… and why it helps to reduce waste.

It is April the 14th. I’m returning from my two-week holiday break, coming home exhausted from a long train ride. I’m tired and all I want is to get in my bed quickly. But wait, I haven’t checked my letter box yet. There might be some important letters or the new magazine I’ve ordered. But when I open my letter box, a pile of paper falls out. And even more flyers, advertising magazines and leaflets, some even coated with plastic, are cramped in the small space. Annoyed, I take the whole bundle, and throw it in the bin, without another look. This small incident was certainly not helping to improve my mood.

Does this scenario sound familiar to you? I am sure, almost everyone of us has gotten a bunch of advertising magazines without wanting them, and throwing them away without looking at them. In Germany, every household receives up to 33 kg of unaddressed advertising every year! This equals 2,8 million trees that are cut down every single year. But that is not all: The production of the advertisement costs energy, releases CO2 and pollutes water. Resources are wasted and waste is produced. And it is not only paper, but plastic coats as well. And to be honest: Who takes time to remove them, before throwing everything in the trash?

But what to do? How can everyone of us avoid to get all this unwanted stuff? You don’t have to start a petition, or fight the postman. You don’t even have to invest a lot of money. It’s the easiest environmental action in the world, promised. You only need a piece of paper and a pen.

In Germany the legal situation is clear: If you put a sticker, or a sign, or even just a piece of paper on your letterbox with the words “No advertising”, in German “Bitte keine Werbung”, then the postmen (or whoever brings the advertisement) are legally obliged not to put any unaddressed advertising into your letterbox! That’s it. You won’t get any advertisement anymore! And congratulations: You’ve just saved 2,8 Million trees. Every year!

But why are there still so many letter boxes without a sticker? In Germany, one in ten households has a sticker. (By the way, Bayreuth is with a 40% “sticker-coverage” way above average and a good example.) But does everyone else simply want the advertisement? Surely not! Unawareness and laziness are often the cause. And a small association in Berlin wants to change that! Their aim is to raise awareness and make sure every sticker-less household in Germany (33 730 300 households, state: march 2018) can get a sticker. This makes it very easy to say “No” to advertisement. They call themselves “Letzte Werbung”  (“Last advertisement”) and have already started last year: 40 000 stickers have been sent to Olpe and Hamburg, making it easy for people to get rid of unwanted advertisement. And more is yet to come!

But until then, it is up to you. If you are annoyed by all the advertisement, make a sticker yourself (you can download the sticker here). It is a simple act – with an enormous impact.

More information:
www.letzte-werbung.de

Read also the article in the Nordbayrischer Kurier about the campaign in Bayreuth (German only):
https://www.nordbayerischer-kurier.de/inhalt.studentin-will-prospekte-abschaffen-eine-letzte-werbung-noch.1f1a9c4a-4e4a-45e3-96f5-f830da222f49.html

Title image: Letzte Werbung

The post The easiest environmental action in the world appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

But after kilometers and kilometers, the Savannah still looked the same, and even though I was straining my eyes, I couldn’t spot animals anymore. Trees, bushes, dry grass, sand, over and over again. For hours, nothing happened. I looked out of the window, into the monotonous landscape, trying to spot something that would stand out, something that would break the recurring scenery. But then there was again nothing, nothing except trees, bushes and dry grass, softly swaying in the wind. The journey seemed to stretch into infinity…

Around midday, we crossed the veterinary cordon fence (VCF), which runs through the whole width of Namibia, from East to West. Back in colonial times, it was meant for keeping the indigenous people in the North, and separating them from the, usually white, farmers in the South. Today, the fence (sometimes also called the “red line”)  serves to control the transport of meat across the country. Since 1896, when a Rinderpest outbreak shook Namibia, it is not allowed to transport meat from the North to the South. In the 1960s, the fence was also used to isolate Foot-and-mouth disease outbreaks in the North from the farms in the South.

It is notable to contemplate the respective land tenure systems in Namibia differing between the North and the South: In the South, being influenced by German and South African colonial politics, and formerly occupied by German settlers, the land is owned by the farmers. Each farmer can buy land (5000 hectares in the North and Central Namibia, and even more in the South) and build up a commercial farm. (Check out our article about our stay at a commercial farm here.) As the land needs to be bought, it is freehold land. In the South, the most of the agricultural usable land belonged to commercial farms. We saw the fences, stretching for kilometers next to the road. In the North, most of the land is communal land, and everyone in the respective community is allowed to use it. Livestock is usually not restricted by fences and roams freely, often accompanied by a shepherd, guarding the cattle from wild animals. Some people have inheritance rights to use a certain piece of land  but they cannot sell the land. Otherwise, the distribution and use of the land is in the sovereignty of the local chief. He (or she) can assign or withdraw land use rights. This, however, clashes with the concept of the management of a conservancy. Here, the deputies of the conservancy (as representatives of the government) can decide how the communal land is used and can declare certain land use zones, which can lead to local conflicts over land use rights. But often, this is well managed in conservancies and the chief acknowledges the land use zones and assigns land use right accordingly.

