becoming exhausted – and even if not yet imminent – it is useful to understand what our society in my lifetime has, effectively, been responsible for.

Look what we’ve done in 50mm of time

On a time line continuum  of some several hundred metres representing the length of time some form of life has existed on planet Earth:  The Roman Invasion, the Renaissance, Tudors, Stuarts, the Industrial Revolution, the advent of the car and the latest micro computers. We, identified as the  ‘written history of man’; our time line representation, would be  less than 50mm  of the overall length.

During that   ‘tiny’ window of   influence we have contaminated and exhausted our planet disproportionately by any measure. 

Now, driven by the need to address our excessive carbon footprint, we are  championing  sustainability as we did recycling to solve matters

Upcycling, not recycling

Recycling has for twenty years enabled a comfort zone of activity which changes nothing as we continue to crush and incinerate vulnerable materials that could be recovered or upcycled, thus making a significant improvement to our attempts to address embodied carbon values.

Let me just illustrate what I mean. if you crash to the ground a steel frame building and send the metals ‘recovered’ to the metal recyclers you will save 5-7% of the embodied carbon value. However, if you save and reuse the same RSJ’s, the embodied carbon recovered is above 95%.

Olympics 2012: the politics of sustainability

The relevance to my topic is that we should ensure that sustainability is not just more jargon like supplying “goods in green packets” to borrow associated benefit. Many of the problems are political and my work with Hyder Consultancy on the sustainability and pre-demo auditing is a good illustration of the problems.

To get the site developed and the Olympic Games actually built, ‘pragmatic’, you might argue ‘compromised’, decisions were made.

The Games at Stratford are, in the end, justified as designed for sustainability on the basis of Legacy; that afterwards the improved infrastructure and facilities will allow the East End to go forward and prosper. The jury is out and, to the ODA: we are watching and monitoring to ensure promises are fulfilled.

Sustainable design will build value

Again, I use the Olympics as an example – albeit a grand one – of designing with sustainability in mind. When talking to the planning authority and demolition industry, much material cannot be saved for reasons of time/cost and, more rationally, because the materials involved have little intrinsic value.

Confronted by the incredulous demolition contractor who honestly cannot see how you apply the ideas of reuse and reclamation to the average 1960/1970’s building, it is hard to mount a defence.

In this situation we have the very essence of both the problem and solution: we need to build with intrinsically valuable materials and stop creating architecture that is intended only to satisfy the need for a 15 year investment return lifecycle.

We need to forward-build durable architecture that considers end of lifecycle deconstruction and recovery

It is an indictment of our age that we are demolishing buildings constructed in my lifetime whilst we renovate and celebrate buildings constructed by the Georgians & Victorians that are still going strong.

We need to start introducing some caveats & qualify arguments. We need to understand what our political masters cannot grasp and why we have generally such appalling modern housing.

Local authority bureaucracy: no imagination, no creativity

We have charged legislators, who have struggled in the first place to comprehend the issues and delegated responsibility to local authority planning officials, with a challenge that is failing on all fronts. Instead of addressing imaginatively and creatively the problem, we regulate and administer a lowest common denominator approach swathed in bureaucracy and stifling mediocrity.

Local authority personnel recourse to a ‘by the  book approach’ for fear of punitive litigation and will not countenance risk, whilst conforming to long bankrupt ideas that are safe and predictable.

We need to break out of these structures.

Creating a fully sustainable supermarket across the UK

I know that some of you may be sceptical or feel a lack of realism. Let me address this possible criticism by saying that, for and on behalf of Britain’s leading retailer, I carry out sustainability policy development. The Chief Executive of that major chain has charged his colleagues with the creation of a fully sustainable supermarket within 20 years – across the board.

I say across the board for SUSTAINABILITY needs to address not just material recovery and architecture but an integrated system that applies to human resources and buildings alike, from procurement to deconstruction and reuse.

Commercial success through sustainability

That process is begun and is driven by, arguably, the most enlightened management team in the UK who have identified commercial success as interdependent with sustainability. Some of you may be familiar with Cheetham Manchester or more recently the new supermarket in Cambridgeshire; both represent first steps in a direction that is cutting edge design.

Every steel and timber element in these buildings is being bar coded with specification details, structural values and information that will allow end of life cycle recovery.

Local authorities: watch and learn…then act!

Of course, aesthetics and design can always be improved and it would be folly to boast the end result is a total and resolved solution, BUT it is happening and domestic housing and town planning need to catch up.

We need to insist that paramount consideration is given to how materials are deployed and how they can be modified in the lifecycle, as well as deconstructed at any end point. The more durable the buildings are, in terms of quality, the longer the lifecycle.

