Connect with us

Business

How a £1.5bn ‘wildlife-boosting’ bypass became an environmental disaster | Environment

Published

on


Lorries thunder over the A14 bridge north of Cambridge, above steep roadside embankments covered in plastic shrouds containing the desiccated remains of trees.

Occasionally the barren landscape is punctuated by a flash of green where a young hawthorn or a fledgling honeysuckle has emerged apparently against the odds, but their shock of life is an exception in the treeless landscape.

The new 21-mile road between Cambridge and Huntingdon cost £1.5bn and was opened in 2020 to fulfil a familiar political desire: growth. One of Britain’s biggest infrastructure projects of the past decade, it was approved by the secretary of state for transport over the heads of locally elected councillors.

Map

National Highways, the government-owned company that builds and maintains Britain’s A roads, promised that the biodiversity net gain from the construction project would be 11.5%; in other words, they pledged the natural environment would be left in a considerably better state after the road was built than before.

But five years on from the opening of the A14, the evidence is otherwise, and National Highways has admitted biodiversity and the environment have been left in a worse state as a result of the road project.

Empty plastic tree guards stretch for mile after mile along the new road, testament to the mass die-off of most of the 860,000 trees planted in mitigation for the impact of the road. Culverts dug as a safe route for animals such as newts and water voles are dried up and litter-strewn, while ponds designed to collect rainwater and provide a wildlife habitat are choked with mud and silt.

With concerns that the rollback of environmental protections in Labour’s planning and infrastructure bill will make it easier for developers to destroy nature, Edna Murphy, a Liberal Democrat on Cambridgeshire county council, is calling for MPs on the environmental audit committee to investigate the multimillion-pound failure of the A14 project.

“National Highways has resisted attempts by local representatives to discover what it is up to,” Murphy said.

“We have struggled over years to find out basic facts about the death of nearly all of the 860,000 trees that were originally planted and what has happened subsequently in terms of replanting.

“How can they be allowed to get away with this? How can anyone have confidence in promises about environmental mitigations in any national infrastructure projects in the future?”

Edna Murphy (left) and Ros Hathorn beside the A14. Photograph: Sean Smith/The Guardian

Murphy and her Lib Dem colleague Ros Hathorn believe the failure of the environmental improvements created in mitigation for the A14 are a shocking example of how powerful developers make environmental pledges in order to gain planning permission, which are then not upheld.

They began asking questions of National Highways in 2021 when it became obvious from the scale of the tree die-off that something had gone wrong. They asked for details of how many trees were planted, how many had died, and for regular reports on the tree planting.

A slide presentation in 2022 to Murphy and Hathorn indicated 70% of the 860,000 trees originally planted had died.

In late 2023, Martin Edwards, a National Highways project manager, suggested to local councillors the die-off may have been only 50%. He said two re-plantings had taken place since the die-off, both of which had also subsequently failed. He blamed this on the policy to replant the same tree in the same place “and keep your fingers crossed”.

Edwards insisted that lessons had been learned and that in 2023 National Highways had carried out a full soil survey and a three-month tree analysis.

This revealed they had planted the wrong species in the wrong place, and provided valuable lessons about the most appropriate season in the year to plant a tree, he said.

Nicole Gullan, principal ecologist at the ecology consultancy Arbtech, said she was surprised by the approach: “Tree planting on this scale should have been underpinned by ecological due diligence, including soil sampling, hydrological and geotechnical surveys, and an adaptive management plan to address potential failures. Proper reporting and mapping of planting locations is also essential for long-term monitoring and accountability.”

A third replanting of 165,000 trees – at an estimated cost of £2.9m – took place over the autumn and winter of 2023-2024. National Highways promised to share details of their surveys and a new planting plan with Cambridgeshire council’s biodiversity team.

skip past newsletter promotion

Today, parts of the A14 where trees should be thriving still resemble a desert. Photograph: Sean Smith/The Guardian

But in a report this June, council officers said the information had never been passed to them despite repeated requests.

“Documents that were provided to the group were basic overviews and did not contain the detailed information requested,” the officers said. “The council therefore did not have evidence of where and why the planting had failed, which would be crucial to inform the replanting strategy, ensuring improved planting success.”

Today, parts of the A14 where trees should be thriving still resemble a desert, and the whereabouts of the 165,000 new trees remain a mystery.

