TELL IT LIKE IT IS
24 07 2007Monbiot’s latest article in the Guardian is excellent.
But I also loved this one from a whole ago about our new bono-in-waiting Chris Martin from Coldplay, who wants to do for/to the environment what Bono did for/to Africa (which is nothing, at best).
Green hypocrisy means that we can’t tackle climate change without government intervention.
By George Monbiot. Published in the New Statesman 30th June 2005.
Show me an environmentalist, and I will show you a hypocrite. In an interview with the Guardian recently, Chris Martin, the lead singer of Coldplay and all-round good guy, spoke of his concerns about climate change. On his new album there’s “an intense, angry track encouraging people to make the right decisions about how they live their lives and how they treat the planet.” A few paragraphs on, he revealed that he was about to “fly by private jet to Palm Springs … The band can now afford to fly wherever possible”.(1) Neither Martin nor the interviewer appeared to recognise the contradiction.
At the beginning of his “Organic Bible”, Bob Flowerdew explains that organic gardening means minimising “any bad effects we may have on the environment.” He goes on to boast that “when most people are only planting their [new potatoes] on Good Friday … I am eating mine.” How? By growing them in a heated greenhouse.
I do not excuse myself. I rail against cars, but try to forget about the impact of the train journeys I take. I convince myself that when I fly to other countries, the work I do there somehow counteracts the effect of my carbon emissions. There’s no environmental difference, of course, between my journey and that of the person next to me. And as for flying to my in-laws’ home in Sweden …
But I’m not half as bad as most prominent environmentalists. I know men and women who spend their lives telling other people what not to do, but take their holidays snorkelling in the Pacific, throw their bottles and cans in the bin, eat tuna and cod. I don’t know how many times I have seen that embarrassed smirk when I’ve asked, apple core in hand, where the compost bin is.
In the absence of government action, environmentalism is, and always will be, for other people. At its best, it is a faltering and contradictory effort to do the right thing. At its worst, and especially when articulated by the elite, it is a means of securing ecological space for yourself against the competing claims of the hoipolloi. The environment movement in Britain and its colonies arose in part from anti-poaching efforts: game reserves were turned into nature reserves for the continued benefit of the hunting class. Will climate change campaigns now reserve airspace for pop stars?
Nothing of any substance can happen through self-enforced abstinence. However well-meaning we are, we will overlook our own assaults on nature, while recognising other people’s. We will persuade ourselves that we are doing the right thing by making the odd meaningless gesture, while continuing to consume as much as our credit cards allow. The only way in which climate change, or any other environmental impact, can be addressed is through government action: rules and taxes which apply to everyone, rather than to everyone else.
“Consumer democracy”, “voluntary simplicity” and “mindful living” have proved to be a disastrous distraction from the political battle. They don’t work for all sorts of reasons, but above all because of the staggering hypocrisy of well-meaning people. If we want to change the world, we must force governments to force us to change our behaviour.
As he admits, “there is a mismatch in timing between the environmental and electoral impact”.(3) By the time the decisions he makes come home to roost, he will be writing his memoirs. The political cost of preventing us from spending our money as we please is high, while the political cost of letting us get on with it is low. Our task must be to raise the cost of the second option. We must turn the greatest threat we’ve ever faced into the world’s foremost political issue.
Blair was incautious enough to make climate change “a top priority for our G8 presidency”. He has invited us to hold him to account if he fails to call in his political loans to George W Bush, and fails to use all the brutal tactics he has deployed elsewhere to strike a meaningful agreement. But he will listen to us only when we stop pretending that we don’t need his help.
www.monbiot.com
References:
1. Craig McLean, 28th May 2005. The importance of being earnest. The Guardian.
2. Tony Blair, 14th September 2004. Speech. No title or location given. http://www.number10.gov.uk/output/page6333.asp
3. ibid.
He followed that up with this….
Greenwash Exposed - Chris Martin
From Turn Up the Heat :: print :: email this page
Who could possibly be mean enough to attack the angelic frontman of the world’s most inoffensive band - Coldplay? Well someone’s got to do it. I recognise that he’s an all-round Lovely Bloke who really wants the world to live in peace and harmony. Unfortunately he’s doing a pretty good job of ensuring that this won’t be possible.
Let me begin by admitting that almost every environmentalist I know - and I include myself - is a hypocrite. We all want people to live by codes rather stricter than those we apply to ourselves, which is why real action on climate change isn’t possible without intervention by the government. But Chris is in a league of his own.
