Environmental English (2)
Yes, it's our addiction to plastic that is of concern because this material doesn't
decay very quickly, so once we've used it, it hangs around for a very long time.
It is a problem – and decay, by the way, describes the natural process
of something being destroyed or breaking down into small particles. We hear so much
about the consequences of having too much waste plastic around, don't we?
Indeed. Not only does it cause a mess - wildlife, particularly marine animals,
are at risk when they become entangled in plastic waste,
or ingest it. It's an issue that needs tackling – or dealing with. And that's
what we'll be discussing today and finding out what could be done to solve this plastic crisis.
OK, first, let's challenge you to answer a question about plastic, Rob. The first synthetic
plastic – that's plastic made entirely from man-made materials - was created over 100 years
ago. Do you know what its brand name was? Was it… a) Bakelite,
b) Lucite or c) Formica?
I'm no expert, so I'll say c) Formica.
Well, we'll reveal the answer at the end of the programme. Now let's talk more about plastic.
This man-made substance is everywhere - from clothing to crisp packets, and bottles to buckets.
But the problem is that most of it isn't biodegradable – that's a word that describes
something that can decay naturally without harming anything. Each year, 400 million
tonnes of plastic is produced and 40% of that is single-use. So why don't we stop using it?
It's not that easy, Rob, and it's something Lucy Siegle, a BBC reporter and author, has been
talking about. She was speaking in a discussion on the Costing the Earth programme on BBC Radio 4,
and explained the issue we have with quitting plastic but also how our attitude is changing…
We have this weird psychological attachment to this material that's been around and it's like
a push and pull. At the one time, we're so horrified by what we're seeing – the whales
dying, the oceans vomiting plastic, beaming in from all over the world,
and at the same time we're being told we can't live without it,
so that creates a psychological dissonance –which I think is the barrier to behavioural
change but I'm finding now awareness has peaked and it's going over into activism.
She mentioned the word psychological – that's something that affects or involves
our mind – so here, psychological attachment means that in our mind
we feel we have to use plastic – we're addicted.
But we also see the negative impact of plastic – like whales dying – and in our mind we're also
thinking we must stop! This has created what Lucy says is a 'psychological dissonance' - dissonance
means a disagreement between two opposing ideas – so we're having an argument in our
head about the right thing to do – this is the 'push and pull' of thoughts she referred to.
And this dissonance has been the barrier to us trying to solve the plastic issue – but
now we're starting to do something about it – we're taking action to reduce our plastic
waste – we're turning to activism. That's taking action to change something – it
could be social or political change, or a change in our behaviour or attitude.
Of course there has been a big push – that means people have been strongly encouraged – to recycle.
Maybe in an ideal world the best thing to do is go plastic-free – but that isn't easy, is it?
No, it isn't, and it's something Lucy Siegle spoke about. Getting rid of plastic in our
lives is a gradual process. But where does she think we can make the biggest difference?
I really think that to concentrate on stopping the flow of plastics into your life
is easier and more effective in the long term, than trying to go plastic-free from the outset.
We are in the UK, a supermarket culture, so a lot of the tips and
tricks to decreasing the flow of plastic are getting round supermarket culture.
She says we have a supermarket culture in the UK. Culture here describes a way of life – or
a way that we generally behave – and in terms of food shopping, we tend to do that in supermarkets.
So, for example, customers can make a big difference by putting
pressure on supermarkets to use less plastic packaging.
It does seem that the future of plastic is in our hands – we need to be more careful
about how and when we use it – and use our collective power to force change if it's needed.
But there's no doubt plastic is useful for many things
so it will be a long time before it disappears altogether.
And earlier I asked you what was the name of the first synthetic plastic, invented over a 100
years ago. Was it… a) Bakelite,
b) Lucite or c) Formica?
And I said c) Formica. Was I right?
Formica is a type of hard plastic used for covering tables and working areas
in kitchens – but it's not the oldest type. That was Bakelite.
I may have got that wrong but hopefully I'll have more success recapping some of today's
vocabulary – starting with decay, which describes the natural process of something being destroyed
or breaking down into small particles – which plastic takes a long time to do.
Next, we had biodegradable – that's a word to
describe something that can decay naturally without harming anything.
Then we had psychological – that's something that affects or involves your mind.
Next up, we had dissonance, which describes a disagreement between two opposing ideas.
And then we mentioned activism - that's taking action
to change something. We also mentioned the phrase a big push which means people
are strongly encouraged or persuaded to do something, usefully by force.
And finally we had culture. In our context of supermarket culture,
it describes a way of life – or a way that we generally behave.
Thanks, Neil. Now, remember you can find more learning English programmes and materials
on our website at bbclearningenglish.com. That's
it for now but please join us next time for 6 Minute English. Goodbye.
