‘Sustainable Glasgow’, or unsustainable greenwash? (Updated May 2011)
UPDATE MAY 2011: This post has received a certain amount of attention due to its critical content. I have been contacted by people ranging from a magazine editor, to international planning students about my perspective on Sustainable Glasgow. While I stand by much of the content, things have changed. With former council leader Steven Purcell’s resignation, and the publication of Glasgow City Council’s relatively progressive climate change strategy, it may be that things are moving forward. I will be shortly launching a social enterprise aiming to promote equal access for dispossessed communities to the growing renewables sector in Scotland, so the polemics will need to give way to positive alternatives- it’s easy to criticise without offering another way!
Yesterday saw the launch event of Sustainable Glasgow, a partnership between Glasgow City Council, the University of Strathclyde and several energy corporations.
It’s aim is to make Glasgow into one of the most sustainable cities in Europe in the next ten years. Sounds good? Let’s take a closer look at some of the aims (direct quotes from the Sustainable Glasgow report in grey):
creation of urban woodlands in the city’s vacant land – literally making Glasgow greener;
North Kelvin Meadow is doing just that. Surely Glasgow City Council is giving this project it’s full support as part of their Sustainable Glasgow policy?
Not quite: Glasgow City Council is trying to evict those working on the meadow and raze it to build flats.
Restricting use of petrol and diesel vehicles;
Creation of Low Emission Zones in the city centre;
So Glasgow City Council succesfully resisted the M74 extension that would bulldoze its way through the city, which was rejected by a public inquiry because “policies for environmental protection and improvement would be breached along various sections of the route, where some adjacent and nearby areas would be affected by increased noise, visual intrusion, and airborne emissions, and severe noise and disruption during construction” and “”those living along the route would suffer from the adverse environmental impacts, with little benefit, while the main advantages of the new road would accrue to non-resident vehicle users passing along the new motorway, and to businesses located mainly outwith the area”?
Not quite. The M74 is being built as we speak as is slithering its way through the city like a vile concrete snake.
Creation of systems to turn the city’s sewage and
municipal waste into biogas;
Does this mean that the discredited plan to build autoclave plants across Glasgow has been abandoned? Either way, the city is facing millions of pounds in landfill fines from this year: it’s the worst in Scotland for recycling.
Development of a district heating system for the city – starting in 5 identified zones;
Development of highly efficient natural gas/biogas fuelled Combined Heat and Power systems;
This is promising, and such a system, developed, owned and operated for the common good would be great asset to Glasgow. That’s not what ‘Sustainable Glasgow’ has in mind, however. Here’s what they propose, and it’s deeply problematic:
Sustainable Glasgow’s proposed business model for implementing many of the major projects is through public/private partnership. The Council’s clear support and involvement would reduce the risk perceived by investors – thus making it easier draw in significant private sector funding.
In other words, corporations will be able to extract profit from Sustainable Glasgow’s projects, with the taxpayer left to carry any liability. The public/private partnership model has been shown to be a scam : maximised profit for corporations, a complete rip-off for the taxpayer.
Sustainable Glasgow’s Hall of Shame
Here’s some of the stakeholders of ‘Sustainable Glasgow’ (note that there is not a single representative from an environmental organisation):
Scottish and Southern Energy
Named by the Scottish Environmental Protection agency as one of the filthiest companies in Scotland, and recipients of a £20,000 fine for polluting a South Uist sea loch:
ScottishPower
Operator of the dirtiest coal-fired power plant in Europe;
Source One, a Veolia Energy Company
A company which has attempted to prevent access to details of it’s public/private partnership with another city being made public, and which profits from Israel’s illegal occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem;
Blitzer, Clancy & Company
An investment banking and management consultancy firm, presumably involved in ‘Sustainable Glasgow’ in order to allow profiteering corporations maximum access to Glasgow’s common good:
Where do the people of Glasgow fit into all this? While there’s a sprinkling of managerialist jargon about “sustainability champions” and “stakeholders” in local communities, it’s quite clear where the power lies:
Creation of a high level steering group;
Appointment of a Sustainable City “tsar”;all Sustainable Glasgow projects are designed to take account of behavioural change issues, and support behavioural change programmes as an integral part of their design;
No mention at all of grassroots community groups who are already trying to affect radical change in their communities, from Carbon Rationing Action Groups, to transition initiatives, to many others: and all expected to have their behaviour changed via a programme.
