Counting On … – Page 2

Counting on 2026 … day 13

22nd January

In restoring a sustainable balance vis a vis land use across the globe, whilst most attention is focused on ending deforestation and promoting reforestation, restoring wetlands is also important. Whilst wetlands (including peatlands, marshes, floodplains and mangrove swamps) may only cover 5-8% of the Earth’s surface, they are critical as absorbers of carbon dioxide, as defences against erosion, and as preventers of excess flooding. They are also areas that have been drained and used for other purposes.

“Wetlands are critically important ecosystems that support biodiversity, climate mitigation and adaptation, food production, freshwater availability, recreation, wellbeing, and so much more. Yet we are losing our wetlands three times faster than forests.” (1)

In the UK the Fen Lands have been drained so that the peat rich soils can be used as high grade farm land but with the disadvantage that as the land dries out, so it shrinks, becoming increasingly at risk of flooding, and with the effect of destabilising the foundations of roads and infrastructure across the region.

Elsewhere in the UK peatlands have suffered from the effects of burning and grouse shooting, overstocking with livestock, planting for commercial forestry, extraction for peat compost, and pollution. (2) Overall some 80% of the UK’s peatlands have been degraded.

One way of restoring peatlands and maintaining their agricultural use, is through paludiculture. Here lowland peatland is rewetted and used to grow crops that thrive in wet conditions such as Norfolk Reed used for thatching; bulrushes (typha) used as a building material, as a bioenergy crop and in clothing; sphagnum moss which can be used as a peat substitute as well as for biomecidal and industrial chemical uses; food crops such as celery, bilberries and cranberries, watercress, sweet grass grains, rice etc. (3)

Counting on 2026 … day 12

21st January

One of the issues with the loss of a sustainable balance in land use (as highlighted by transgressing this planetary boundary) is the loss of soil fertility – and in some cases the loss of the soil itself, being washed or blown away. One solution is to restore the fertility and structure of the soil of the soil and to adopt farming methods that healthy soil. Regenerative farming is a widely used term to describe this process. This is a broad term and can mean many things in different situations. Unlike organic farming, it doesn’t come with any form of certification. Nevertheless, any methods that improve soil fertility are to be encouraged.

Generally regenerative farming will encompass some or all of the following principles:-

limiting soil disturbance
maintaining soil cover
fostering agricultural diversity and rotations
keeping living roots in the soil
integrating livestock and arable systems (1)

What regenerative farming does not address is altering the balance of land use to one that is more sustainable – and which as outlined in the previous entry – should include restoring tree cover, as well as restoring peatlands.

https://www.wildlifetrusts.org/blog/vicki-hird/what-regenerative-farming

Counting on 2026 … day 9

19th January

Tree planting is key to restoring sustainable human lifestyles within safe Planetary Boundaries. Yet disturbingly the UK is falling g behind with its tree planting targets.

“New analysis from the Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU) found that the UK is falling behind its tree planting targets, warning that the nation could miss the “critical window” for woodland creation needed to meet its climate and nature targets.

“The report found that more than 70 per cent of carbon removal from new trees up to 2050 will come from those that have been planted within the next five years. This is due to the time lag between when a tree is planted and when it has reached its peak carbon removal potential.

“However, if current planting rates are maintained, the total area of missed planting will be an area equivalent to three times the size of Greater London, with a third less carbon sequestered than on the Climate Change Committee’s (CCC) Balanced Pathway. This is equivalent to all residual industrial emissions in 2050.

“The CCC Balanced Pathway is the UK’s blueprint for reaching net-zero emissions by 2050, which calls for an 87 per cent emissions cut by 2040 as well as boosted efforts in renewable energy, energy efficiency and carbon capture.”

https://www.euronews.com/green/2026/01/14/uk-and-eu-tree-planting-pledges-face-reality-check-as-scientists-warn-the-climate-window-i?utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=green_newsletter&utm_medium=referral&insEmail=1&insNltCmpId=257&insNltSldt=10080&insPnName=euronewsfr&ins_iid=NThmY2Q3ZTQtNDc3Yi00Y2MxLWJlYzItYWViN2RiZTRjNmNk&isIns=1&isInsNltCmp=1

Counting on 2026 … day 8

16th January

Reversing land system change needs to include both reforestation and the adoption of regenerative farming methods – ie methods that restore the fertility of the soil, restores fresh water cycles, protects the environment from pollutants such as pesticides, fertilisers, slurry etc, that promotes increasing biodiversity and produces healthy food. Somehow nations need to find ways of valuing the role that trees and good agricultural practice play in maintaining the wellbeing of the earth systems on which we rely.