Neil Goodbye.
Hello. This is 6 Minute English from BBC Learning English. I'm Neil.
And I'm Rob.
I've been reading about ways to protect the environment, Rob, and I've decided
to eat less meat. And maybe drive my car less too.
Good for you, Neil! And flying less can also help reduce air pollution.
Right. Flying and driving less are two good ways to combat climate change
because they reduce your carbon footprint – that's the amount of carbon dioxide or
CO2 released into the atmosphere as a result of your everyday activities.
The idea of reducing carbon emissions is catching on in the music industry too.
Bands and artists who go on tour around the world generate large carbon footprints.
So recently some music groups like Massive Attack and Green Day
started thinking about ways to reduce the impact their tours are having on the environment.
Ha! Green Day – what a good name for a band trying to be environmentally friendly!
Today we'll be finding out about bands and musicians
who want to continue going on tour but do it in ways which reduce their environmental impact.
And of course, we'll be learning some related vocabulary on the way.
So, it seems like the days of rock and roll stars flying around the world in private jets
may soon be a thing of the past.
Indeed, Rob, and that brings me neatly to my quiz question. One British band recently announced
they would stop going on tour until they were 100% carbon neutral, but which band? Was it:
a) The 1975
b) The Rolling Stones, or
c) Coldplay
Well, Coldplay had a hit with their song The Scientist,
and we are talking about carbon dioxide and the climate, so I'll say c) Coldplay.
Good thinking, Rob! We'll find out the answer later. But first let's hear from another artist
concerned about her carbon impact. Fay Milton is the drummer of the band
Savages and co-founder of the climate pressure group
Music Declares Emergency. She spoke to BBC Radio 4's programme You & Yours:
This year I have actually turned down a tour. My income comes from
touring so it has put me in a bit of a precarious situation
but I actually feel quite good about it – it feels like the right thing to do in this moment.
Even though Fay earns a living as a drummer by going on tour,
she has started to turn them down – meaning to reject or refuse the offer of touring.
Losing the income she usually gets from touring
puts Fay in a precarious situation – a situation where things could become difficult,
in this case financially difficult, because she isn't making money from playing the drums.
But she still wants to do the right thing – in other words,
do what is most fair, ethical and just. For Fay, fighting climate change is even
more important than doing what she loves – going on tour with the band.
Well, good for her! I'm not sure if I'd be so committed as Fay. But if bands stopped touring
altogether, fans wouldn't get to see gigs – or live concerts and hear the music they love.
Well, that's an interesting point because it might be possible for bands to carry on touring
and also reduce their environmental impact at the same time. Bristol band, Massive Attack,
want to do exactly that. Their singer Robert Del Naja explains:
We're working with an electric bus company. We're going to look at all the energy being
renewable and obviously the power we can create will go back to the grid,
so we're hoping we can actually create legacy green infrastructure which can then power
future gigs. We plan to travel to Europe solely by train, with the band, the crew and all the gear.
Swapping tour planes for trains and encouraging fans to travel to gigs
by bus are two good ways to reduce the total carbon footprint of the concert.
And by using renewable energy, the gig can create power. This can then be put back into the national
grid, called the grid for short – the network supplying electrical power across a country.
Well, Massive Attack are certainly ticking all the green boxes, Neil,
but who else is doing a good job? Remember your quiz question earlier?
Ah, yes. I asked which band has decided to stop
touring until their tours were carbon neutral and you said?
I said c) Coldplay.
And you were right! Are you a Coldplay fan, Rob?
Just remember to leave your car at home the next time you go to their gig!
Right! Today, we've been looking at some of the
ways music bands and artists are trying to fight climate change.
They want to reduce their carbon footprint – the amount of carbon they release into the air.
Some musicians are starting to turn down – or refuse, long world tour dates because flying from
country to country playing gigs – or live musical concerts, generates so much carbon dioxide.
Bands like Savages, Green Day and Massive Attack are trying to do the
right thing - taking the most fair and ethical course of action, even though for some artists,
the income lost from not touring puts them in a precarious – or difficult situation.
But when they get it right, bands can be carbon neutral or even generate power which can be put
back into the national grid – the network supplying electrical power across a country.
All of which means we can ‘keep on rocking' into the next century
without increasing carbon emissions and adding to climate change.
So, Rob, you could say you were ‘born to run'… on renewable energy!
Ha-ha! Very funny, Neil. That's all for today but remember to join us again soon
for more topical discussions and vocabulary from 6 Minute English, here at BBC Learning English.
Thanks for listening and bye!
Bye.
Hello. This is 6 Minute English from BBC Learning English. I'm Neil.
And I'm Sam.
