6:45 AM | 
Posted by
Free Game Zone |
Following Obama's meeting with BP bosses we should expect to see the firm leak billions long after the flow of oil is staunched
It 's not spill as much oil vomit. The ugly brown liquid poured into the Gulf of Mexico for eight weeks. The latest estimates, now also spewing as much as 60,000 barrels per day â€" that's 100,000 gallons an hour â€" with no end in sight. No wonder people are frustrated and angry.
When Barack Obama went on national television last nighttalk about the crash, he began by assuring the country that he 's always in the spotlight, and that the government is not sitting idly by. In addition, he reaffirmed his determination to hold BP accountable for the damage region , and spoke of the need to reduce our dependence on oil.
Obama followed up his address with a well-publicised meeting with BP officials, which produced the firm's agreement to suspend its dividend and place $20bn in an escrow fund for victims independently managed by Kenneth Feinberg, who managed a similar fund for the victims of 9/11. This should prevent legitimate damage claims from languishing in court for years, as happened after the Exxon Valdez disaster. BP further agreed to contribute $100m to compensate workers idled by the deep water drilling moratorium imposed by Obama. The fund won't cap BP's liability any more than its engineers have been able to cap the well head, and we should expect to see the firm leak billions long after the flow of oil is staunched.
For those who imagine an anti-British tone in the criticism of BP and its CEO, Tony Hayward, it's worth remembering that our politicians have been pretty tough on American executives as well. (Remember Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein?) Americans have grown weary of tone-deaf CEOs wondering why they can't get any love while inflicting expensive disasters upon the public through their recklessness. There is no political downside to coming down hard on BP. A recent Gallup poll found that 71% of the public thinks Obama hasn't been tough enough on the oil giant. Even so, Obama was careful to say that: "BP is a strong and viable company, and it is in all of our interests that it remain so."
in an effort to build support for a climate bill.
Obama is absolutely right that the only way to prevent future spills is to reduce our dependence on oil that is driving oil companies to drill nearly a mile below the ocean surface. We may not have reached peak oil just yet, but our continuing dependence on fossil fuels is driving industry to take on greater risks in extracting oil, natural gas and coal. This is an inherently and increasingly dirty and dangerous business, and the next barrel of oil or ton of coal will inevitably be more costly and hazardous to extract than the last.
I think the public is readier to act on global warming than those who represent them in Washington. The relentless drumbeat of the global warming sceptics may have some thinking that acting on climate change is politically impossible. But polls show that three-quarters of Americans think that global warming is real and caused by human activity, and favour government control of greenhouse gas emissions. Washington Post "/ ABC News poll, believes that even 55% of Republicans favor of action .
The effect of the BP disaster ought to add to the impetus for climate legislation in the same way that the Goldman Sachs PR debacle hastened the effort to strengthen financial regulation. Even if BP manages to plug the leaking oil rig, Obama can and should continue to talk to the public about shifting our economy from dirty fuels to clean energy.
We on the left have been in numb denial about President Obama's failures. But as the crises pile up we can't remain silent
Until President Obama's first ever Oval Office address-to-the-nation the other night BP's chief executive Tony Hayward was winning the booby prize as "America's most clueless man" for his gaffe-prone TV interviews. But Obama is gaining fast. His self-exonerating speech, full of sparkling generalities and with no hint of frank accountability for his administration's culpability in the nation's worst environmental disaster, was like the man himself, bloodless and emotionally detached from the human costs of an oil invasion that's now spreading from Louisiana to Texas, Florida and as far north as the Carolinas.
Instead, to hide his impotence to cope with the seemingly unstoppable 60,000 barrel a day spillage, and his deference to BP he's appointing â€" what else? â€" one of those tired old wheezes, a "tsar" to oversee the Gulf spill effort and a "commission" to investigate its causes which by now are well known by everyone except the clueless White House. Don't they listen to their own scientific advisers?
Tony Hayward must feel a little relief that the spotlight on him as a 24-karat fool shifted momentarily on Tuesday night to our do-nothing-except-make-war president.
