Not only does he wear a green goalie's jersey, it seems David James is also a bit of a 'green' activist...
"Forget Joey's arse - it's wind turbines that matter
More football clubs should follow Man City's lead and promote green living.
David James December 3, 2006
Joey Barton's arse, Ben Thatcher's elbow, Stuart Pearce's toy horse - we've heard a fair few stories about my old club Man City this season. But the best was the one that didn't get much coverage because it was, in the eyes of the press, boring, unsensational, happy-clappy 'good news' - City's installation of a wind turbine to make Eastlands more environmentally friendly. Yes, I know, David James on another moral crusade, but this is a bloody good, bold gesture by City, in an industry which can really afford to make them. Not many clubs - and probably not many fans or players - worry much about their carbon footprint, but they should.
And carbon footprints don't come much bigger than football's. Think of all the teams and fans flying to fixtures, football stars driving around in gas-guzzling 18-litre cars, and all those thousands of fans driving to the grounds, spewing litter, week in, week out. The E word - the environment - sends everyone to sleep: we're so used to hearing warnings and reprimands about it. But ignoring it isn't doing anyone any favours. The football industry is one of many that has a negative effect on the environment, and it needs to clean itself up.
Part of the problem is habit and tradition. Football is pure bloke territory: it's still acceptable to spit out gum and chuck bottles on the floor, and the industry mirrors this selfishness across the scale.
The worst thing is how easy it would be to make a difference. In Germany every public bin - including in football stadiums - is divided into four sections: paper, cans, plastic and general waste. Anyone who collects bottles and cans for recycling earns cashback, which meant up to €1.50 per plastic cup during the World Cup this summer. How difficult would it be to motivate more fans - and players - to put their rubbish in the right place for recycling? While I'm sweating it out at home, washing out cans and separating plastic from paper packaging, plenty don't, undermining the efforts of those who do. It's about changing attitudes on an individual level, but also in terms of the way the clubs themselves operate.
So whose responsibility is it to enforce this change? Environmental damage is a global problem so let's bring in the global authority. Fifa should be issuing directives to football's national governing bodies to be more responsible. Recycling is the first step, but there are plenty of other models to follow. English clubs could pay for tree planting in Bangladesh, or set up solar panels in the Gobi desert, to offset their own carbon emissions. On a national level the Premier League have enough power to implement the changes. The Taylor Report changed stadiums, so the same principle could be used to force clubs to satisfy environmentally friendly criteria. But it needs to be enforced worldwide.
And to do that, money, as always, will play a persuasive part, even in such a rich industry. Governments should be thinking about tax incentives for clubs who reach new standards and governing bodies could introduce eco awards similar to the way that fair-play awards operate.
And City need to be put up as the example for others to follow. When their turbine is fully operational next year it will supply enough energy to power the stadium and thousands of nearby homes. They also source local produce for their kitchens to keep the carbon count low and have tried to improve the recycling of drinks bottles from the training ground - something we have to do at Portsmouth, where we get through about 60 bottles per training session.
The City model is particularly important when it comes to new stadiums. They're springing up all over the country - even Portsmouth might eventually get one. So why not stipulate eco-friendly controls from the outset? You wouldn't fit a wind turbine near Luton Town, for instance - you'd be lucky to fit in a shrub between the ground and the next house - but there's no excuse not to incorporate City-like measures in out-of-town sites.
And transport to these sites - and to older grounds - is also key. Manchester United have about 75,000 supporters attending each game: with many of those based in London that's a lot of travelling, and a lot of carbon. Why aren't the responsible bodies reducing the damage in this area? Car-sharing and pool zones could be introduced, on top of better public transport. Motorways could follow the US model, where cars with four people in them can use an express or bus lane. And park-and-ride services currently operate for town centres, so why not extend these to football stadiums, old and new?
In continental Europe they are, of course, miles ahead. In Germany, match tickets double up as rail, tram or bus tickets to encourage public transport use. Even the odd club over here, like Brighton, have taken the scheme on. Bicycles are popular transport in Holland and as eco-friendly as it gets, although personally I wouldn't fancy cycling down to the Reebok Stadium on a cold February evening.
One way or another all this is going to cost, but it needn't be the fans who foot the bill. There are plenty of possible revenue streams: a percentage cap on gate income or more proactively through waste trading. Plenty of companies will buy up waste and remanufacture it into bio fuels - there's one, for instance, that makes plastic chips from plastic bottles for industrial products.
But on the simplest level, it also comes down to the example football and footballers set. Many top players drive gas-guzzlers, so how about clubs introducing credits for the way footballers get to work? Turning up in your Ferrari that does eight miles to the gallon would score worse than turning up in a 1.6-litre, bio fuel or electric car. You'd then trigger off sponsorship deals based around the most eco-friendly cars. And a cool footballer driving an eco-friendly car would popularise the eco-friendly lifestyle.
Football can and should be moulded into the perfect ecological role model. Get a load of footballers on a reality TV show and challenge them not to chew the balls off kangaroos or whatever, but to reduce their carbon footprint by 20 per cent. Once kids see top players like Wayne Rooney or Michael Owen actively trying to make a difference, the initiatives will take off. Whether you'd convince the players to do it is another issue, but it's worth having the conversation.
The bottom line is that we've got to make use of football as a driving force for environmental change. We'd be stupid not to. It doesn't take a think tank to see that the game holds a powerful influence over kids and adults around the world. Harnessing that influence is vital if we want to enjoy football, and the planet, in years to come."
Your views
Contact David James direct at david.james@observer.co.u