In an interview for the Guardian conducted in Las Vegas in 2005, he spoke about the songs on his album X&Y.
Twisted Logic is an intense, angry track encouraging people to make the right decisions about how they live their lives and how they treat the planet.
A few paragraphs later, he revealed that he was about to fly by private jet to Palm Springs, 35 minutes from Las Vegas. The band can now afford to fly wherever possible, and the increased privacy and speed mean that Apple will be able to join her father on tour more often. I certainly don’t want her to stay at home all the time,Martin says. As she gets older, hopefully she’ll come out as and when she wants. I always thought it’ be cool to be in school and say, I’m not coming in today - I’m off to Costa Rica to see my dad play. I do think that wins you a few points.(1)
The following week, Alison Goldfrapp told an interviewer that, during his tours, Chris flies home between gigs. We supported Coldplay and Chris Martin used to fly home on his jet, go home, write songs then fly to the next gig. I thought, What? Are you insane?(2)
As Goldfrapp suggested, his trips back ‘home’ (this could be one of a number of places) were plainly unnecessary. While the rest of the tour hopped from gig to gig, he must have travelled twice or even three times as far. But even if it was absolutely essential, for some reason, that he went back to Gwyneth and Apple and Mangosteen, why couldn’t he travel in a commercial plane?
None of the accounts I have read give the make of his jet, but I will assume itis that standard celebrity vehicle, the Learjet 45. The reports suggest that even if he is not the sole passenger, he is the sole beneficiary of the journey: those who travel with him - minders, servants or crew - go only for his convenience. So I will place the plane’s carbon emissions on his account.
The Learjet 45 has a normal cruising speed of 846 kmph. Its fuel consumption at this speed is 579 litres/hour, which means it burns 0.68 litres of kerosene per kilometre(3). The Airbus A321, a standard medium-haul commercial plane, travels at 853kmph and uses 3000 litres per hour, or 3.52 litres per kilometre(4). It seats around 189 people. Assuming that average occupancy is 70%, or 132, then every passenger is responsible for burning 0.027 litres per kilometre, or one 25th of Chris Martin’s consumption. But, as Heat shows, even one return trip across the Atlantic on a commercial airliner equates to a person’s entire sustainable carbon ration for a year.
It’s probably fair to assume that he flies at least 100,000 miles (or ten return journeys averaging 10,000 miles each) in his private jet each year. If so - and even before taking the rest of his activities into account - he would be exceeding his fair share of carbon by 250 times. If we were to take the other climate changing effects of air travel into account, we would multiply this by 2.7 times.
As if to prove that making the right decisions about how to treat the planet really is for lesser mortals, in December 2005 Chris Martin pranged his car, whereupon we learnt that the model he drives is a BMW X5. This is one of the thirstiest 4×4s on the road. The US Environmental Protection Agency reveals that in cities (he rammed someone’s hatchback in Belsize Park in London) they manage just 16 miles to the gallon(5).
Chris Martin claims to care about the poorest people on earth. Why then does he seem to be mounting a one-man campaign to sweep them off the planet?
ACTION TO TAKE
There is no point in trying to reach him directly. It would better to post comments on the sites dedicated to the adulation of Coldplay. When large numbers of his fans start asking questions, he might be forced to respond.
Here’s the forum on the official Coldplay site: http://forums.coldplay.com/
And here’s the fans’ biggest site: http://www.coldplaying.com/forum/index.php
Ask, politely, whether this is the example he wants his socially-conscious, eco-friendly fans to follow.
DEAR CHRIS MARTIN
I have no wish to be unfair and would love to hear your response to what I’ve said about you. If you want to respond then e-mail me at George@TurnUpTheHeat.org and we’ll post your response here.
References:
1. Interview with Craig McLean, 28th May 2005. The Importance of Being Earnest. The Guardian.
2.http://www.contactmusic.com/new/xmlfeed.nsf/mndwebpages/
goldfrapp%20chris%20martin%20is%20mad_06_05_2006
3. http://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/learjet/specs.html
4. http://www.gbairways.com/company-details/the-fleet/airbus-a321/
5. http://www.epa.gov/emissweb/E-BMW-X5-06.htm
Exactly right. Politicians seldom fly commercial either - remember the flap about Nancy Pelosi’s plane.
My car is in the shop so I have been riding the bus. I am usually the only person on it. The purpose of mass transit is to save energy, but in this case it is not working since it usually runs the route empty and it is a huge vehicle with a big fuel demand.