But the dogs are waking up and barking in the night.
But like tiny buds of spring little fragile flowers of dissent are springing up all over the place, sometimes unexpectedly. I live in West Los Angeles, an incubator for the Obama-voting intelligentsia. A few days ago I drove past an ultra-liberal private academy in Santa Monica for the children of affluent Obama-ites, and the lawn sign in big letters proclaimed a snide reference to Obama's dismal failure get a handle on BP's environmental crime. Garry Trudeau's daily cartoon Doonesbury, which bashed Bush for years, now satirises the Obama presidency for its incomprehensible torpor in the national emergency. "The White House grows more passive every day," a Doonesbury character says in a dig at No Drama Obama's habit of lofty detachment.
Once faithful Obama retainers like syndicated columnists Maureen Dowd and Frank Rich are turning on the president for his crushing indifference to the simple human predicament of the disaster's victims. Even TV's Keith Olberman, until now virtually an Obama PR man, complains that the Oval Office speech "was great … if you were on another planet for the past 67 days". And Rachel Maddow, until now a fervent Obama cheerleader, has criticised his way-off-the-mark speech.
George W. Bush gave the (false) impression, helped him Flax, actually tastes of ordinary people. Obama prefers to take a picture of human communication, such as funny pictures produced, earnestly study the "tar balls" washed ashore in Lafourche Parish and promising Gulf residents, "I'm here to tell you that you are not alone. You will not be abandoned, and you will not be left behind" â€" only to promptly leave for a Chicago vacation.
He's not only tone deaf but also growing hostile to public criticism. Indeed, Obama goes after whistleblowers with more punishing venom than ever did George W Bush who whined about leaks but did not indict. In Obama's 17 months in office he has outdone all his Oval Office predecessors in going after anyone in government who dares spill the beans to the media. For example, instead of ordering court-martials for the army helicopter gunmen who murdered unarmed Baghdad civilians â€" a video shown worldwide by Wikileaks â€" the young GI leaker, 22-year old Bradley Manning, has been arrested, and the Pentagon cops are frantically trying to smoke out, and shut down, Wikileak's Pimpernel-like founder, Julian Assange. I did not think it possible, but our President Obama has an even thinner skin than Bush.
With each passing day, as crises pile up, from out-of-control unemployment to the Gulf to Gaza to the failed Afghanistan adventure, the underlying liberal authoritarianism of the Obama White House becomes clearer. We, Obama's "liberal base", of which I'm a charter member, were in numb denial that our former community organiser, who elicited such an outpouring of love from his vast network of volunteers, is actually just another Illinois pol â€" but with a better vocabulary.
But the dogs of dissent are waking up and starting to howl.
• Robert Green waits to learn if he has been forgiven
• West Ham goalkeeper endures nervous training session
Robert Green has been left on tenterhooks as to whether he will have the opportunity to redeem himself against Algeria tomorrow nightafter Fabio Capello steadfastly refused to shift from his policy of naming his team until two hours before kick-off.
• Follow the Guardian's World Cup team on Twitter
• Sign up to play our great Fantasy Football game
• Stats centre: Get the lowdown on every player
• The latest team-by-team news, features and more
"I picked Green because he was in a good moment [of form] and had played very well in that first half of our friendly against Mexico at Wembley. But the real problem for the goalkeepers here is the ball: sometimes the bounce is higher than normal. We will decide."
Capello rotated his three goalkeepers during the training game that followed their evening session at the stadium but, when the trio stayed behind to undertake kicking practice, Joe Hart and David James were stationed at one end of the ground with Green, effectively doing twice the work, at the other while the coaching staff looked on.
Asked whether it was not harmful not to confirm his goalkeeper choice until the day of the game, Capello, who turns 64 tomorrow said: "No. Why would it be? All the players are ready and focused. There are no problems. I've always done it this way, it's my way, and I'd prefer not to change.
"Actually, not always. In my first year in management [at Milan] I used to tell the players if they were selected or not the day before, after dinner. But, three times that year there was an injury or an illness the next day, and someone else had to play. So I stopped. I have not done it since."