When we crossed the fence, our Professor said: “Now we are driving into the real Africa.” And lo! The scenery was changing: The fences next to the road vanished, and small villages with round huts made from clay or corrugated iron appeared. We could see children playing under Acacia trees and people walking along the road, carrying huge baskets on their head. Sometimes, some cows or goats where crossing the road, jumping nervously when a car approached them. Not always in the right direction. Sometimes we would see people were riding donkeys or just sitting in the shade of a tree, waving merrily at us. Our Professor was right: Whether this is the real Africa or not – this was substantially different from what we had seen before.

The post Blog Journal: Heading north appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

On our second day in Windhoek and after a nice long sleep (shivering as the African sun still did not hold its promises), we tried out our rented car and headed to the GIZ (German Corporation for International Cooperation) office in Windhoek. It took some time to get used to drive on the “wrong” side of the road, but after a while it felt quite normal to drive on the left-hand side. The GIZ office can be found in a neat, white house, not so different from the family homes in the neighbourhood, surrounded by a huge wall, topped with barbed wire, and a nice blooming tree reaching over it, covering the street with faded-red blossoms. While the wall might seem unusual for someone from Germany, this is a common sight in Windhoek. Also gated communities can be seen often, and many houses are protected by a huge fence. We passed a sleepy guard and stepped into the building. Inside, it looked like a normal office which you could find all over the world, with posters on the wall and pictures from projects in Namibia. We were asked into a kind of conference room, with a long table and a beamer in the front. Sitting down, I could see long-tailed birds fluttering around the trees outside.

We met three GIZ employees, Johannes Laufs, who works on a project about bush encroachment, Innocent Haingura, who gave us insights how the GIZ supports CBNRM (community-based natural resource management) projects and Alexander Schönig who talked about the adaption of agriculture to climate change.

Johannes Laufs, a brown-haired man, who looked very German and behaved accordingly, told us about the issue of bush encroachment, which is a huge problem in Namibia. Approximately 30-45 million ha are affected – an area as big as Germany. Bush encroachment affects the savannah, an ecosystem that is usually composed of grass and occasionally by trees, because more and more bushes are growing there. This is mainly caused by overgrazing, the lack of natural fires (often because fires are suppressed by farmers) and according to some sources also the rising levels of CO2. And even though most of the bush-species are indigenous to Namibia (and not invasive), the ecosystem savannah is still disturbed. This means for example that the habitat for certain species vanishes because of the bushes or the available food range has changed, which in turn can affect biodiversity and ecosystem services accordingly. Bushes have also deeper roots than grasses and are thus affecting the groundwater. This is decreases the quality of land negatively: The livestock carrying capacity of the land is reduced by two thirds which in turn causes a loss of 100 million € per year. As bush encroachment diminishes not only the functionality of the ecosystem but also the income of the farmer, it is crucial to restore the natural savannah to guarantee food security and fight poverty in Namibia, Johannes Laufs tells.

However, the bushes provide a huge amount of biomass, which can be used in many ways. In total, 500 million tons of biomass can be harvested in Namibia every year and used to produce coal or energy. In fact, a 20 MW power plant could be sustained from within a 50-kilometre radius over 20 years, and there is furthermore a great potential to export coal or other products. This means, there could be a win-win situation accomplished, which can create environmental as well as ecological benefits.

However, a key factor for establishing a win-win situation is the creation of value chains and helping the farmers to utilize those. The biomass can be used to produce charcoal, which is also exported to Germany, wood chips that can be used for cement production as well as for power generation; or even more advanced materials such as chip boards, fuels or biodegradable plastic. The GIZ is working with approaches like these, introducing modern technology and approaches which can support, for example, the Namibia Biomass Industry Group.

According to Laufs, there is still a long way to go. De-bushing is expensive and work intensive and it often has to be redone after some while. Huge investments have to be made. But there is also the possibility to generate a substantial net benefit of around 48 billion Namibian Dollar over the next 25 years, with bush control and biomass utilisation. And there is even more to it: De-Bushing will restore the former carrying capacity of the land, ecosystem services will increase, more water will be available. This can, in turn, increase food and water security and combat poverty. So – if you find coal from Namibia in a German supermarket, you can actually help to bring back the savannah to Namibia.

