TEN BY TEN = 10X10 = 10% REDUCTION OF CO2 IN LONDON BY 2010. Join the Campaign to save a tithe. A savings of CO2 of 10% by end of 2010 is realistic by using taxation, public policy and resource management as the only easy and fastest method to start on the road to healthy ecosystem. The beginning step towards CO2 emission reductions is also the most difficult. However it is rather achievable in the city of London. If the starting point of 10% carbon emissions reduction cannot be achieved by the end of 2010, then the rest of the targets for London and the UK are rather meaningles. Further examination reveals that in order to achieve progressively the 60% savings of CO2 by 2025 as is the London Mayoral environmental pledge and the citizen's promise. The first step to take is to break down the ultimate goal of CO2 emissions reduction in bite size tasks and achievable benchmarks. In simple terms if we approximate the reductions to economic savings and regeneration of the city's economy into Green infrastructure and devise a technologically Green Olympics of 2012, we will succeed to reach the mantle of London being the first city on earth to move in the position of achievable CO2 reductions and environmental leadership.

But still we need to take the first baby step: ''Ten by Ten'' is reduction of 10% of CO2 by end of 2010. The matrix is as follows for the city of Greater London and the whole of UK.

''Ten by Ten'' campaign FIVE SIMPLE STEPS :

1) Achieve the simple goal of a 10% reduction in CO2 by the end of 2010. Use the reductions caused by the economic recession as the conduit to achievable targets.

2) Restructure the planning and focus on making the Olympics as a green push in 2012 for a further reduction of 10%, to bring the carbon savings to a total of 20% off the 1990 baseline.

3) Another 10% savings in the next three years will help us reach a 30% reduction in CO2 by 2015 with the green industry and economy coming on it's own.

4) With a robust & changing economy and a growing green industry, we can save an additonal 10% and thus reach 40% reduction in 2018 in the midst of a green industrial revolution in full swing fuelling further, faster reductions in London as well as elsewhere in the UK and the world.

4) Reach a 50% reduction in CO2 by 2021 cuting off an added 10%.

5) Thus we can reach the legally binding goal of the 60% reductions in CO2 emissions by 2025. This matrix allows us to have a sensible and progressive reduction of CO2 in the atmosphere for the near future while rebuilding and refocusing the economy.

We have sixteen years to achieve this but only a year and a half to get the start of 10%.

We can achieve this if we put our minds to it.

As an example: President Kennedy challenged the people of the USin 1962 ''to go to the moon not because it is easy but because it was hard.'' The US quest for a lunar mission was fullfilled in 69 and they never looked back. Does the environment deserve any less enthusiasm?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYb_mhiE-qU

Now the many benefits of the CO2 reduction laws and the effects to the markets aren't that obvious and yet they are far reaching. An economic axiom is that higher energy price expectations in the marketplace along with the certainty of the taxing of CO2 emissions will lead to an economic stimulus. It will certainly also lead to a greening of the economy. And that is what Nobel laureate economist Paul Krugman agreed with me in our last conversation at LSE.

We can thus focus to achieve the objective a 10% reduction in CO2 emmissions by the end of the year 2010 as that most important first step.

The Ten by Ten campaign started with the Press Conference on June 25th at the LSE in London.

We will unveil the policy of the Environmental Parliament and announce the methodology of achieving this simple goal.

Of course Public policy and the taxation mechanisms are at the heart of this. The price of energy is the obvious way to reduce consumption. A tax on energy would do this. Accordingly the emissions will be reduced. Now which political party vying for leadership in the UK will actually deliver this mechanism?

We will ask them on the 25th of June at the LSE debate to position the Environmental Parliament policy.

Environmental Parliament has a simple plan.

There are the usual three main points:

1) It is essential an energy tax is a replacement for other taxes, not an additional tax. For example, if the tax was set at 10% of revenue (national and local), business rates, council tax, vehicle excise duty and insurance premium tax could all be abolished. The average person would overall gain as much as they would lose. Those who waste energy would be worse off, while those who use little energy would be better off -- which is the whole point.

2) The tax should be levied on the end user. Waste heat from fossil fuel and nuclear power stations should not be excluded from the tax. This has two benefits. If the power station operators are taxed on the waste heat -- of which they are the end users -- and have to recover that from their customers, it transforms the economics of renewables vs non-renewables, since renewables in general produce no waste heat. It makes renewables much more price competitive. The second benefit is that it encourages the use of waste heat in CHP systems, since then the power station operator would not be the end user of the waste heat, and the tax would be paid by the person whose property is being heated.

3) The methods above will also reinvigorate the economy by creating jobs in the building sectors where energy efficiencies will be sought by weatherizing old homes to making them more efficient and in the new building sector. This will lead to an economic stimulus and a greening of the economy. These are all green jobs and businesses that are set to progressivelly decrease the CO2 emissions. Additionally all the savings can be redirected to alternative sustainable technologies and energy generation as well as sustainable environmentally friendly finance and services.

As for the figures, a 10%-of-revenue tax would mean roughly 2.5p per kWh on renewable electricity and domestic gas, 21p per litre on oil fuel products; and 8p per kWh on fossil and nuclear electricity where the waste heat is not reused.

There are also international measures the Environmental Parliament could call for.

A) Climate Change, once it starts disrupting global food production, will kill a significant proportion of the human population of the planet. Depending on which books you read, forest clearance accounts for between 25% and 40% of human carbon emissions to the atmosphere. People who destroy mature native forest are therefore committing a crime against humanity on a far larger scale than anything seen in, say, Rwanda. They should be treated exactly as other war criminals fpr crimes against humanity. Appropriate punishment constitutes proper balance of interests with the environment and allignment od society's norms, goals and laws.