Glasgow Labour Mafia: now with a green fig leaf
It’s good to see Glasgow City Council enaging with sustainability issues and to begin to propose ways to transforming the city. This certainly should include energy providers, which we all use and are therefore complicit with. While I can support this in theory, I cannot give ‘Sustainable Glasgow’ my blessing. In summary, this is a proposal to offer Glasgow’s future development on a plate to some of the filthiest corporations, for profit, with only a token involvement of the communities affected, to be controlled by an unelected ‘tsar’.
It would seem this is yet another example of the “West Coast Labour mafia. It’s not about changing the world, making life better for the working class. It’s about looking after yourself and your mates and not being accountable to anyone. It’s mate-ocracy“.
I love this dirty sprawling city and it deserves better. I call on anyone who agrees to contact Stephen Purcell, leader of Glasgow City Council, and demand a real Sustainable Glasgow.
I too, love this city, where I have lived for all of my 68 years. I’ve been dissapointed many times over the years by the destruction of communities not to mention buildings which other cities would have been proud to preserve.
Many good things have developed also and a Sustainable Glasgow is a concept which we could all be proud of if only Glasgow City Council would come up with the goods and involve the many groups and individuals who have been striving at grass roots to achieve a sustainable Glasgow and Planet.
As a long time rate & council tax payer I demand a real sustainable Glasgow. Thank you Luke for informing me of the facts of this shocking scheme.
More Luke! Whatever the anti zero carbon people say, the bottom line is it all makes perfect sense to live within a low carbon budget, ecologically and financially it can only make for a better way of life. We need a strong core of well informed, well intentioned, down to earth people to articulate, audit and prevent any further wrong moves by those with current power to do so. I have been so heartened over past years to hear a growing number of your generation shout for a change in way we live. I saw in Sweden gas/biogas fuelled Combined Heat and Power systems being installed many years ago. It is just done – not endlessly discussed!
Hi Luke
Thanks for this timely crtique of a sheep in wolfs clothing – while the concept of a Sustainable Glasgow does not tackle the consumer driven madness that consumes so many individuals and communities all the biogas plants in the world will not prevail against the current environmental & social crisis.
While the public sector weds itself to a private sector addicted to profit at any price we will continue to dig ourselves and our fellow humans into a deeper and potentially unfillable hole.
The concern of these type of documents is that while they fall short of the paradigm shidt required they fool many people in to thinking something of merit is being done.
I would submit this piece to The Big Issue so it might reach a wider audience. Meanwhile thanks for your vigilance and the truth of your words.
best wishes
Mark
Hi Luke
Thanks for this timely crtique of a sheep in wolfs clothing – while the concept of a Sustainable Glasgow does not tackle the consumer driven madness that consumes so many individuals and communities all the biogas plants in the world will not prevail against the current environmental & social crisis.
While the public sector weds itself to a private sector addicted to profit at any price we will continue to dig ourselves and our fellow humans into a deeper and potentially unfillable hole.
The concern of these type of documents is that while they fall short of the paradigm shidt required they fool many people in to thinking something of merit is being done.
I would submit this piece to The Big Issue so it might reach a wider audience. Meanwhile thanks for your vigilance and the truth of your words.
best wishes
Mark
Hello Luke, this isn’t really a comment for inclusion on the site, but rather a personal request, if you can help. Having said that, it’s a very interesting site, and I’ll certainly check it out regularly – I live in Glasgow but had worked in Lanarkshire on environmental projects for about 12 years, and have finally, for various reasons, become too tired to carry on the endless fight against the council and its minions – for example one department would lend its full suppport to a community initiative (a garden and community composting centre), give you money, help with grants – and then land services would come in, cut down all your plants, spray weedkiller on everything and destroy the entire site. No communication between departments at all.
However, enough of my personal gripes against council stupidity – despite this, I’m still fully committed to doing my environmental bit, (I have my beloved car to atone for) and recently met a woman from an organisation who helps people identify bits of land and come to an agreement with the owner of the unused land to allow the community to cultivate it. I’m dying to get growing on the unused land behind my tenement in Govanhill, but can’t remember the name of the organisation, and I thought you might know? It’s a land swop scheme – the individual or community uses the land, the owner gets part of the produce or similar bartar. And there at least 3 more unused gardens out there, it’s almost enough for a community farm……
Hoping you can help, and many thanks for doing all the work digging up the nonsense that is council policy and PR that keeps lazy folk like me informed!
Rees