Construct, plan, develop sustainably

The salient and most important themes remain that we cannot continue to disregard the wanton waste of materials and we need to design sustainability into all elements of the construction, planning and development process.

There is no time for despondency; we must address these matters with both urgency and creativity.

Follow Steve Tomlin’s Sustainability Blog

Where have all the reclaimers gone?

 

 

A sustainable skill base

If sustainablity is to be achieved we need a massive injection of funding to promote the materials recovery skill base in Britain. Politicians’ fine words will not obscure the fact that we need a workforce capable of fulfilling this agenda.

No amount of bureaucracy or rhetoric will compensate for the desperate need to skill up to enable material recovery  and deconstruction to be an effective means of saving the embodied carbon in construction materials due for demolition.

Who will deconstruct this problem?

Increasingly, the case is made for careful recovery and segregation of material on demolition sites or renovation projects generating surplus materials. Who is going to deconstruct this material?  Who will stockhold it?  Where are the brokers and traders to merchandise and reinstall.

The sad reality is that the established Reclamation merchants are too few and far between and, dare I suggest, in the main too long in the teeth to accept the scale of the challenge that confronts us. 

Updating the tools of the trade

Technology and mechanical skills for deconstruction are minimal in the UK whilst in the USA, serious consideration is increasingly given to technical equipment to make tasks more efficient. Too often the UK deconstructor is found with handtools that have not changed since our grandfathers’ days.

Setting aside the low tech available procedures for deconstruction and handling secondhand materials we have another more fundamental problem.

Will mechanical demolition take over? It’s very likely…

Where will the skilled labour come from to move forward in the next twenty years if techniques and procedures are to change, as they ideally should?

If government does not see the need to address these problems then remote mechanical demolition is the only outcome. Fact.

…unless we train a huge workforce

The objective of increasing recovery rates by seeking solutions further up the waste hierarchy, to ensure improved embodied carbon recovery, will fail unless we educate and train a huge workforce. This process needs to start immediately and by the time the imminent European legislation demanding pre-demolition planning audits arrives in full force, we may be ready to cope modestly with the expectations of our European partners.

How to achieve embodied carbon recovery (the answer’s not recycling)

Nothing will achieve construction waste embodied carbon recovery unless we deconstruct and maximise reuse. Failure to resolve these problems of skill and personnel will render recycling and energy from waste the only options available. By default we will see more material crushed and incinerated without serious alternative choices.

Recycling is increasingly efficient, safe and cost effective but it does not recover the carbon content of materials or reduce the need for importing virgin materials that are rapidly becoming scarce and are required by nations like China with more financial ability to control supply.

If we don’t invest now, we will pay the price in 20 years

Government needs to understand and address these problems. If we are proactive and imaginative we can lead the world in material recovery skills and technology development. This would enable the creation of new technologies and large scale employment opportunities.

If we ignore these issues we will discover the scale of our short sightedness twenty years from now. History says we will not adapt despite the fact that we have been warned in good time.

More from the MASCo Sustainability Blog

New Year greater resolution…..an end to recycling

 

TWENTY TWENTY VISION

With the new decade and the seasonal urge to contemplate new ideas, it has never been more necessary to abandon old thinking and adopt new approaches, particularly in the wake of Copenhagen.

If our politicians need any reminding, then let’s begin by persuading them of the case for abandoning recycling and ending their subsidy of crushing (recyclates) and their plans to extend investment in incineration (energy from waste recovery).

Inevitably, we will continue crushing and incinerating waste in the absence of adequate landfill capacity.

A CHANGE OF DIRECTION

Down Cycling

What needs to be understood is that these two policy options must cease to be our principal approaches to sustainability. We need to understand the political function of the concept of ‘recycling‘. The word recycling in the popular vocabulary of politicians is used to persuade the electorate that progress in matters of sustainability is being achieved, without ever understanding that they are supporting a lowest common denominator approach that changes very little (down cycling).

The public are encouraged by politicians to believe that recycling targets represent progress, never understanding or only obliquely explaining that we need to reduce our consumption, reuse existing materials, and reclaim wherever practicable.

What isn’t explained is that recycling (down cycling) almost invariably means crushing or burning materials to attain high return recycling rates  but recovering very little of the embedded carbon.

If our problems of sustainable development are to be resolved then we must recover more embedded carbon than recyclate /incineration processes enable. Consideration of other approaches will need to be adopted or we will fail miserably to make any progress beyond providing reassurances to ignorant politicians who crave only to be told everything is alright.

THE NEW RESOLUTION

The new year resolution must be to challenge the powerful lobbyists who perpetuate the myths of recycling.

Government needs to understand that it subsidises ‘recycling’ and ignores important alternatives. 