The post Blog-Journal: Talking with the GIZ about bush encroachment appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

The airplane is making its landing approach around 10 am at the airport of Namibia’s capital city, Windhoek. Quite exhausted after the 10 hours flight through the night, I look up. Outside I can see dry grass, some bushes and a seemingly endless savannah. I am finally in Africa! A bright sun is gleaming in a cloudless blue sky and I am preparing myself for the heat. But when I step out of the plane, a strong gust of cold wind blows in my face. Shivering I draw my jacket closer around my shoulders. What a start for spending the next two weeks in Namibia!

We are spending the first two days of our excursion in Windhoek, a clean, and quite European looking city, trying to acclimatize to the windy and colder than expected conditions. On our very first day, we have the opportunity to meet John Kasaona, who is the head of the the IRDNC (Integrated Rural Development and Nature Conservation), one of two major nature conservation agencies in Namibia (the other one is NASCO (Namibian Association of Community-Based Natural Resource Management Support Organizations)). John Kasaona is a huge man with lively eyes, who greets us friendly and guides us into his office.

John tells us that Namibia experienced a severe drought in 1980 that endangered many wildlife species and threatened the life of the communities depending on the animals. Thus, the government decided to act and engage rangers to protect wildlife. But who knew the bush and the animals best? The answer was simple: Local poachers. So, John’s father, a former poacher, became a conservationist und John became one after him. In 1986, the number wildlife began to increase again and communities got the right to manage the nature surrounding them. To make nature conservation work, it is crucial that the locals can also benefit from nature. “Conserve and make sure that you benefit from the resources that you protect,” says John. Ten years later, the “Nature Conservation Amendment Act” finally passed, allowing communities to become so-called “conservancies”. This would prove to be a very successful concept throughout Namibia in terms of nature conservation.

Communities wanting to become a conservancy have to define their boundaries, give themselves a constitution, elect representatives of the community and submit management and financial plans. Thus, a conservancy resembles a national park, with the exception that people are still allowed to live on and use the land in defined areas. Nevertheless, the local communities have to respect certain restrictions e.g. in hunting and land use, to conserve nature. In turn, the conservancy gets the right to manage its own land. To generate income, conservancies can set up contracts with investors, who want to build lodges for tourists and trophy hunters. Part of the profit of the lodge goes then to the conservancy. The money is can be distributed evenly amongst the conservancy members or be used to build schools, health points or other projects that benefit the community. To make the foundation process even easier, the IRDNC provides assistance when communities choose to become a conservancy. John told us, he once camped under a large tree for many weeks, until the conservancy was finally running. Now, the conservancy office building is built under that tree. (Check out John’s TedTalk as well.) Today, in 2018, the number of conservancies has summed up to 82 conservancies in Namibia. And it is working: Wildlife numbers are increasing, poaching is becoming harder and harder and ecosystems find their balance again. Thus, Namibia, which is one of the few countries who specifically address habitat conservation and the protection of natural resources in their constitution, can set an example for us all.

The post Blog Journal: How nature conservation works in Namibia appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

There have been five major mass extinction events in the history of earth. Extinctions of single species has always happened, but these five big extinction events are characterized by a loss of 75% or more of all species. The first mass extinction event occurred in the End Ordovician, 444 million years ago, where 86% of all species were lost. This event was probably triggered by a short and severe ice age, killing most of the – at the time mainly aquatic – species. The second extinction occurred in the Late Devonian, 375 million years ago. 75% of the species were lost. The culprit this time: Newly evolved land plants that stirred up the earth and released nutrients in the ocean, which for its part caused algae blooms, using up oxygen and harming ground-dwellers such as trilobites. The third mass extinction, also known as “the great dying” occurred in End Permian, 251 million years ago. Several natural catastrophes – occurring at the same time and causing each other in a domino effect – killed nearly all life on Earth: 96% of all species vanished. Some groups of species never evolved again. The forth mass extinction happened 200 million years ago, at the End Triassic. Even though 80% of all species were killed, a clear cause could never be found. The fifth mass extinction – 66 million years ago at the End Cretaceous – might be the most famous one: Volcanic activity, climate change and an asteroid’s impact ended the era of dinosaurs on Earth. But also, other species suffered: 76% of all species went extinct. (1)

But soon, we might have to add another mass extinction to this list. The sixth mass extinction, happening in the Anthropocene, right now. How many percent of the species on Earth will be gone this time? Some authors think the sixth mass extinction event has already begun, others say, we are on the edge. Clear is, we are observing currently a rapid extinction of many species due to human activity: Habit destruction, overexploitation, new diseases, invasive species and climate change are just some of the driving factors.