Emile Heskey will also await confirmation of his starting place after the manager admitted he has considered selecting Jermain Defoe against Algeria in a bid to encourage England to play a shorter passing style. The Aston Villa forward played alongside Wayne Rooney in tonight's training though, rather surprisingly, he sat out the final shooting session before the players retired.
"Heskey and Rooney played very well together [against the USA]," said Capello. "I can change the style of the forwards with Defoe, but I think Heskey is a very important player for the movement of the team. Defoe is also important, like the other players, but I was happy with the game against the USA for everything I saw apart from the result.
"It is important we take our chances in this match. We have been speaking about how impressed we have been with Argentina today but, remember, when the score was 2-1, South Korea had a big chance to equalise. At 2-2 we wouldn't be speaking about Argentina in the same way. This is football. You have to score goals when you are playing well. We were playing very well [against the USA] and our midfield were getting chances at every moment, but they scored. Not us. In the end, the scoreline is the most important thing. Everything else is just words."
Only Ledley King was absent from training tonight â€" the Tottenham Hotspur defender will be out for up to three weeks with a groin injury â€" with Jamie Carragher to replace him today. Gareth Barry will also be included. The absent captain, Rio Ferdinand, will only return to South Africa if England progress to the latter stages of the tournament, and only then with the blessing of Manchester United's medical staff as he continues his rehabilitation from a knee injury.
The mood among the players remains bullish, with England hoping to establish their authority on the tournament in Cape Town. "We have to push on now and show our qualities," said Steven Gerrard. "We wanted to win the first game and were disappointed to come away with only one point, but the dangerous thing now would be underestimate Algeria and think this is a guaranteed three points.
\\ "But I think we 're ready to invest in a sharp performance.
We didn't click for the whole 90 minutes against the USA. Hopefully we will in this match and, if we do, everyone will be a lot more positive after the game. Hopefully we'll go strong and get a convincing win."
The women of the surrealist movement were often written off as silent and subservient. In fact, a group of them were creating extraordinary work â€" and lives â€" in Mexico
As I got to know my cousin, who is now 93, I discovered an artist who had eschewed fame to concentrate on the essence of the surreal experience â€" her inner life. And far from being moulded primarily by Ernst, she had found inspiration in other women artists, in particular the Spanish painter Remedios Varo and the Hungarian photographer Kati Horna. These two, who are both now dead, were also strong, independent-minded women, who had fled war-torn Europe for Mexico, a country that opened its doors to refugees in the 30s and 40s.
Interestingly, when they met, all three had had relationships with major figures in the art world â€" Horna had been a close friend of the legendary war photographer Robert Capa, and Varo was still the lover of the surrealist poet Benjamin Péret. But in Mexico they formed relationships with men who would be supportive, loyal, yet no match for them artistically. Carrington married a photographer called Chiki Weisz, Varo became the lover of a businessman called Walter Gruen, and Horna's partner was a sculptor and craftsman called José Horna.
In taking this path, they were very different from the painter Frida Kahlo, whom they brushed up against in their new country. She, of course, had married the famous muralist Diego Rivera, not once, but twice. (Carrington attended the couple's second wedding, and apparently annoyed the great man. "He asked me who I was, and I said 'Leonora Carrington, and who are you?' He said, 'Moctezuma,' so I said, 'Really? I thought you were dead.' He didn't seem to find it funny.") Kahlo used to boast that she would stop her own painting to take Rivera his lunch; I get the impression that Weisz had to sort out his own sandwiches.
Varo and Carrington, in particular, found they shared a deep intensity of imagination. They encouraged each other in feats of daring: Varo would write letters to strangers, their names picked at random from the phone book, inviting them to attend dinner parties. There were also endless experiments in cookery, with surreal recipes served up to unsuspecting friends, including an omelette made with human hair, and ink-dyed tapioca passed off as caviar. But while the wild lives of the surrealist men in Paris attracted much attention, those of the surrealist women in Mexico passed largely unnoticed. This wasn't just due to art-world prejudice â€" this group of artists was not looking for an audience. To this day, Carrington tends to be scathing about those she feels are "pretending" to be surreal. "You shouldn't need to fake it," she says.