The tax incentivized crushing operations invest huge amounts of capital in advanced plant and machinery to accelerate the effectiveness of their ability to rapidly reduce buildings to rubble for processing through the crusher.

Driven by the need to justify their investments and using issues of Health and Safety to make their actions plausible, the vested interests promote their position by controlling the lobbying positions that influence Parliament.

In due course, politicians receive reports that high recycling rates are being achieved and they boast of their success to a public that is barely aware of the truth.

HAPPY NEW YEAR

Our political masters would be better addressing the problem of wasted new materials, than investing more heavily in the failed down cycling policies of the last decade. 15% of all new building materials are reportedly wasted by poor site storage and over ordering.

The resolution must be to encourage up cycling and responsible purchasing whilst directing more energy to designing for end of life cycle deconstruction using recoverable high quality materials in the new build process.

Read more posts from the MASCo Sustainability blog

Environmental Leadership and the way forward

The situation is clear: we have not  convincingly addressed the climate debate

In the race to rubbish Copenhagen we should perhaps recognise that in the real world solving any problem is complex. The initial emotional reaction to the frustration is to condemn our political leaders out of hand for their narrowness, self-interest and lack of vision. It most certainly is better that the resolution of the climate summit is not perceived as a significant progression. Painful as it may be, we are clearly not deceived by a smoke and mirrors, politicians’ spun version.

Even if Copenhagen had been genuinely successful, we still could not change events for the next forty years 

Our energy policies of the last three decades dictate, even if we achieved Zero Carbon today, events would not change perceptibly for the next four decades.

What we need to avert is reaching the tipping point of climate change, nominally 3 degrees, whereupon we may experience a free fall or utterly unpredictable potential collapse of all previously modelled outcomes.

All is not lost by the Copenhagen decisions, but it may take  a natural disaster of unimaginable magnitude to refocus international opinion rather than rational debate.

It is vital that measured, scientific opinion continues to gather the growing evidence and that a scientific breakthrough, as yet not discovered, might mitigate our inability to resolve matters by reasoned behaviour change.

Copenhagen is not a failure that should be  minimised

Our inaction will  have terrible consequences. History, however, demonstrates that change will take place and the probability is that human existence will continue. For some  nation states, communities and individuals the consequences will be disastrous. It would be a very conceited person who assumed that they or their particular self-interest would not be affected adversely.

It might not affect you but it will effect tens of millions and some of those people will ask WHY did we allow this to happen?

EXCUSES

Get your excuses ready  if you must, but they won’t change what you have enabled, unless we address the problems of climate and consumption today with even more vigour and determination. No Excuses.

Knowledge Exchange Network: House Of Commons Meeting

High expectations at the Knowledge Exchange Network…but were they met?

Set in the wonderful surroundings of the terrace bar restaraunt at the Houses Of Parliament, the Knowledge Exchange Network announced its coming of age.

Given the grandeur of our surroundings and 120 delegates and representatives from all walks of industry, expectations were high.

Sadly events went down hill after  MP Barry Sheerman’s motivational opening address, stressing the need for change and the imperative to understand that our present policies and patterns of consumption  cannot be sustained.

The Chairperson of the new group Environmental Sustainability KTN, Colin Drummond, Chief Executive of Viridor, called for a policy  directive to achieve 6% Energy from Waste from the present 1.5% base.  His proposition was well delivered and drove forward yet more backing for Incineration and Recyclates.

When will the authorities wake up to Reuse and Reclamation?

No mention in any literature, posters or speeches was made at any time in the entire proceedings about Reuse and Reclamation. So much for joined up government.

Only last month we had spent a whole day in Whitehall on the other side of Parliament Square listening to a DEFRA presentation on the need to change the Waste Hierarchy to comply with future European Waste Directive proposals. Yesterday, the only stated view was to do more of what already fails; the poor, hapless politicians were  trying to do their best but had no grasp of how, in their desperation to get things going, they were  sowing the seeds of failure.

Politicians need a reuse roadmap, not a commercial dead end

The good intentions of politicians who continue to believe down-cycling will remedy anything was palpably tragic given the cynicism of the commercial vested interests who were there only to control the opportunities that might come their way from Government.

I must stress, I have no doubt that the politicians present genuinely believe they are finding postive solutions.

They have no idea what the alternatives are because they are surrounded by commercial lobbyists who are concerned to promote only self interest. You cannot burn and crush your way out of the present over-consumption of virgin raw materials.

We, the reclaimers, need to do more

Why, on such an important ocassion, was there no reference even obliquely to Reclamation in any of the speeches, literature or wall posters?

The answer can only be the failure of the reclamation trade and sustainability lobby to convince  politicians that they are directed into a policy cul-de-sac that solves nothing. The financial and organisational muscle of the orthodox down-cyclers deafens all alternative voices.

