But where would all the workers go?

By Josh on 10/10/2010
Tags:

CtrlAltShift Blog #2 - Ask most direct action environmentalists what we should do with all the airports and coal-fired power stations, and they will probably give you a funny look - "obviously we should shut them down!" Josh Moos explains...

Unfortunately, coal-fired power stations and airports are currently workplaces for thousands of workers, from technicians to baggage handlers. Most environmentalists have a vague idea that they want these workers to be involved in a 'just transition' to a low-carbon economy, but what does that really mean? Even when the environmental movement acknowledges the "problem" of these workers' existence, it has a tendency of overlooking their agency and potential power to effect change. If we are to prevent catastrophic climate change, these issues must be addressed.

Workers in high-emitting industries are not the enemy. Climate change is not caused by workers, but by a system based on profit and accumulation where the majority of people in society produce the wealth and a minority appropriate it. This system is called capitalism.

By understanding the causes of climate change, we can also work out the solutions to it. If it is the workers that produce the wealth, then ultimately it is the workers that hold the real power in our society. Those best placed to press the figurative "stop" button in a coal-fired power station are not the people frantically (if admirably) throwing themselves at the fences, but those working in that power station.

Those dynamics were clearly demonstrated by the recent strikes by British Airways cabin crew. By striking, they grounded thousands of planes, and had a considerably bigger impact on emissions than myself and other activists did when we shut down Stansted Airport for several hours in 2008.

This is not to suggest that Plane Stupid shutting down Stansted was unsuccessful, or that environmental direct action of that kind is in anyway pointless. However the fact remains that, while the BA strikes may not have had a directly "environmentalist" motivation, the workers' action still prevented considerably more emissions than we did. We have to recognise the power that workers hold.

This is not simply a question of using workers as a conveniently-placed army to disrupt the activity of high-emitting workplaces. It is about disrupting the wage relation and profit motive that are, fundamentally, the root causes of climate change. By striking workers challenge the "right" of their bosses to run their workplaces (and, by extension, the whole economy) in the sole interests of profit. This creates the possibility of workplaces and a society in which other interests - those of human need and environmental sustainability - come first.

Even a strike around "bread-and-butter" issues like pay or pensions poses the question of power and control. If climate change activists active within the workers movement can win workers in high-emitting industries to a radical environmental perspective, we could again see workers taking action to save the planet as well as their jobs. This is what happened at the Lucas Aerospace plants in the 1970s; when faced with redundancies, the workers developed an Alternative Corporate Plan to convert their factories and save their jobs. The factory produced military hardware, but the workers demonstrated that it could instead manufacture renewable energy equipment.

From the point of view of an environmental activist and not a worker in a car factory, this may all seem rather abstract, but the implications are crucial. The environmental movement needs to engage with workers in high-emitting industries, rather than alienating them. Campaign Against Climate Change Trade Union Group (CACCTU) have attempted to start this process with their "Million Climate Jobs" Report, and Workers' Climate Action is a network built on the idea of working-class environmentalism.

But we need these initiatives to grow. At the most basic level, if a car factory is threatened with closure we shouldn't lick our lips at the prospect of getting rid of a high-emitting workplace, but actively campaign alongside workers to keep the plant open, while helping develop worker-led conversion plans so that factories currently producing cars or aeroplanes begin producing socially and environmentally necessary products.

Everyone knows that climate change will hit the poorest first and hardest, but a united working class is not a vulnerable victim, it is a significant social power. A 'just transition' is not an abstract concept but an integral part of the fight for the survival of our planet. On 20 July 2010, Linamar car factory workers started a fight to save their jobs, and BA cabin crew workers rejected a pitiful pay offer from bullying boss Willie Walsh.

These are workers' struggles in the here and now which need our support and solidarity; they are the path to a just transition and sustainable future.

Polar Bear video nominated for the Viral Video Award 2010

By Becky on 07/10/2010
Tags:

Plane Stupid's Polar Bear ad has been nominated for the Viral Video Award 2010! Out of 500 submissions, 20 were selected for the competition starting on Monday 18th October.

Online voting will be open for one month on www.viralvideoaward.com, with the award ceremony taking place on November 19th within the 26th International Short Film Festival Berln run by Interfilm Berlin. The film is written and commissioned by creative agency Mother, made by production company Rattling Stick and directed by Daniel Kleinman.