Amid the fun, games and tequila, there was serious work being done. All three women had to earn their own living: painting was done anywhere in the house where there was space, frequently with children and animals playing around on the floor. Far from shackling them, domesticity seems to have been liberating. Many of Carrington's and Varo's paintings are set in the interiors of houses, which are transformed into places where extra- ordinary, inexplicable, exciting events take place. In Carrington's The House Opposite (1945), female figures move through floors, change into trees, and mix a mysterious potion in a cauldron. In Varo's The Creation of the Birds (1957), a female figure sits painting birds that seem to come to life on the paper and fly out of the window.
But there are also images that express women's oppression. Varo's Celestial Pablum (1958) shows a lonely looking woman trapped in a high tower, caring for a caged moon, and is often considered a commentary on how maternity traps women; Carrington's Green Tea (1942) features a young woman, in a quintessentially English landscape, who has been mummified. (Leonora undoubtedly felt herself to have been mummified by her early experiences, which had included a period at finishing school and being forced to "come out" as a debutante.)
Horna, meanwhile, had already photographed the Spanish civil war, not at the front, as her friend Capa did, but behind the lines; she depicted the fallout of war on the lives of ordinary women and children long before it was fashionable to do so. In Mexico she experimented with photographs of a doll, trying to impose emotional content onto an inanimate object, and her 1987 collage Leonora Carrington in Renaissance Style â€" which shows Carrington in Leonardo-like pose, Italian architecture rising up behind her â€" appears to be a comment not merely on the story of one of her oldest friends, but also on the experiences of women artists through the ages.
While the art world has generally ignored Carrington and her friends, they did have a devoted patron in the Sussex millionaire Edward James, who was also one of the most important collectors of Dalà and Magritte. James died in 1984, but his influence continues to be strongly felt at Pallant House Gallery in Chichester, near his home, and in 2007 the gallery's director, Stefan van Raay, and I hatched a plan to bring Carrington's paintings to the UK, the country of her birth. Last week a plane took off from Mexico City for London, laden with work by Carrington, Varo and Horna. The exhibition will be open to the public from tomorrow.
So, will the art world now take a fresh look at these European outcasts in Mexico, and find in them something new, different and important? Madonna spotted the star potential of Carrington and Remedios back in 1995, when she used their work as the basis for her video, Bedtime Story. At the time it was the most expensive music video ever made (costing US $5m/£4m) and today it is included in the permanent collection at the Museum of Modern Art in New York. Meanwhile, the work of all three artists is changing hands at auction for sums that would have amazed them all in the 50s when they were seated around that kitchen table. Last year, for example, Carrington's painting The Giantess was sold at Christie's in New York for US $1.5m, putting her among a handful of living women artists whose work can command such sums.
Carrington herself is sanguine; she says that nothing much has the power to surprise her any more. Of course, the people who would be truly shocked are now long dead â€" the surrealist greats, who once glanced in her direction and saw only a beautiful young woman whose presence might help them paint better canvases. Carrington and her friends have had the last word. They were never femme enfants. They were, in fact, the muses who roared.
• Surreal Friends: the work of Leonora Carrington, Remedios Varo and Kati Horna opens at Pallant House Gallery, Chichester, on 19 June, and moves to the Sainsbury Centre for Visual Arts, Norwich, from 28 September.surrealfriends.com
• Watch a video of Britain's lost surrealist Leonora Carrington talking to Joanna Moorhead about her life and art guardian.co.uk/artanddesign
The Italian has selection and tactical issues ahead of his side's next match. Our writers suggest what he should and shouldn't do
Dominic Fifield
Who should play in goal?
David James
Who should partner Terry?
Jamie Carragher
As Barry to stay?