This might be by levying a rate or tax to cover the cost similar to the water rate we used to pay for clean water – and which could be used to pay for planting trees and/or for setting aside land for woodlands. In the UK farmers can be paid by the Government (and thus ultimately paid for by the tax payer) to protect and enhance the natural environment – eg through the Sustainable Farming Incentive – https://www.farmingadviceservice.org.uk/category/funding-support

In a similar vein, consumers can actively chose to support environmentally friendly farming by paying a premium for the products thus produced – eg organic fruit and vegetables, grass fed meat, wild flower honey.

It might be by levying a fee on those whose businesses pollute the environment – eg levied against beef and dairy products, or against industrial chicken farms. Denmark – https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c20nq8qgep3o

Governments and other institutions- like health bodies, schools etc – might promote a switch to largely plant based diets (as per the Planetary Health Diet). Denmark is developing a concerted switch to a largely plant based diet with support for farmers as well as encouragement for consumers. https://rethinkpriorities.org/research-area/plant-based-diet-shift-initiative-case-studies-denmarks-plant-based-food-grant/

Governments and farming bodies can encourage a switch to crops better suited to the changing climate in their region – eg switchIng from olives and almonds to pistachios in the dryer Spanish climate, introducing agroforestry, replacing cotton with hemp (as is happening in Turkey – https://egedeniztextile.com/turkish-hemp/) etc. https://inspain.news/spains-green-gold-rush-and-why-pistachios-are-the-future-of-farming/

Governments could mandate that public purchasing should favour sustainably produced products – both food and timber based products. This report urges the use of timber in the construction industry: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/timber-in-construction-roadmap-2025/timber-in-construction-roadmap-2025

Conversely governments can implement legislation to limit or end land use and farming practices that damage planetary boundaries. The UK and the European Union have both introduced legislation that requires companies to ensure through the length of the supply chains that not products are derived from sources where deforestation is involved: https://www.clydeco.com/en/insights/2025/02/spotlight-on-deforestation-regulations-in-uk-eu

NB both sets of policies have yet to be fully implemented.

Counting on 2026 … day 6

14th January

Atmospheric aerosol loading is another planetary boundary that we should avoid crossing. The global concentration of aerosol particles has more than doubled since pre-industrial times. The effect that excessive aerosol concentration could have in human health and the climate that established the need for a safe limit.

What are these particles? – salt condensed from ocean waters, fine sand from desert dust storms, ice crystals over the poles and ash from fires as well as volcanic eruptions, carbon and sulphur dioxide from fossil fuel power statist and industrial smoke stacks, hydrocarbons from combustion engines and stratospheric vapour crystals from aircraft. (1)

It is another boundary where we are currently within the safe limits and in fact the concentration of aerosol particles in the atmosphere is declining as we are across the globe tackling and reducing air pollution, providing alternatives to open cookings fires, ending crop the burning of stubble after crop harvesting, reducing pollution levels from road vehicles and from commercial cargo ships. Taking action to stay within planetary boundaries is good for the planet and for our wellbeing! (2(

Counting on 2026 … day 5

13th January

Stratospheric ozone depletion is one planetary boundary* where we did cross into the danger zone and through concerted global action, pulled back from into the safe limits of the boundary. Regulations curbing what chemicals could be used, for example, in fridges and aerosols, had a real effect!

“”In the face of a triple planetary crisis – climate, nature and pollution – the Montreal Protocol is one of the best examples we have that showcases the positive and powerful outcome of multilateralism,”

Meg Seki, Executive Secretary of UNEP’s Ozone Secretariat. (1)

(1) https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/rebuilding-ozone-layer-how-world-came-together-ultimate-repair-job Do read this full article and/or watch the YouTube clip.

* NB What are the planetary boundaries? https://greentau.org/2025/10/22/counting-on-170/

Counting on 2026 … day 4

12th January

Data centres – which includes those that provide AI – use large amounts of water, principally in providing cooling., but also (depending on the source of their electricity) from the water needed at fossil fuelled power plants where water is again needed for cooling. It is estimated that the water footprint of AI in 2025 was somewhere between 313 and 765 billion litres which apparently is roughly the same as the amount of bottled water consumed globally. (1)

This consumption of water is going to increase as our use of and development of AI continues to expand. By 2027 experts predict global water use by could reach 4.2–6.6 trillion litres annually – equivalent to about half the UK’s annual water consumption. (2)

In a world where freshwater is already in short supply, this is a serious issue as highlighted in this comment from a UK Government blog:

“AI has potential to address challenges in healthcare, inequality and climate monitoring. However, these benefits must be weighed against the full environmental impact of building and running AI systems. This requires development of a comprehensive and transparent series of metrics that include, carbon emissions, energy consumption, water usage, biodiversity and social impact. Only by looking at AI through these combined lenses can we ensure it delivers net benefit rather than widening inequality or disproportionately impacting communities and regions.” (3)