Aviation is the fastest growing cause of climate change, and the film reminds viewers that each flight has an impact. So get voting from the 18th October!

Manchester airport protestors appear in Magistrates court

By Joe on 05/10/2010
Tags:
Source: Flickr

Six Manchester residents from the group Manchester Plane Stupid pleaded not guilty to their charge of aggravated trespass. They claim that in the light of Manchester airports contribution to runaway climate change, it was the necessary action to take. The trial will take place on Feburary 21st 2011 and will be the first climate change trial of its kind in Manchester, where expert scientists from around the world will defend the six against the polluting activities of Manchester airport.

On 24th May 2010, the six heroes created a human circle around a stationary plane in order to keep it grounded - using arm tube lock-ons. The six were challenging the World Freight Terminal expansion plans which will involve the demolition of historic homes on Hasty Lane.

Manchester airport faces increased scrutiny for wanting to increase airport capacity, whilst aviation expansion continues to be incompatible with climate change targets across the UK. Following the groundbreaking decisions to stop expansion at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted airports, the aviation industry is now looking to regional airports such as Manchester to increase profits. The environmental and social impact of Manchester airport will further be in the spotlight during the trial as all the local councillors around the airport had their unanimous objection to expansion overturned by the Manchester Council Planning Committee in November 2009.

Penny Woodson from local campaign group Manchester Climate Action said:

"Despite the threat of climate change, Manchester Airport wants to demolish local people's homes to expand flight numbers and increase emissions. The public are facing VAT rises this January yet the aviation industry pays no VAT at all. With all these injustices stacking up, direct action is necessary."

Another group who simultaneously used tripods to blockade the World Freight Terminal, preventing airfreighted goods from being taken in and out, have been charged with obstruction of the highway. Those defendants have already pleaded guilty and will stand trial on December 6th 2010.

Plane Stupid launches new blog series

By Richard on 04/10/2010
Tags:
Source: Flickr

In collaboration with website blog CtrlAltShift, Plane Stupid is launching today the first of many blogs on issues such as climate change, environmental justice and social justice to name a few. Every Monday you will be able to get your weekly dosage of key thinking on the important issues of today. Here's the first, written by activist Richard George and titled "We're In Charge - Or Nothing Is Going To Change".

To paraphrase author and activist Derek Jensen, every morning I wake up and ask myself whether I should go to work or shut down an airport. Going to work usually wins - I work for a green charity, and tell myself that I can make a difference sitting at my desk - but that doesn't make it a rational response to climate change. Instead, it's time to get disobedient.

It's not a want of impassioned campaigning that's stopping progress on climate change, but a lack of meaningful action. If campaign success was measured in petitions, marches and demonstrations, we'd be well on our way to solving the problem. Instead, scientists are warning that we're headed for a 4 degree rise in global temperatures, and we're only on track to meet our CO2 targets because of the recession.

Those of us who have been enjoying the balmy summer might secretly look forward to warmer temperatures, but stories about vineyards in Scotland bear no resemblance to reality. At 4 degrees, Kent turns into Marrakech - 45 degrees C in the shade. Even a 2 degree rise leaves Europe uncomfortably hot and condemns the global south to a very nasty future.

You might think that such a serious threat would galvanise people to action, but so far the response has been muted. Sure, we've marched a bit, and there have been calls for govenment to do something. We have even got a shiny new law: the Climate Change Act 2008. But the net result is resolutely business as usual, as lobbyists, businesses and politicians frantically backpedal, obfuscate and do everything they can to prevent lasting and meaningful change.

The problem, as I see it, is partly one of language. We turn our faces to the sky and cry, "The earth is dying! We must do more to stop it!" But the earth is not dying, it is being killed. Unhelpfully, the people killing it are incentivised to do so by the fortunes they make selling cars, trading in carbon or flying people to Manhattan to go shoe shopping. Helpfully, they have names and addresses, which means that we can pay them a visit and persuade them to stop.

We need to accept that government, businesses and the army of civil servants are not going to make the changes we need. They have too much invested in the present system. Instead, it is our responsibility, not just to be the change we want to see, but to reshape the world as we want it to be. This means changing our behaviour - buying less crap, turning down thermostats and all that jazz - but far more importantly, it means making sure that business as usual is simply not an option.