To define a mass extinction event, one has to look at the extinction rate, specifying how many species go extinct in “normal periods”. These so-called “natural background extinction rates” can be estimated by going through fossil databanks. With there help it can be for example estimated that under “normal” conditions every 700 years one mammal species will go extinct. This changes when a mass extinction event occurs. The palaeontologists Anthony Hallam and Paul Wignall write that “a mass extinction is an extinction of a significant proportion of the world’s biota in a geologically insignificant period of time”. (2) And even if we don’t know whether we are witnessing an extinction event equal to the former five events, one thing is clear: Species are vanishing, faster and more thoroughly than during the last 66 million years.

In the first part of the book, Kolbert addresses some species that have already disappeared: The mastodon, an extinct mammoth species, the great auk, the last individual being killed in 1844 in Iceland, and the ammonites, for their part witnesses of a mass extinction event. Kolbert tells the story how in 19th century certain natural scientists discovered there must have been species roaming the earth that went extinct – a blasphemous thought! Hadn’t god created all species, perfectly adapted to their environment? How could some species just have vanished? It took quite some time until the thought of the extinction species caught on…

The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History is quite an eye-opener, covering all important processes that are contribution to the ongoing extinction. And even though the book is dealing with a serious topic, Kolbert writes in a way that leaves you not thoroughly depressed. Now you know the Panamanian golden frog and the white-plumed antbird. And the more people know about their fate, there is a chance that other species don’t have to go the same way.

The post Book recommendation: The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History by Elizabeth Kolbert appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

The Classic – Reusable Drinking Bottle:

In Germany, 43 million non-reusable plastic bottles are used every day. (1) This means that everyone in Germany uses on average 192 plastic bottles per year. But there is a simple way to reduce this to only one plastic bottle: Using a reusable drinking bottle.

You can take it anywhere and as Germany has high quality tab water, you can simply refill it. Thus, you can even safe money, as tab water is usually free. There are many different types of reusable drinking bottles: Some made of plastic (make sure that they are BPA free as BPA can be harmful to one’s health), some made of glass, some made of steel. Every type has its pros and cons, so you should have a look at them and figure out what works best for you. For me, it was a reusable, BPA free plastic bottle, as it is light and cannot break.

A little side remark: You should never use single-use plastic bottles more than once, as potential toxic chemicals are seeping from many disposable plastic bottles when used more often or after contact with hot liquids. (2)

Fruit, vegetables and bread bags:

In many supermarkets, you’ll find these thin plastic bags in which you can pack your fruits and vegetables. For a long time now, I’ve tried to use them as little as possible, putting individual vegetables in my shopping cart without any bags. But it is nearly impossible not to use these plastic bags, when you are buying for example lots of small tomatoes or a lot of vegetables. An easy solution for this dilemma is to use bags made from cotton or tulle (so you can see what’s inside). Many come with a sewed in information about their weight, so it can be subtracted at the checkout. Another great way is to use them when you are buying rolls at the bakery or if you go to the weekly marked. There are many options to buy these bags e.g. on amazon, but it is also really easy to make them by yourself. If you google “diy fruit and vegetables bags” you can find many tutorials, e.g. this one. Now the only thing left is to to take the little bags with you. You could place them next to your shopping list or within the bag you usually use for shopping. As I usually go groceries shopping spontaneously after my classes, I simply keep one or two of those in the bag I take to uni.

Buying vegetables and bread with reusable cotton bags. (Photos: Katharina Funk)

Bee’s wrap:

Have you ever heard of Bee’s wrap? Bee’s wraps are cotton cloths covered with beeswax and jojoba oil, which makes them the perfect alternative to plastic wrap and tinfoil – and you can use them many times. You can wrap in you sandwich, pack a snack for the next lecture or cover a bowl in your fridge. To keep the wrap in place, you simply warm the beeswax with your hands and shape the wrap the way you like. If the Bee’s wrap gets dirty, just clean it with cold water. Easy, isn’t it? You can find the original store here but if you want to save money you can also make them yourself, check out e.g. this tutorial here.

Bee’s wrap. (Photos: Katharina Funk)

Silicone Baking Mat:

One thing I never liked about backing was that I had to use and throw away the baking paper every single time. Especially when you roast vegetables with oil – one of my favourite dishes. But then my flatmate came up with this incredible silicone baking mat. You simply use is as you would use baking paper and clean it afterwards. That’s it. One bonus: It is non-sticky, so you can remove everything very easily from it.