Gareth Barry has only one role to play in this England side â€" as a scuttling defensive midfield shield â€" and could be best utilised in something approaching a 4-2-3-1 formation. His inclusion will allow Steven Gerrard to move back to the left, playing narrowly with Ashley Cole encouraged to overlap on his outside down the flank, with Barry slightly deeper than Frank Lampard in the centre. The Manchester City player is no feverish tackler, but he should ferry the ball on to his team-mates efficiently enough and his presence will offer reassurance to the back line. England will benefit from his passing as much as anything else, and he can effectively be this team's metronome.
One more thing …
The theory was always that Capello would eventually morph his side into a 4-3-3 towards the latter stages of the tournament, with Wayne Rooney flanked by two attack-minded wingers rather than fellow strikers. The time to play the forward alone up front may have come early, with Joe Cole â€" strangely ignored against the USA â€" the man to link the play at his back. Cole played off Rooney for around 20 minutes in the recent friendly against Japan, albeit in a 4-4-1-1, and excelled, playing a part in England's two goals in Graz. He is an elusive runner and was this team's best player at the last World Cup finals, so he boasts pedigree. Now is the time to give him his chance.
Education
4-2-3-1
James: Johnson, Carragher, Terry, A Cole; Barry, Lampard; Lennon, J Cole, Gerrard; Rooney
Paul Hayward
Who should play in goal?
Joe Hart
Robert Green was a rational selection against the USA but his howler exposed a concentration flaw. Sad, because Green is a good pro. On experience David James would take the gloves, but has he pushed too hard, politically, for a starting place? These things matter in World Cup camps. Also, James has his own history of slip-ups. Hart exudes cockiness as well as talent. Capello was tempted to anoint him his No1 before caution got the better of him and Green was picked. Algeria and Slovenia can prepare Hart for the harder tests ahead.
Who should partner Terry?
Jamie Carragher
Capello has already lost Rio Ferdinand and Ledley King and will be relieved he brought eight defenders, unlike Spain, Brazil, etc, who confined themselves to seven. King lasted 45 minutes against the USA. Carragher, who came on at half-time, might have been sent off for an early foul and was cleaned out by America's Jozy Altidore on England's right side. Matthew Upson is entitled to be aggrieved at being passed over for the first-replacement spot and Michael Dawson impresses with his attitude and is better than he has had a chance to show. But England need Carragher's grit and cunning, so he should start with John Terry.
How should Barry be accommodated?
One more thing …
Formation
4-5-1
Hart; Johnson, Terry, Carragher, A Cole; Lennon, Barry, Lampard, Gerrard, J Cole; Rooney
Kevin McCarra
Who should play in goal?
Robert Green
There is a strong case for regarding Joe Hart as the man eventually to restore the reputation of England goalkeeping, but Fabio Capello has not let him start a match for his country. That has begun to look a miscalculation and there would have been an air of panic if he were pitched in now. David James let no one down in the qualifiers but has not had the backing of Capello and his coaches recently. In the circumstance, Green ought to be retained. He was guilty of a howler but showed character by not letting it affect him.
Who should partner Terry?
Matthew Upson
The manager is likely to opt for Jamie Carragher now that Ledley King has been ruled out, but he had an alarming second half against the USA where his lack of speed was expected, but the inability to dominate physically was disconcerting. Carragher could easily have been sent off too. Considering that Capello has never permitted Michael Dawson a single minute on the field, England ought to turn again to Upson, who was a steady presence when called upon in the World Cup qualifiers, even if West Ham's campaign showed virtually everyone in an unflattering light.
How should Barry be accommodated?
One more thing …
It was preposterous if Capello truly ignored Joe Cole because he was fretting about the overlapping of the Americans' right-back Steve Cherundolo. England should have concentrated on making him defend. Cole's creativity and technique ought to be essential. While Emile Heskey mostly impressed against the USA, Wayne Rooney kept drifting away from the danger area and on this occasion at least the answer may be to make him a lone striker, with Steven Gerrard in support, since his country craves some of the firepower so apparent with Manchester United.
Formation
4-1-3-1-1
Green; Johnson, Upson, Terry, A Cole; Barry; Lennon, Lampard, J Cole; Gerrard; Rooney
Richard Williams
Who should play in goal?
