CLIMATE

AGAINST a backdrop of orange skies, as vast wildfires sweep through Greece and California, the sixth report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was published. In western Germany, thousands of homes remain without running water or other vital utilities following the devastating floods of July. In the Siberian city of Yakutsk, deemed the coldest winter city on earth, residents were warned last month to stay indoors as forest fires filled the air with acrid and toxic smoke, following extraordinary heat waves that began in the spring.

The IPCC’s report which took eight years to compile, and which was authored by the world’s leading climate scientists and approved by 195 national governments, confirmed the meaning of the evidence before our eyes: the cumulative impact of human activity since the Industrial Revolution is “unequivocally” causing rapid and potentially catastrophic changes to the climate. The predictions that environmental scientists foresaw with such alarm when the IPCC produced its first report three decades ago has arrived.

Without an accelerated reduction in greenhouse gases during the next decade, the ambition of the 2015 Paris climate agreement to limit global heating to 1.5C will not be met. The price of failure will be a world vulnerable to irreversible and exponential effects of global heating: there will be worse floods more often, more frequent heatwaves, devastating and repeated droughts, and an increase in mortality through disease.

The science is irrefutable. Less certain is the political will to act upon it. The burden of responsibility upon this generation of world leaders as humanity finds itself at a fork in the road is immense. The decisions and actions taken or foregone during the next 10 years will define the parameters of what is possible for future generations. A step-change is required, but across the world green rhetoric continues to translate into policymaking at a pace which is fatally slow. China has committed to the target of net zero emissions by 2050, but it continues to build coal-fired power stations both at home and abroad. Along with the top carbon-emitters such as Russia and India, it refused to endorse the 1.5C goal at an April summit convened by the American president, Joe Biden. As Mr Biden’s special envoy for climate, John Kerry, has said, if countries such as these cannot be persuaded to enact faster reductions over the next decade, the target looks unachievable.

Whilst this treacherous turning point in history must be dealt with, Britain finds itself both uniquely placed and unprepared to host the crucial Cop26 climate summit in Glasgow. The government’s climate minister and Cop26 president, Alok Sharma, has tried to use the IPCC report as a means of concentrating minds. Speaking in the last few days, he said that the world was almost “out of time” in dealing with the effects of global heating. Yet, ahead of arguably the most important summit held on British soil since the second world war, delay and equivocation have become the government’s trademark response to the greatest challenge of our times. The publication of a net zero strategy, which had been due in the spring, has been delayed until the autumn amid fears over the possible cost. Some backbenchers have also begun to lobby for a slower transition, based on the false presumption that poorer families will disproportionately bear the burden of change.

It is imperative that a fair transition to net zero is set. With the right forms of intervention and subsidies, it is eminently achievable. The experience of the Covid-19 pandemic has taught us that the most daunting challenges can be met by political leaders who recognise that exceptional times require exceptional measures. Thus far, though, there is little sign that Boris Johnson’s government is willing to treat the climate crisis in the same way. The stark conclusions of the IPCC study, and Britain’s vital convening role at Cop26, make that position untenable. The science is unequivocal. The verdict is clear. There is no more room for political manoeuvring, delay or prevarication in dealing with an emergency which is this generation’s responsibility to address.