Different kinds of baking mats. (Photos: Katharina Funk)

Reusable Cotton pads:

When you need to remove make-up, it can easily happen that you’ll use 3-5 cotton pads per day (depending on the amount of make-up of course ?). One possibility to reduce waste here is to use reusable cotton pads or little sponges. You can wash these in your washing machine and they are as good as new. When I used sponges, I had to buy new ones every two month or so, and my (newly purchased) reusable cotton pads are said to be able to be used 100 times per piece. They came even with a little cotton bag in which you can store and wash them. I bought them at the shop where I bought my shampoo bars and my deodorant as well: Wolkenseifen.de. But you can get them from Amazon, too.

Shampoo bars:

I used to use shampoo, conditioner and shower gel, all of them neatly stored in plastic containers. This meant I would produce a lot of plastic waste during the year. To avoid this, I recently started to use shampoo bars. Shampoo bars look like common soap bars but are specifically produced to wash your hair with. Note that there is a difference between solid shampoo e.g. from lush, which you can use like any other shampoo, and shampoo bars. It takes a little time to adjust to shampoo bars, as the hair will go through a transition phase and it might be harder to untangle. To avoid this and to add shine you can also rinse your hair with apple vinegar afterwards (don’t wash it out though). Your hair will not smell like vinegar as soon as it is dry, but this might still not be for everyone. I seldom use the vinegar rinse as I don’t like the smell and use common conditioner instead. I still have to work something out there. Nevertheless, it is worth trying it out in order to avoid waste. Additionally, there are many benefits for your hair when you are using shampoo bars. Bloggers write about how much stronger their hair feels, that they have to wash it less often or how their dandruff has vanished. It is also quite easy to travel with shampoo bars: You simply cut off a small piece and put it in a little container. It is super small and handy if you don’t have a lot space in your luggage. You can order them at various online-shops (Wolkenseifen.de, Amazon…) but you can usually buy them in organic supermarktes, too. I’ve seen very recently that Cafe Freundenherz in Bayreuth offers shampoo bars as well.

Deodorant:

I was looking for a good, ecological deodorant for a long time. I felt that the natural deodorants I could buy in the drugstore where less effective than “normal” ones. So, I kept using the normal ones for a long time, until my flatmate let me try out her deodorant – might sound weird but it is not a roll-on as you will see. Coming in a little aluminium container it was a deodorant lotion, which you can simply apply with you finger just as any other lotion. When using enough (and you don’t need much) it was for me just as effective as any other deodorant. And it is free from aluminium salts and palm oil! (Read more about palm oil here.)Two little flaws: Until it is absorbed by the skin it looks white, but it won’t colour you clothing at all. And it “melts” if the temperature outside is too high. So you cannot use it when traveling in warm countries. It is a bit more expensive than common deodorants but keep in mind that one container will last for several months. We bought this deo at Wolkenseifen, a German natural cosmetics store.

How are you avoiding waste? Is there anything we could add to this article? Tell us in a comment!

The post How we avoid waste in our shared flat appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

Mysterious castles, beautiful hiking trails and fabulous wine festivals: For an internship, I moved to the beautiful Palatinate region in the very West of Germany for three months. The office of the small company UDATA – Environment and Education is located in the idyllic town Neustadt an der Weinstraße, which is situated 30 km from Mannheim. UDATA has around 15 employees – depending how many projects they are working on – and quite a lot focal points. Climate, water or soil research, environmental education, data management or app development: UDATA has many projects.

When I was about to start my internship, I was very nervous. Having had only an interview on the phone, I wasn’t sure what to expect. But I met a wonderful team with friendly and helpful people and I soon felt very comfortable about going to work. The team was also very supportive and tried to find work that matched my interest. I got the chance to work in different projects and to gain insights in various topics.

One of my tasks was to set up a website for a “Massive Open Online Course” (MOOC) about energy and business, but I was also involved in filming the lectures and setting up an additional course about climate change. Under www.energie-bwl.de (German version) and soon under www.energy-business.net (English version), you can learn everything a manager needs to know about energy. Controlling, facility management, logistics and green IT are closely related to energy consumption. In a changing world, the smart use of energy is a crucial ability for every business. Through filmed lectures and short animated videos you can learn all about energy and business. Are you also wondering why climate change is important? Have a look at the climate change course and find out!

In another project, an app called uRnature (we wrote about it in a previous article here) has been developed to bring young people in touch with nature again. With minigames and outdoor missions the app teaches youth about climate change andthe importance of forests. During my internship, I was not only writing texts for the app and helped debugging new versions, I was also involved in the marketing: I was allowed to plan and carry out two major marketing activities, including advertisement and a prize competition on-site the outdoor missions.