“The council does not know where replanting has taken place,” officials said, adding that officers had driven along the route to try to find them, but only found a few limited areas where replanting appeared to have taken place.

Some residents have begun planting their own saplings. Vhari Russell from Brampton said she had grown various different trees in her garden in pots and planted all of those into the A14 embankment. “I think we’ve probably put in 150,” she told local reporters.

National Highways, which has been reprimanded by the office of roads and railways for failing to fulfil a key metric on biodiversity gain, has admitted that the A14 project has left nature worse off despite having pledged to improve it.

In an evaluation report National Highways said the impacts on biodiversity “were worse than expected”, as were the impacts on the water environment. National Highways has faced no sanction for these failures.

From 2026, biodiversity net gain will be mandatory for big infrastructure such as the A14 road. But Becky Pullinger, head of land management for the Wildlife Trusts, said developers had to be held to account once the mandate came in, so that recreated habitats had a fighting chance of survival. A recent report showed that only a third of ecological enhancements promised by housebuilders were fulfilled.

Pullinger said the example of the A14 showed how important it was that harm to wildlife was avoided in the first place, reducing the need for compensation planting.

“The failures highlight the challenges of trying to recreate mature habitats: it takes years, if not decades, for saplings to turn into woodland and provide much needed spaces for the wildlife [affected] by development,” she said.

A National Highways spokesperson said: “We take our responsibility to the environment very seriously. The A14 upgrade project was not limited to just improving the road; our ongoing environmental work remains a long-term project that we will continue to monitor and support. Between October 2023 and April 2024 – the optimum planting season – 165,000 trees and shrubs were planted. These comprised 16 different species specially selected to enhance the surrounding areas and habitats. Our latest survey showed that nearly 90% of these trees have survived. Nationally, we continue to monitor, evaluate and adapt our practices to respond to a rapidly changing climate to meet the challenges that it brings.”



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Business

OBR says pension triple lock to cost three times initial estimate

Published

on


Kevin Peachey

Cost of living correspondent

Getty Images Older man and woman sit at a kitchen table with paperwork and a laptop in front of themGetty Images

The cost of the state pension triple lock is forecast to be three times’ higher by the end of the decade than its original estimate, according to the government’s official forecaster.

The triple lock, which came into force in 2011, means that the state pension rises each year in line with either inflation, wage increases or 2.5% – whichever is highest.

The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) said the annual cost is estimated to reach £15.5bn by 2030.

Overall, the OBR said the UK’s public finances were in a “relatively vulnerable position” owing to pressure from recent government U-turns on planned spending cuts.

The recent reversal of proposed the welfare bill, on top of restoring winter fuel payments for most claimants, have contributed to a continued rise in government debt, according to the report.

It said: “Efforts to put the UK’s public finances on a more sustainable footing have met with only limited and temporary success in recent years in the aftermath of the shocks, debt has also continued to rise and borrowing remained elevated because governments have reversed plans to consolidate the public finances.

“Planned tax rises have been reversed, and, more significantly, planned spending reductions have been abandoned.”

Spending on the state pension has steadily risen, the OBR said, because the triple lock and a growing number of people above the state pension age was contributing to costs.

It added: “Due to inflation and earnings volatility over its first two decades in operation, the triple lock has cost around three times more than initial expectations.”

Pensioner protection

The UK’s state pension is the second-largest item in the government budget after health.

In 2011, the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition brought in the triple lock to ensure the value of the state pension was not overtaken by the increase in the cost of living or the incomes of working people.

Since then, the non-earnings-linked element of the lock has been triggered “in eight of the 13 years to date”, the OBR pointed out.

That was because inflation “has turned out to be significantly more volatile” than expected.

In April 2025, the earnings link meant the state pension increased by 4.1%, making it worth:

  • £230.25 a week for the full, new flat-rate state pension (for those who reached state pension age after April 2016) – a rise of £472 a year
  • £176.45 a week for the full, old basic state pension (for those who reached state pension age before April 2016) – a rise of £363 a year

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has said the Labour government will keep the triple lock until the end of the current Parliament.

However, before and since that manifesto promise, there has been intense debate over the cost of the triple lock and whether it is justified.

Last week, the influential Institute for Fiscal Studies, an independent economic think-tank, suggested the triple lock be scrapped as part of a wider overhaul of pensions.