A UK government report ‘Water use in AI and Data Centre’ highlights the issue of the 2050 projected daily 5 billion litre water deficit versus the expansion of date centres in the UK. It notes with concern that in coming to its projection of a 5 billion litre water shortage, the Environment Agency has not included any figures for the anticipated increased water demands that will be made as data centres expand. This is aggravated by a lack of information as data centres are not required to be transparent about the amount of water and electricity that are and will be using. Mandating transparency would encourage data centre to find ways of minimising the resources they need and would enable the relevant authorities to make better decisions as to where new data centres could or should not be located. (They should not for example be located in areas already prone to water shortages). (4)

Equally if information about the likely consumption of scarce resources were more readily available, it would enable a better discussion as to whether we should be encouraged the unrestricted growth of AI and data centre, and have the ability to weigh up the benefits of AI against its detriments.

Counting on 2026 … day 3

9th January

How do we protect and preserve fresh water supplies – part 4

As consumers we can use less water by reducing the amount we literally take from our taps, but we can also reduce the amount we consumer by reducing some of the things we buy. Everything we consume has a water footprint. Here again there is a strong argument for eating less meat and dairy and more nuts, seeds and pulses, and locally produced, in-season fruits and vegetables.

1kg of beef uses 15,415 litres of water, milk 1020 litres and vegetables an average of 322 litres. (1) Dried beans use 5053 litres , lentils 5874 litres and shelled walnuts 9280litres. (2) (NB a portion of beef will typically be twice the weight or more of a portion of beans or pulses).

Another significant item of consumption that can impact our water footprint, is clothing. Making clothes – growing cotton, manufacturing threads and dying the fabrics – uses a significant amount of water.

To produce a T-shirt can use 2000litres of water, a pair of jeans 11,000 litres, a pair of leather shoes 8000 litres. (3)

If we buy fewer items of clothes – buying items we know we like and they we know will last – rather than buying lots of new items which we may wear once and discard, we will make an impact on reducing water consumption and save money too! Clothes will last longer of we take care of them, mending and cleaning them as necessary. And if we no longer need or want them, we can give/ sell them as preloved items. Equally we can save water and money by ourselves buying preloved items.

Counting on 2026 … day 2

8th January

How do we protect and preserve fresh water supplies – part 3

Using less water!

This is something for businesses and farmers and domestic consumers to respond too – and feels particularly pertinent as decisions are made about AI and data centres generally (see tomorrow’s blog).

In the UK at our continued rate of water consumption there will be a daily shortfall of 5 billion litres (about a third of current consumption) by 2050. This takes into account the need to extract less water from rivers, aquifers etc where it negatively impacts the natural environment, a growing population, the need to cope with increasingly frequent droughts, the impact of climate change (eg changing rainfall patterns) and increased use by businesses. (1)

Per capita household water consumption in the UK is already falling, from an average of 169.53 litres per day in 2005/2006 to an average of 139.47 litres in 2023/2024. (2) However there is clearly a need for consumption levels to fall further. A survey across Europe in 2020 varied daily domestic consumption varied from 300 litres in Switzerland to 100 litres in Belgium and even less in Estonia and Slovakia. (3) In some instances the difference maybe due to a lower volume toilet flush, or the frequency and duration and rate of flow of showers, or the frequency of use and water efficiency of appliances such as washing machines.

Websites with water saving tips

How to save water

https://friendsoftheearth.uk/sustainable-living/13-best-ways-save-water

This earlier blog is about saving and reusing grey water around the house – https://greentau.org/2025/07/10/counting-on-day-106-3/

And this one about showering less and more efficiently – https://greentau.org/2025/02/13/counting-on-day-31-3/

Counting on … day 1

7th January 2026

How do we protect and preserve fresh water supplies – part 2

Land use changes, especially things such as deforestation and urbanisation, have aggravated the problem –

“Deforestation, agriculture, and urban expansion have greatly changed the way land stores and moves water. When forests are cleared or soils are sealed under concrete, they lose their ability to hold green water — the moisture that plants rely on. This weakens local rainfall, increases runoff, and can intensify both floods and droughts. Changes to land systems also affect regional weather patterns, such as monsoons, and create feedback loops that further influence the climate.” (1)

Reducing or indeed eliminating such land use changes is clearly beneficial for the wellbeing of the planet. We can go further by reversing the changes by both protecting and increasing land uses that capture and store – eg through reforestation, restoring peatlands and wetlands, re-wriggling rivers (ie allowing them to flow freely and more slowly across a greater expanse of the flood plain, re-establishing water meadows, limiting the extraction of water to protect lakes and aquifers etc.

These nature based solutions not only protect supplies of fresh water, they also protect and enhance biodiversity and reduce the risk of flooding, creating a better environment for us to enjoy.

(1) https://www.planetaryhealthcheck.org/boundary/freshwater-change/