UDATA offers guided tours for kindergardeners and school kids through a waste-to-energy plant in Ludwigshafen (find out about the waste cemetery here) in order to teach children how to separate waste and raise awareness for trash avoidance. Luckily I also got the chance to to participate in these tours as well. And it was my task to take care of the ghost insects in the office. (Those were shown to the children in the waste-to-energy plant, to make them understand how animals deal with their waste). There were also some smaller projects such as designing an info panel for the newest outdoor mission of uRnature and a flyer about sustainable consumption. Additionally, UDATA is creating some maps in QGIS for a project aiming to provide a detailed map of bicycle paths all over Germany.

Due to the diverse and instructive tasks as well as due to the good work environment, I enjoyed my time at UDATA very much. The Palatinate region is also guaranteeing a high quality of life: The closeness to France, the beautiful landscapes, the friendly people. Thus, I am sure I have not been there for the last time and can only recommend it to others to do their internship there.

The post Internship at UDATA GmbH – Environment and Education appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

„If you could act, but you don’t, the whole world will hold you responsible. That’s why I give my best.”    – Kisilu Musya

In November 2017, the climate of our planet Earth was all over in the media: The “Conference of the Parties” (COP23) took place in Bonn, where representatives of 197 discussed how to implement the climate goals set at the Paris Agreement 2015. This time, 38 students of the master’s program “Global Change Ecology” had the chance to take part in the COP23 and present their study program within an exhibition booth. Global Change Ecology holds an official observer status for the UN since 2009, so 8 students could follow the climate negotiations close-up in the “Bula Zone”. The other students could attend side events in the so called “Bonn Zone”, see panel discussions about a variety of topics and have a look at all the exhibitions of different programmes, associations and countries. So, everyone returned with many new experiences and insights and maybe also a different view on the world of climate politics. (See also our articles about our experiences at COP23.)

But how to give somebody an understanding of the atmosphere of such an event – the successes and failures, the merits and danger, the swaying between euphoria and disappointment – beyond blog and newspaper articles and pictures? To bring the spirit of COP23 back to Bayreuth – the discussions, the findings, the failures – the students from GCE chose to organize a movie night at Glashaus with a following panel discussion with students who attended the COP23. The movie “Thank you for the rain” from Julia Dahr tells the story of Kisilu Musya, a Kenyan farmer, whose community is endangered by the impacts of climate change. Kisilu records his everyday life in the village with a handheld camera and shows the audience how his harvest is at risk. Due to climate change the long-awaited rain fails to appear and the plants are withering… When the rain finally comes, it is extreme and causes harm to houses and plants alike. Eventually, climate activists learn about Kisilu and his story and invite him to speak at the 21. climate conference in Paris.The movie fee was funded by the BcG Alumni (Alumni association of Biology and Earth Sciences in Bayreuth).

The Glashaus was well-filled for the movie presentation and around half of the audience stayed for the follow-up panel discussion. Alicia Medina Valdiviezo from Peru and Judith Schepers, Martin Baur, Patrick von Jeetze and Katharina Funk from Germany spoke about their impressions from COP23: They felt – similarly to Kisilu – a certain euphoria to be able to attend the world’s biggest climate conference. But then the negotiations stretched over days and all that was going on was mostly strategical manoeuvres. Thus, it was not easy to believe in a successful outcome of the COP. Did the politicians really want to reach an agreement? Did they really care to limit the warming to 1,5°C? Did they realize the importance of immediate action? Patrick von Jeetze stressed that especially the pre-2020 actions are crucial. Almost nobody is aware that Germany needs to become climate neutral within 20 years to fulfil its requirements according to the Paris agreement. Nevertheless, it recently became clear that Germany will fail its climate goals for 2020, mainly because of an enlargement of the transport sector. Judith Schepers talked about the island nation Kiribati, which will be destroyed in the near future – by hurricanes caused by climate change. Its inhabitants have only one option: humane migration. And Alicia Medina Valdiviezo indicated that especially indigenous people will be affected by climate change. She illustrated how indigenous communities do have their own coping mechanisms which are nevertheless presumed to be “non- scientific” by the science community. This traditional knowledge should come to the fore at climate conferences.

The audience discussed mainly about the (non-) action of the German policy as well as possibilities to motivate people to take more action. And even though climate change is an immense challenge for humanity, the GCE students had the feeling that the visitors went home caring a little bit more about climate change than before. And even though these conferences seem to make very little progress – the Paris Agreement was a major breakthrough in climate politics. Nearly every country has signed the contract, acknowledging the the issue of climate change and the urgent need for action. Now we have to make sure that the Paris Agreement is implemented accordingly. This is why these conferences are immensely important nevertheless.

