There was a time when casinos were known for undertaking tricks which would retain players.  One such trick would be to have no windows in the gaming areas.  What better way to keep punters playing than to keep the time of day secret – that’s why traditionally there are very few clocks in casino as well.

Of course times are changing and ultimately it costs a lot of money to keep those windowless rooms brightly lit.  Casinos are, in the end, capitalist, revenue generating operations and the answer has been to move with the times.  New casinos are constructed with natural lighting via windows and skylights and where that is not possible, energy efficient lightbulbs have replaced those old inefficient ones.

That’s just the start though and casinos require electricity for much more than just lighting.  Slost such as Book of Ra and Lord of the Ocean are just a couple of the two and a half thousand slot machines at the Marina Bay Sands in Singapore need a lot of juice as do the three and half thousand at the Venetian Hotel and Casino in Macau.  These may be extremely profitable businesses but how do they stay that way?  As renewable energy sources have become more sophisticated, the more progressive casinos have embraced the power-saving technology.  Solar panels have proved massively popular, especially in areas where sunlight is plentiful.  Las Vegas, Macau and Singapore all benefit in this respect.

The energy-efficient Palazzo in Las Vegas

The United States has a hard-to-achieve building design certification called the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) and several new casinos can are now proud holders of this document. The Palazzo in Las Vegas is a good example.  During the building process the steel used was 95% recycled, concrete was 26%.  Water usage is controlled and minimised electronically, among other things.  These measures are estimated to save the casino up to 40% in energy costs and over 50% in water savings – something that’s vital in a Sizzling hot, water-scarce environment.

Leipzig's solar array

What Germany also has is a massively subsidised industry which makes it profitable in the long term to install solar panels on the property.  Currently a German solar power user will receive an over the odds payment for each unit of energy that is fed back into the system and this arrangement is guaranteed for twenty years.  This is also the same system which kicked off in the U.K. in April, 2010 and while it’s been running it’s been a runaway success.  In just under two years, there is forty times as much solar power being produced as there was pre-April 2010.  The U.K. previously generated just 25 MW (megawatts) of solar power and now it has breached the 1 GW mark.

The problem with the scheme was that it became too successful; those with a bit of spare cash realised it was a fantastic long term investment that would pay for itself in around 6 – 8 years, leaving the remainder of the contract period as a cash cow.  To stop this drain on tax resources the government announced that it would be ceasing the scheme for any new sign-ups in December 2011, reducing the tariffs paid per unit by about 50%.  An enormous rush then took place as those who hadn’t quite got around to the installation realised their time was running out.

Solar installation

Environmental organisations immediately took exception to this, arguing that the U.K. needs ever more solar power, even at this extra cost and overturned the governments decision in court.   The government is appealing against this ruling but has said anyone who gets their installation sorted by the 3rd March will now receive the higher tariffs.  We’ll have to wait and see what happens after that date.

The founder is Arthur Potts Dawson, no stranger to projects in the public eye.  He set up Acorn House, London’s first environmentally sustainable restaurant and was involved with Jamie Oliver’s Fifteen project.  His concept of the People’s Supermarket was to create a co-operative which was “owned by the people, for the people”.  The People’s Supermarket would be an alternative to the four supermarket giants of the U.K. – Tesco, Sainburys, Asda and Morrisons.

The Holborn branch

How would this work though?  How would the project afford to compete with the dominant supermarkets?  Competing is not really the point here; the concept is to maintain a self-sustaining business which would cater (at first) to like-minded people.  All produce would be locally produced and available at a fair price, “by connecting an urban community with the local farming community” but that’s not the most interesting part.

Everyone who wants to shop and take part in the co-operative must pay an annual membership of £25 and this entitles them to a 10% discount on all produce.  All members must be available for up to 4 hours of voluntary work at the supermarket each month.  Once you’re in the swing of things you can book your volunteering slots online at your convenience.

The original supermarket is in Lamb’s Conduit Street in Holborn and though it has experienced its fair share of ups and downs along the way the concept is undoubtedly an exciting one.  Exciting enough that a second London supermarket has now opened in Hackney.  But that’s not all; the project has been viewed with interest by groups in other towns and even other countries and Australia is one of the latest to jump on board.  There has also been contact with groups in Europe and Asia so perhaps the concept is here to stay.

As it’s name suggests, the CSAS was set up in response to the problem of coal smoke which the founder, Sir William Blake Richmond called “comparable to a total eclipse of the sun” in a letter to The Times, but it wasn’t until 1926 that the Public Health (Smoke Abatement) Act was introduced following campaigning by the CSAS.

Unfortunately for the history of the environmental movement, two devastating world wars were about to put a stop to anything not related to the provision of wartime necessities.  Countries such as the United States which were largely unaffected on their own soil now began to take the lead in the movement.

London Smog 1952

Post Second World War, the U.K. and Europe began to wake up to the problems being caused by industrialization and in 1952 the CSAS were once again instrumental in the passing of the 1956 Clean Air Act following the Great London Smog of that year.  As times changed and coal smoke began to disappear, the CSAS changed its name to the National Society for Clean Air (NSCA).  By the 1970s it’s focus was now on pollution from other sources such as transport and industry and it was largely responsible for the focus on Local Air Quality Management and how this was incorporated into the 1995 Environment Act.  The NSCA’s Air Quality Committee was a sub-organisation which brought together air quality experts and this group strongly influenced the 1995 Act.

It’s interesting to note how the focuses of the organisation has changed over the years; towards the end of the 1990s the NCSA branched out into noise pollution and land quality and finally, in 2007, it was renamed Environmental Protection U.K.

Over the life span of this group, many other environmentally conscious organisations have sprung up to agitate on behalf of their particular cause.  Some of the organisations are massive and global – Greenpeace is a good example – and some are extremely small local groups who campaign and work on behalf of single issues.  As we’ve noted above, the focus of attention constantly changes as new, perceived threats arise.  The advent of the nuclear power industry in the 1950s (and in particular the Windscale accident in 1957) not surprisingly attracted a new group of protesters unsure of the potential dangers of this new technology.

In the final analysis, campaigning works.  Protesting, lobbying, whatever you want to call it, has pushed the environmental agenda to the forefront of global media coverage and we should all be grateful for that.

One of the first examples of conservation and environmental protection appears to have occurred in the British Isles as long ago as the 7th century.  It was undertaken by Cuthbert of Lindisfarne who resided as something of a hermit on one of the Farne Islands. Apparently the only inhabitant of this particular island, Cuthbert made sure that his regular visitors did not disturb the nesting sea birds which also lived on the island.

In the 14th century, one of the early English parliaments outlawed the disposal of rubbish into lakes and rivers and the city of Cambridge attempted to pass urban sanitary guidelines.  Whether they were adhered or not is debatable; devastating cholera epidemics in the following centuries would suggest not but at least the thought was there.  In the 17th century Isaac Walton wrote his fishing guide, The Compleat Angler, which included advice on fish conservation.

By the 19th century there was a much greater emphasis on environmental concerns although today their efforts would appear minimal.  In 1876 parliament reinforced the laws on dumping into rivers and streams and in 1895 a thorough clean up of the River Thames and the London sewerage resulted in the return of a number of species of fish.

As the Victorians passed on their legacy to the Edwardians and the 19t century rolled over into the 20th century, the need for, and awareness of, environmental and conservation measures became more pressing.  ’Smog’ was the term coined in London in 1905 when air quality became a health issue and something clearly needed to be done.

Part Two follows……