Joe Hart
Who should partner Terry?
Michael Dawson
The former captain was close to his best against the United States, and he needed to be given the early injury to Ledley King and Jamie Carragher's lack of pace. Matthew Upson and Carragher, both solid stoppers, are cover for Terry, not for King. Dawson would bring the mobility to the role originally entrusted to Rio Ferdinand, and his Under-21 caps and his fine season for Tottenham should help him overcome a lack of senior international experience. He and John Terry could form as useful a partnership as Terry and Ferdinand.
How should Barry be accommodated?
The left-footed Barry is a natural defender with an unfussy approach and a good range of passes. His return would allow Capello to revert to the formation that proved successful in the qualifying campaign, in which Barry and Frank Lampard sit in front of the back four, screening the defence. Both are given the licence to venture forward on suitable occasions (Lampard more frequently, as befits a prolific goalscorer). This permits Steven Gerrard to move across to the left side of midfield, combining with Ashley Cole, but also with the scope to drive infield to support Wayne Rooney and Emile Heskey.
And another thing ...
Formation
4-2-3-1
Hart; Johnson, Dawson, Terry, A Cole; Lampard, Barry; J Cole, Rooney, Gerrard; Heskey.
Authors of higher education green survey claim studying at lowest-ranking institutions add almost third to a student's carbon footprint
Plymouth is home to the universities with the best and the worst "green" credentials, according to a new league table.
Plymouth University took first place in The People & Planet Green League 2010, which claims to be the only assessment of the environmental performance of Britain's universities.
The nearby University College Plymouth St Mark & St John propped up the bottom of the rankings, which were compiled by the student campaign group, who have criticised the overall lack of green initiatives across the higher education sector.
The table's authors have claimed that studying at the lowest-ranking institutions adds almost a third to the average UK individual's carbon footprint.
The Royal College of Music is this year's biggest climber, jumping from 126th place in 2009 into 22nd this year, while Kings College London has seen its ranking slide 75 places to 113th this year.
Despite pledges by some universities to cut emissions by 34% over the next 10 years, the authors have highlighted "a severe lack of ambition and urgency across the sector more broadly".
While the total staff and student headcount across the UK academy has risen by 7% since 2005, carbon emissions have climbed by 25%, according to the campaigners. The table is published today in the Times Higher Education Supplement.
Louise Hazan, People & Planet's climate campaigner, said: "We expected this year's Green League to show the sector making a clear transition towards low-carbon operations â€" students have been demanding this for years. Despite clear improvements across the board on policy and student engagement, we found that the sector as a whole is emitting 25% more carbon now than it did five years ago. That's obviously incredibly worrying with regards to climate change"
The table, now in its fourth year, assesses universities on the basis of seven policy areas, including carbon management and sustainable procurement initiatives, and four performance indicators, such as waste and carbon emissions per head.
The campaigners investigated 137 eligible institutions, of which 133 provided enough information to be entered into the league. Information was obtained from the higher education funding councils, the Freedom of Information Act, and the universities themselves.
Energy and climate change secretary, Chris Huhne, said of the research: "The Green League throws a spotlight onto the work being done in universities to cut emissions, and I hope it will encourage universities and students to redouble their efforts in the fight against climate change. It is the students in universities today who will be carrying on the work to build the low carbon Britain of tomorrow, and it is vital that universities and government set a good example."
Professor Wendy Purcell, vice-chancellor of the University of Plymouth, described their top billing as a "fantastic external recognition for the university"
"At the University of Plymouth, we aspire to be a socially responsible organisation, demonstrating sustainability in all our activities and ensuring our students are aware of economic, environmental, social and ethical issues.
"We are working hard to ensure we lead the thinking in this area, using our research expertise to make a difference and embedding this knowledge in the way we manage our estate."
A spokesperson from University College Plymouth St Mark & St John said: "The university is dedicated to reducing its carbon emissions and applauds People & Planet in their work to drive UK universities' transition to a low carbon future.