The post Thank you for the rain appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

Friends of Global Change Ecology e.V.

One highlight of the evening was the announcement of the foundation of “Friends of Global Change Ecology e.V.”. The association aims to connect alumni and current students more closely, providing internship and job opportunities for students and an overall closeness of the “GCE family”. Another objective is to provide financial help for students, who cannot afford to come to Germany and study GCE. Everyone interested in GCE can become a member, supporting the Friends of Global Change Ecology with a small annual membership fee (10€ for current students, 25€ for everyone else).

Find out more: http://www.bayceer.uni-bayreuth.de/friends-of-gce/

PowerPoint Karaoke

After the international barbecue, it was time for some games. As giving presentations is second nature to GCE students, the student board decided to play PowerPoint Karaoke. Students, who volunteered to participate got random talks about random topics and had to give a spontaneous presentation. Whether talking about the importance of commas, the breeding of sheep (cuteness is the key!) or the fashion of the 1960s – it was a lot of fun to listen to the presenters struggling with unknown topics. But their struggle was rewarded: All participants had the chance to win carnivorous plants.

When the sun was setting, the band was playing and a lot of people danced into the night. Some were watching a football match of the World Cup, others had another beer and a nice chat, others wandered to the buffet again to sneak another piece of tasty food. Everyone had a good time. This wonderful evening would not have been possible without the incredible organisation of the GCE students board and the GCE students of 2017/2018 – thank you so much for organizing such a great party! And we are all looking forward to another beautiful summer’s day in the Ecological Botanical Garden next year…

The post GCE Summerfete 2018 appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

Could you imagine a world in which we just consume less energy, instead of having better technology?

Well, in my lectures I had some discussion of the limits to growth movement and the idea that we should learn to live within the ecological limits or constraints. I was very critical about it, pointing out, that the thesis is often formulated in terms of resources and the idea that we are depleting sort of non-renewable resources and we should learn to live within our means. But even people who are in this literature, recognize that the issue is actually not about resources, it is all about energy. Because almost any resource that we consume could be recovered and turned back into that resource with enough energy. And that is certainly the case in climate change. We can take atmospheric carbon dioxide and turn it back into fossil fuel – with enough energy. So, it’s all about energy. Then you have to look at how much energy we are consuming and also what the energy budget of the planet is. The most striking statistic in this area is that the total human energy consumption right now on the planet is about 18 Terawatts. The energy budget that is available to us in the form of just solar radiation is over 89 000 Terawatts. Therefore, there is absolutely no scarcity of energy on this planet. The problem is that humans are not very good at harvesting that energy. Most of our energy systems are parasitic upon plants. Plants through photosynthesis are able to capture solar energy and turn it into a high energy chemical bond. And we rely upon that for our food systems directly, but then with fossil fuels we are relying upon that indirectly. That’s all energy that is captured by plants. We capture a bit of it with wind power, and differential heating with solar energy, with water power, like rain and so on, this all comes from solar energy. And of course the direct solar energy. But the amount that we are capturing directly is less than half a Terawatt maybe. We humans apparently haven’t tried very hard. Because plants capture it and that has always been sufficient. We had horses and cattle that ate the grass and then we used the horses and the cattle as our machines to plough our fields and so on. And then fossil fuel got discovered and it’s like: Oh, plants aren’t just doing this now. Plants have been doing this for millions of years and it’s all stored up onto the ground. So, we just discovered this incredible convenient way of harvesting past deposits of solar energy. So, what we have to learn is how to capture ambient solar energy and transform it into a useful form. But the amount of solar energy that’s available is mind-bogglingly large. There is a kind of purity about that we should just learn to live within our means or learn to live with less energy. That’s actually like saying: You should learn to use less water. And in Canada, there is water everywhere. This planet is not lacking water. And anyway, there is no reason to learn to use less water if you can do desalination and stuff like that. So, water is plentiful. There is no reason why we should have to limit our consumption of water. But similarly, energy is even more plentiful than water. And there is just is not any principled reason why we should have to use less of it rather than more.

Except for the point that we are not able to harvest the solar energy efficiently right now.

A lot of the debates of the limits to growth and lot of the discussion about environmentalisms – what they really come down to, is optimism versus pessimism about human ingenuity. About whether or not people are kind of clever enough to figure how to do these things, whether or not the rapid technological progress that we have seen in the last two hundred years can continue. And I am an optimist.Let’s use China as an example: you have a country with a billion people, many of them very, very smart. If you look at the innovations about technology – it’s almost all come from the Western countries, from Europe and North America, and the amount of technological innovation that has come from other parts of the world is extremely small. Largely just because of development. As other countries are developing – which they are – then more humans are available, more people will have scientific and technological training to think about these questions.  If China started being technological innovative that would just transform the human condition. So, I just don’t see the case for pessimism.