B) The sweetener should be a fund administered by the UN and contributed to by each country in proportion to its fossil fuel emissions. This fund should be of sufficient size to rent mature native forest worldwide under threat of destruction, and to do so at such a price that the owner, be they government, corporation or individual, cannot make more money than they're paid in rent by converting the forest land to agricultural use.

C) The world spends just over a trillion dollars a year on defence. That makes for a hugely powerful vested interest and a lot of jobs. Suppose Climate Change were declared to be a "threat to national security" (which it soon will be) and the defence industry were given the task of tackling it. Say for example a defence contractor was asked to build a geothermal power plant instead of an aircraft carrier. Would they really object? By defining Climate Change as a defence issue it would enable the defence budget to be tapped while permitting the military-industrial lobby to keep their budgets and their workforce. Suppose every country pledged to spend 50% of its defence budget incrementally on defence against Climate Change by 2020. That'd be over 2.5 trillion dollars worldwide over the next decade. It would buy a prodigious amount of green technology. Furthermore, since defence is an expenditure, not an investment requiring a pounds-and-pence payback, the cost of developing green energy sources through the defence budget would not need to be paid back, any more than the cost of a jet fighter or a battle-tank has to be. This would have a large positive effect on the economics of renewable energy. It will also admittedly raise the bar on all industries to massively promote change towards sustainability and greening of their works.

We are sure there are a lot of other ways to reduce our stated goal of 10%. let's explore the ways this makes sense.

See You all at LSE at the 25th of June to question your politicians and specifically the Environment ministers and shadow secretaries as well as the city of London administration.

Notes: Climate Change Act 2008 - key provisions/milestones

Rationale

Two key aims underpinning the Act:

• • to improve carbon management and help the transition towards a low carbon economy in the UK; and

• • to demonstrate strong UK leadership internationally, signalling that we are committed to taking our share of responsibility for reducing global emissions in the context of developing negotiations on a post-2012 global agreement at Copenhagen next year.

Key Provisions

• Legally binding targets: Green house gas emission reductions through action in the UK and abroad of at least 80% by 2050, and reductions in CO2 emissions of at least 26% by 2020, against a 1990 baseline. The 2020 target will be reviewed soon after Royal Assent to reflect the move to all greenhouse gases and the increase in the 2050 target to 80%.
• A carbon budgeting system which caps emissions over five year periods, with three budgets set at a time, to set out our trajectory to 2050. The first three carbon budgets will run from 2008-12, 2013-17 and 2018-22, and must be set by 1 June 2009. The Government must report to Parliament its policies and proposals to meet the budgets as soon as practical after that.
• The creation of the Committee on Climate Change, a new independent, expert body to advise Government on the level of carbon budgets and where cost effective savings could be made. The Committee will submit annual reports to Parliament on the UK’s progress towards targets and budgets to which the Government must respond, thereby ensuring transparency and accountability on an annual basis.
• International aviation and shipping emissions - the Government will include international aviation and shipping emissions in the Act or explain why not to Parliament by 31 December 2012. The Committee on Climate Change is required to advise the Government on theconsequences of including emissions from international aviation and shipping in the Bill’s targets and budgets. Projected emissions from international aviation and shipping must be taken into account in making decisions on carbon budgets.
• Use of International credits - Government is required to “have regard to the need for UK domestic action on climate change” when considering how to meet the UK’s targets and carbon budgets. The independent Committee on Climate Change has a duty to advise on the appropriate balance between action at domestic, European and international level, for each carbon budget. The Government also amended the Bill in its final stages to require a limit to be set on the purchase of credits for each budgetary period, by secondary legislation requiring debate in both Houses of Parliament, and taking into account the Committee’s advice.

• Further measures to reduce emissions include powers to introduce domestic emissions trading schemes more quickly and easily through secondary legislation; measures on biofuels; powers to introduce pilot financial incentive schemes in England for household waste; powers to require a minimum charge for single-use carrier bags (excluding Scotland).
• On adaptation the Government must report at least every five years on the risks to the UK of climate change, and publish a programme setting out how these impacts will be addressed. The Act also introduces powers for Government to require public bodies and statutory undertakers¹ to carry out their own risk assessment and make plans to address those risks.
• An Adaptation Sub-Committee of the Committee on Climate Change, in order to provide advice to and scrutiny of the Government’s adaptation work.
• A requirement for the Government to issue guidance next year on the waycompanies should report their greenhouse gas emissions, and to review the contribution reporting could make to emissions reductions by 1st December 2010. Requirement also that the Government must, by 6th April 2012, use powers under the Companies Act to mandate reporting, or explain to Parliament why it has not done so.
• New powers to support the creation of a Community Energy Savings Programme, as announced by the Prime Minister on 11 September 2008 (by extending the existing Carbon Emissions Reduction Target scheme to electricity generators).
• New requirement for annual publication of a report on the efficiency and sustainability of the Government estate.

Key milestones

• 1 December 2008: Committee on Climate Change established as an independent body
• 1 December 2008: Committee on Climate Change provides advice to Government on the level of the first three carbon budgets and its full review of the 2050 target - see www.theccc.org.uk
• Spring 2009: Government to announce proposals for the level of the first three carbon budgets alongside the (fiscal) Budget 2009
• 1 June 2009: deadline for Government to set the first three carbon budgets through secondary legislation agreed by both Houses of Parliament
• Mid 2009: Government will publish policies and proposals to meet the first three carbon budgets