We need to remove subsidy to the demolishers and recyclate industry and redirect priorities away from incineration as a central plinth of our campaigns for  Environmental Sustainability.

There will be a case for crushing and burning, but only on the margins if we are to recover the full carbon value of scarce materials.

Like the Olympic project, with all its fine words of support for sustainability, Reclamation has been substituted for Recycling. Valuable opportunities have, in reality, been ignored in favour of Down-Cycling.

Ten out of Ten for hospitality, charm and sincerity!  Nil points for change or improvement.

More about MASCo Sustainability

MASCo launches new website for Christmas

 

 

 

MASCo’s new website

Christmas comes early for MASCo Architecural Salvage with the launch of our interactive website.

Building on our new brand identity and the rapid growth of the business, we wanted a website that would really benefit our customers. At mascosalvage.com you will find:

• Online shopping and product ordering
• Special offers and discounts exclusively for our website customers
• Featured items showcasing our latest products and items of particular interest
• Case studies of our recent salvage and customer projects
• Most popular items being bought by MASCo customers
• Latest news from the reclamation industry and MASCo’s sustainability blog
• and an outline of our Services in sourcing, design advice, restoration and conservation.

Happy Christmas and Happy browsing!

Confusion or Conspiracy? A question of political will.

Events in East Anglia fuel the great debate

The events in East Anglia as they unfold have a double purpose for the delegates in Copenhagen. They may be a distraction from the central issues, either intentionally or accidentally, that provide conspiracy theorists and tabloids with much material to discuss, whilst more rationally they have  generated the much overdue opportunity for intensifying considered debate.

We depend upon accurate scientific data for endorsement and confirmation of policy and for ‘breakthrough‘ in resolution of problems that at any fixed point in time seem impenetrable without technological advance.

Cause & Effect: the politics of science and the consequences

Scientists did not take the decision to drop the first atom bombs, they enabled the political elite of the Western powers to exercise previously unimaginable force. The ability to understand nuclear physics was enabled by political resolution to bring together the best scientific research and resource the work with facilities and the determination to succeed. Thereby achieving their political purpose with considerable  strategic urgency.

The moral dilemma followed as the realisation of consequence registered in the aftermath.

Scientific evidence for climate consumption

Setting aside that all simplistic metaphors collapse under extended scrutiny, the parallel for today’s climate debate with the  creation and  commissioning of atomic weapons offers a useful illustration for the twenty first century’s great debate .

If the distraction of the media frenzy about periferal issues is ignored, then we should call on our politicians to act with clear political conviction. Sufficient credible scientific information exists to confirm that the world’s natural resources are being consumed in an unsustainable manner. The climate debate is intrinsically part of the discussion about consumption and the environmental consequences of profligate use of Earth’s resources.

Political good intentions with cataclysmic results

At the equivalent point in the second Great European war (1940-45), confronted by the uncertainty of victory in Europe and fearing the Japanese military determination to fight on, the allies persuaded and facilitated the escape from Europe of the scientist who came to be the scientific elite that enabled the succesful Oppenheim/Manhattan project to deliver the weapons of absolute destruction that incinerated Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Without resolution and political will these  cataclysmic events could not have been resourced.

As a young man in the 1960′s, I met East German and Czech scientists who claimed that the nuclear projects of LOS ALAMOS could  never have been sustained without the broad base of scientific knowledge that the allies enjoyed and the Nazis could not obtain from their narrow science base, denied by the  allies  ‘spiriting away’ talent from occupied Europe.

It is time for another brave political decision – before we run out of time

I do not choose to venerate a decision that I privately find morally difficult to defend from the comfort of a new century, but rather to recognise that the events that confront us today may similarly not be resolvable without broad international co-operation and determined political will. Furthermore, resourced with more urgency than we have yet deployed. 

In the present context the greater problem, and parallel, remains the issue of political judgement in the light of conflicting forces that may provoke a fatal hesitation.

If climate change is as advanced and critical as most scientific opinion believes, then those in denial are not exercising a responsible democratic judgement but rather an obstructive and potentially lethal distraction, even if they are sincere.

MASCo adds its voice to the United Nations debate

 

Steve Tomlin’s blog goes to the Copenhagen Conference

Many of you have kindly read MASCo MD, Steve Tomlin’s post today: Better A Failure in Copenhagen 

Now you can read it on the United Nations COP 15 website where Steve’s blog has been included in Climate Thoughts, an interactive globe showcasing different climate opinions and thoughts from well-known climate debaters.

Click on the link below to access the globe, then click Show The Latest Published Thoughts. Better A Failure in Copenhagen should appear, until a new flurry of thoughts are posted.