Do you think there are also implications for every single one of us?

Yes – and I like to emphasize that because sometimes I talk to students and activists, who sometimes want to treat climate change as though it is one of these bad guy stories of corporations wrecking the world. Students at my university are trying to push for a boycott of oil companies, as though climate change is caused by evil corporations. And I like to point out to them that there is a fact of the matter as to whether or not large social problems are caused by corporate misbehaviour or not. For example the 2008 financial crisis was caused by corporations, there was nothing in the world or in the average person’s behaviour that contributed to their crisis. It was the fault of the banks, in part because of the bankers having inappropriate incentives. That is something you can actually blame corporations for. But climate change is something that every single one of us contributes to, with few exceptions. But every single one of us, living in a first world country contributes to it, because every aspect of our life relies upon energy that relies on fossil fuel. Therefore every single person can do something about it because every single person is complicit in the problem. Other than in the financial crisis where I actually couldn’t do anything about it. With climate change we are all guilty and that’s actually why everyone of us should do something about it.

Do we have a moral obligation to take the wealth of future generations into account, when thinking about climate action?

That’s a very complicated philosophical question, that many people have treated as though it were an easy question. The easy answer is yes. But, if you do that in a too simplistic way, it can actually lead to really absurd implications on the policy front. The reason why there’s a philosophical topic here is that it is not obvious, like we should fix this problem. The reason it’s a philosophical problem, is that question turns out really complicated. What I did over the course of the five lectures was actually to address that kind of problem, in order to show how difficult it is. My answer would be very nuanced and complicated and therefore is probably not worth trying to summarize in one sentence.*

* Here you can watch the livestream of the lectures to learn more about moral obligations to future generations.

Last Question: Can you explain briefly why there should be a discount rate?

(Editor’s note: The discount rate means basically that you would rather have 100 € now that in two months. The decrease in value for you when having 100€ only in two month is called discount rate. Regarding to climate change, having a discount rate means assuming that people in the future will be wealthier (because of economical growth) and can therefore deal better with climate change issues than we can now.)

That’s actually the thing that people from the sciences have the greatest difficulty understanding. It’s very typical for people with technological education. The same issue comes up with the construction of roads for example. Engineers want to build everything out of concrete because that’s the best way to build. It’s the most durable, it’s the most long lasting and so on. So, they submit all the plan of how they want to build the road and then it goes into the accounting office of the local municipality where some accountant then applies a discount rate. And when it comes back, the road gets build out of asphalt. And it drives engineers crazy because they prefer concrete. The problem is that concrete has this higher upfront cost with lower maintenance, whereas asphalt is cheaper to build now but has higher maintenance costs. So, it looks like it’s just a false economy. The discounting thing is actually the most common source of disagreement between people who look at things from a more scientific/technical way and people who look at it from a more economic and social science perspective. There should be a discount rate and there are a variety of reasons. The simplest reason for why there should be a discount rate is simply the fact that people will be richer in the future than people in the present. And as a result, cost is simply not as significant in the future as it is now. The municipality is having to repair a road in ten years. If there is economic growth that means the municipality is going to have more tax revenue in ten years than it has now. And so a million-dollar liability is less of a concern if it can be delayed for ten years. That’s just sort of rational accounting. It gets more complicated than that, but that’s the core rationale for a lot of discounting. And that’s the least controversial aspect of discounting. That is actually a major point of contention. When it comes to climate change, a lot of the people of earth sciences focus on the consequences and don’t see that, in order to translate that in a policy you have to add in a number of other factors that make it more complicated. Economic growth being one factor and what the impacts of economic growth are to the human capacity to adapt to climate change is a major factor. So, you have to be able to have a model that predicts that. And you have to figure out what impact it is going to have on discounting. There is a lot of frustration and I understand the frustration a lot of people in the natural sciences feel discussing how we should respond to climate change. But it is important not to be too propria about the science. Science contributes one piece of the puzzle. But there are a bunch of other very important pieces s well.

Thank you very much, Prof. Heath!

*** Find all pictures and the stream of the Wittgenstein lectures on the facebook page of the study programm “Philosophy and Economics”. https://www.facebook.com/philosophyandeconomics/ ***

The post “I just don’t see the case for pessimism.” – Interview with Prof. Heath Part 2 appeared first on Global Change Ecology.