A passionate message from an ex-Tory leader
30 years ago, Mrs That cher warned of man- made global warming. If earth is blazing summer is proving her right
Parched fields in east anglia, moorland fires in derbyshire, scorched parks across the nation, depleted reservoirs in the West country, drying lakes in the North.
This blistering summer, during which we sweltered for weeks on end, reminded many of the great heatwave of 1976.
But there is a significant difference: this year’s heat has not been limited to the United Kingdom.
In Sweden, forest fires blaze as far north as the arctic circle. californian firefighters battle the biggest conflagration they have ever seen. Japan has experienced its highest temperatures on record. So has africa. australia’s most populous state, New South Wales, is entirely in drought.
It is hard to escape the conclusion that something unusual is disturbing our weather.
although we should not rush to assume it is man-made climate change, common sense demands that we ask the question.
are the dramatic events unfolding around the world being shaped by the greenhouse gases that we are adding to the atmosphere, and which stop heat escaping from the earth into space, as scientists have repeatedly warned would happen? and if these events are a manifestation of climate change, what does that imply for our future?
Margaret Thatcher, in whose government I served, is unique among prime ministers in having had a science degree and having worked as a scientist before entering politics. She was better qualified than any other politician to understand climate science and to foresee the likely course of climate change if left unchecked.
Thirty years ago next month, she gave a speech to scientists of the royal Society. There was a danger, she said, that ‘we have unwittingly begun a massive experiment with the system of this planet itself’.
Mrs Thatcher’s concerns led to her becoming the first leader of any major nation to call for a landmark United Nations treaty on the issue.
Four years later, as environment Secretary, I played a small role in ushering that UN treaty into existence at the 1992 earth Summit in rio de Janeiro.
Its resolutions did not require countries to commit themselves to specific reductions in emissions, but it was significant because it was the first step.
Then, and in the years since, I have had many conversations with climate scientists. although the details have become clearer, their essential message remains as it was: greenhouse gas emissions are changing the world. The more we put into the atmosphere, the more hazardous the risks.
Since 1992, there has been a backlash against the notion that climate is affected in any way by human activity.
I believe that the extent of this backlash is often exaggerated: a few prominent commentators in this country are sceptical, but they have not shaken the public consensus. In general, I believe, people accept there is a manmade component to the erratic weather patterns we are seeing and they want action to be taken.
It’s certainly hard to argue with such a mass of evidence.
Scientists at oxford University have already analysed this year’s european heatwave and concluded that climate change made it more than twice as likely to occur. They will conduct a fuller analysis at the end of the summer and are predicting that the impact of climate change will turn out to be even more than double.
We know from research by the oxford scientists and others in holland that climate change also increased the likelihood of Storm desmond, which caused severe gales and heavy rainfall in the first week of december 2015. Three years on, communities in cumbria have still not entirely recovered.
The UK is not alone in feeling these impacts. over the past 15 years, scientists have connected climate change with floods, droughts and storms on every continent except antarctica.
It is important to stress that it has never been a conservative value to be ‘ anti- science’. When climate scientists speak, we should listen.
Putting one’s fingers in one’s ears and denying the problem is not a rational response. The only pragmatic approach is to listen, evaluate and act.
The fact is that we have time to avoid the worst excesses of climate change, by reducing greenhouse gas emissions to levels that will keep impacts at manageable levels.
The good news is that in Britain, we are cutting our emissions effectively and doing so is certainly not harming our economy.
Since 1990, Britain has cut its greenhouse gas footprint by more than two-fifths. during the same period, our economy has grown by more than two-thirds.
claims that combating climate change would ruin our economy have conclusively been disproved: we are both richer and greener than a generation ago.
The events of this summer, then, should spur us to continue cutting our own greenhouse gas emissions and persuade other nations to do better. This is not something we have to leave to officialdom: every individual can make a difference.
one effective step is to trade in your diesel or petrol car for an electric model or a hybrid. on the basis of the lifetime of the vehicle, the costs are now comparable.
If that seems too drastic, you could resolve to use public transport more often and walk wherever possible.
at home, it’s wise to review your heating regularly, making sure you use it efficiently — this being a good way of cutting household bills, too.
When the public sets an example in this way, government takes notice.
We are already reducing our reliance on fossil fuels. Indeed, in april, the National Grid announced that more than three whole days’ electricity supply had been generated without burning coal, for the first time since the 1880s. It came from gas, which is much less polluting than coal, renewable sources and nuclear.
Nuclear power stations can play an increasing part in this energy revolution. I am not a starry-eyed idealist and I accept that the cost of building more of these atomic generators might add a small amount to energy bills — although investing in energy efficiency will reduce them.
But we have to be open-minded. above all, we must not lose hope. There is still time for catastrophic climate change to be averted.
cynics and pessimists claim that burgeoning pollution in china and India makes it impossible for the West to reverse its effects.
I disagree. anyone who has been to a chinese city knows the terrible atmospheric problems they endure. But people there are not prepared to put up with it any more. china’s government recognises this and is implementing changes. In India, politicians accept they must reduce carbon emissions. Both countries have huge plans for renewable energy and electric cars.
The big question is whether change can happen fast enough to avoid damaging consequences for future generations.
The obdurate refusal of U.S. President donald Trump to do likewise is a matter of regret, but in individual american states, much encouraging progress is being made. Businesses are adapting, even if the lead is not coming from the federal government. It is not co-ordinated, but it is cause for optimism.
This summer has shown that Margaret Thatcher was correct. We are conducting an experiment with the atmosphere and it is a dangerous one.
It is only right that we permit the experiment to proceed no further, by eliminating greenhouse gas emissions as soon as we can.
doing so will not cost the earth and may yet succeed in ensuring that we pass it on to our grandchildren in a condition fit for them to enjoy.