"However, in compiling the Green League 2010, the campaign group have failed to recognise the value the university places on environmental management and the achievements the institution has made to date. Instead, the Green League 2010 has judged the institution primarily on an incomplete response to their questionnaire."
Susan Nash, National Union of Students Vice-President for Society and Citizenship said that the league table was "a powerful tool which has transformed institutions, and helped put sustainability well and truly on the desk of every vice chancellor", but criticised institutions that fared badly in the research:
"The lack of ambition from many universities is concerning. Even at a time when budgets are tight there innovative ways for universities campuses to save money and reduce emissions which is essential if we are to meet carbon reduction targets and effectively fight climate change."
Authors of higher education green survey claim studying at lowest-ranking institutions add almost third to a student's carbon footprint
Plymouth is home to the universities with the best and the worst "green" credentials, according to a new league table.
Plymouth University took first place in The People & Planet Green League 2010, which claims to be the only assessment of the environmental performance of Britain's universities.
The nearby University College Plymouth St Mark & St John propped up the bottom of the rankings, which were compiled by the student campaign group, who have criticised the overall lack of green initiatives across the higher education sector.
The table's authors have claimed that studying at the lowest-ranking institutions adds almost a third to the average UK individual's carbon footprint.
The Royal College of Music is this year's biggest climber, jumping from 126th place in 2009 into 22nd this year, while Kings College London has seen its ranking slide 75 places to 113th this year.
Despite pledges by some universities to cut emissions by 34% over the next 10 years, the authors have highlighted "a severe lack of ambition and urgency across the sector more broadly".
While the total staff and student headcount across the UK academy has risen by 7% since 2005, carbon emissions have climbed by 25%, according to the campaigners. The table is published today in the Times Higher Education Supplement.
Louise Hazan, People & Planet's climate campaigner, said: "We expected this year's Green League to show the sector making a clear transition towards low-carbon operations â€" students have been demanding this for years. Despite clear improvements across the board on policy and student engagement, we found that the sector as a whole is emitting 25% more carbon now than it did five years ago. That's obviously incredibly worrying with regards to climate change"
The table, now in its fourth year, assesses universities on the basis of seven policy areas, including carbon management and sustainable procurement initiatives, and four performance indicators, such as waste and carbon emissions per head.
The campaigners investigated 137 eligible institutions, of which 133 provided enough information to be entered into the league. Information was obtained from the higher education funding councils, the Freedom of Information Act, and the universities themselves.
Energy and climate change secretary, Chris Huhne, said of the research: "The Green League throws a spotlight onto the work being done in universities to cut emissions, and I hope it will encourage universities and students to redouble their efforts in the fight against climate change. It is the students in universities today who will be carrying on the work to build the low carbon Britain of tomorrow, and it is vital that universities and government set a good example."
Professor Wendy Purcell, vice-chancellor of the University of Plymouth, described their top billing as a "fantastic external recognition for the university"
"At the University of Plymouth, we aspire to be a socially responsible organisation, demonstrating sustainability in all our activities and ensuring our students are aware of economic, environmental, social and ethical issues.
"We are working hard to ensure we lead the thinking in this area, using our research expertise to make a difference and embedding this knowledge in the way we manage our estate."
A spokesperson from University College Plymouth St Mark & St John said: "The university is dedicated to reducing its carbon emissions and applauds People & Planet in their work to drive UK universities' transition to a low carbon future.
"However, in compiling the Green League 2010, the campaign group have failed to recognise the value the university places on environmental management and the achievements the institution has made to date. Instead, the Green League 2010 has judged the institution primarily on an incomplete response to their questionnaire."
Susan Nash, National Union of Students Vice-President for Society and Citizenship said that the league table was "a powerful tool which has transformed institutions, and helped put sustainability well and truly on the desk of every vice chancellor", but criticised institutions that fared badly in the research:
"The lack of ambition from many universities is concerning. Even at a time when budgets are tight there innovative ways for universities campuses to save money and reduce emissions which is essential if we are to meet carbon reduction targets and effectively fight climate change."