We still have a chance to make a difference, but we'll have to be quick. Unlike campaigns to end poverty, or stop the arms trade, this one has a deadline. Once we hit a certain temperature, large amounts of greenhouse gases, such as the methane stored in the frozen Siberiam permafrost, will start to leak out of their own accord. If we're going to stop runaway climate change, we have only a few years in which to do it.

So what can - and should - you be doing? Think global, act local. Find your nearest "carbon criminal" - a coal fired power station, an airport, an open-cast coal mine - get some friends, and pay them a visit. Don't be a "green consumer", or an "ethical shopper" or whatever buzzword some arsehole in marketing dreamt up. Instead, get active in your community, your school, your workplace.

Make sure that government realises that the changes which need to happen - and which would make the world a better, fairer place, even if climate change wasn't happening - are going to happen, even if we have to go through them to do it. Because until they realise that we're in charge, nothing is going to change.

But whatever you do, don't lose hope. We can win this if we work togethor and remember what we're fighting for. It's ok to go to work most days (unless you work for an oil company, in which case, call in sick). Just remember: if you want to make a difference, you have to get off the sofa and start taking action against those who would condemn us to a future not worth living.

See you on the streets.

A call to end the Fairford Air Tattoo's charitable status

By Joe on 30/09/2010
Tags:
Source: Flickr

A big campaign against the Fairford Air Tattoo's RAF charitable status has just formed. The Fairford Air Tattoo is one of the largest air shows in the world and each year tonnes and tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions are created by the event, polluting the atmosphere in a major way. And for what - a bit of entertainment?

A new campaign group called The Royal Internation Air Tattoo - No Thanks (RIAT-NT) has formed to campaign against one of the most unsustainable events of the year in Britain. The Fairford Air Tattoo is one of the largest air shows there is with over 155,000 tickets sold last year. A lot of those tickets went to people who then flew over to watch the flying show. The event is extremely controversial in the Gloucesterchire region and is deeply resented by many local people. It also makes a complete mockery of personal sacrifices being made at a local level due to individuals concerns about climate change.

As well as the climate impacts there is also the question over the validity of encouraging youngsters into aviation. The charitable trust's website states that "at the heart of the trust is it's commitment to young people, to initiate and develop within them an enthusiasm for aviation and all it's guises." Young people face a bleak future as a consequence of runaway climate change and will have to learn how to live in a low carbon future. Being sucked into becoming the new generation to push the aviation agenda is definetly not the right step.

Financially the aviation industry is highly subsidized compared to other industries. It receives £9 billion annually in fuel tax exemptions and there is also no VAT on ticket sales. Charitable support is definetly not needed.

To find out more check out: http://www.riat-nt.blogspot.com/

To sign the petition go to: http://www.petitionbuzz.com/petitions/riatnt

Welfare cuts for the majority, more flights for the minority

By Joe on 30/09/2010
Tags:
Source: Flickr

Birmingham and Solihull councils have a month to decide whether to give the go ahead to Birminham Airports runway extension plans. To extend the runway, the plans are going to have to include the £32 million realignment of the A45, money in which the airport is relying on from the council. Both councils have until the 28th October to make a decision about whether to put this money in or not.

This is why they should NOT put the money in:

  • With a looming climate catastrophe ahead of us, and while most other industries and individuals are trying to make cuts in emissions, it is not just for the aviation industy to continue down the road of expansion.
  • Social welfare is being sacrificed on the god of corporate welfare - if the council decide to put the £32 million in towards the airport expanding, the money will come at an expense to services like local public transport, schools and social services.
  • The aviation industry continues to state they are simply responding to demand - this is clearly not true as we see adverts for cheap flights everywhere we go these days. Also, if people stopped flying on unnecessary flights domestically, ie from London to Manchester and London to Birmingham then we would straight away see a reduction in air passengers.
  • The increased noise impacts - there are many estates close to the airport which already suffer from the noise. An increase in air traffic is only going to make this worse.
  • Pollution levels - pollution levels are already really bad in areas around the airport, an increase in flights will add more kerosene and diesel into the air in the surrounding areas, making it an even more unpleasant place to live.