It argued that it should rise in line with prices, but the cost should be linked to a target level of economy-wide average earnings.

Pensioner groups say many older people face high living costs and need the protection of the triple lock to avoid them falling further into financial difficulty, especially because the amount actually paid was far from the most generous state pension in Europe.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Pluriva Invests €250K in AI Virtual Assistant for Romanian Firms

Published

on









Pluriva Invests €250K in AI Virtual Assistant for Romanian Firms – The Romania Journal





























Source link

Continue Reading

Business

AI in healthcare: What business leaders need to know

Published

on


Artificial intelligence may seem like a new, untested technology, but the reality is that AI is already integrated into our everyday lives. For instance, Siri, Amazon Alexa and Google Assistant use natural language processing and natural language understanding to analyze and respond to voice commands. Emails and text messages use NLP for predictive text and auto correct.

The rapid development of AI brings with it enormous concerns, especially regarding its applications in healthcare. However, AI is already transforming patient care in positive ways, for example, by making it easier for clinicians to diagnose and treat illness sooner, potentially reducing the need for costly specialized treatment or hospitalization.

Read more:  Sick of answering the same benefits questions from employees? Let AI do the work

Chronic condition management and early detection

While clinical judgment by an actual human is still critical to ensuring patients receive the best possible care, AI can support clinicians and their decision-making by providing a more complete view of patient health.

For instance, radiologists are now using AI to more accurately analyze X-rays, MRIs, CT scans and mammograms. AI’s sensitivity to distinguish slight changes from image to image can help detect chronic diseases earlier and more accurately. In one study, researchers found an AI system could predict diagnoses of Berger’s kidney disease more accurately than trained nephrologists. In an attempt to slow the progression of kidney disease among veterans, such as Berger’s disease, the Veterans Administration partnered with DeepMind, an AI research lab, to identify risk predictors for patient deterioration and alert clinicians early. DeepMind developed an AI model based on electronic health records from the Veterans Administration that identified 90% of all acute kidney injuries that required subsequent dialysis, with a lead time of up to 48 hours. 

Earlier intervention in the case of Berger’s disease and other kidney conditions significantly impacts the economic burden of the disease, potentially saving plan sponsors between $276.80-$480.79 per member per month. 

Read more:  AI can help benefit leaders with the compensation process

Automating administrative tasks

One of AI’s greatest assets is its ability to quickly assess large volumes of data to optimize clinical and administrative time. Medical practices are utilizing AI-enabled technology to improve administrative efficiency and patient care. Automated documentation tools can reduce the time physicians spend on patient charting by 72%, which means physicians can spend more time treating and diagnosing plan members. AI can also integrate with electronic health records to pull relevant data, identify missing information and complete and submit prior authorization forms on behalf of providers.

Administrative expenses account for 15% to 25% of total healthcare expenditures. Reducing administrative overhead and claims errors, along with early diagnosis and treatment of chronic disease, can improve member outcomes and produce impressive cost savings for plan sponsors. AI has the potential to save $265 billion in overall healthcare costs by eliminating administrative overhead and documentation errors.

AI’s ability to process vast quantities of data also benefits health plan administrators. Plan sponsors can implement AI tools that provide members with personalized treatment and support, identify health plans during enrollment that best fit specific member needs and determine additional benefits for members and their families. 

Read more:  Leaders share their most popular summer benefits

Overcoming barriers to adoption

Despite its potential to reduce healthcare costs, improve patient outcomes and improve member experience, AI adoption is still slow. The initial investment required to implement AI can be high, and it includes the cost of the technology, staff training, system integration and maintenance of AI models, not to mention potential liability concerns. 

When considering utilizing AI for the purposes of improving efficiency and outcomes, organizations in the healthcare industry are: 

  • Analyzing how AI solutions can support their population, and which modalities are likely to be (or have proven to be) successful
  • Consulting with internal stakeholders from the beginning to identify potential challenges to adoption
  • Evaluating potential cost savings and member outcomes
  • Considering the quality and source of data used to train AI models
  • Ensuring AI tools meet HIPAA requirements

AI in healthcare is no longer an idea of the future. It is here and already making significant improvements in patient outcomes. However, AI is dependent on data quality and clearly defined learning parameters to eliminate potential bias and make accurate predictions. Organizations must also weigh other risks associated with AI, such as informed consent issues that may arise if patients do not fully understand how their information is being used.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending