Climate for Change

Nigel Lawson, Britain’s chancellor of the exchequer during the Thatcher years, is no exception. He is an outspoken skeptic about global warming. But in An Appeal to Reason he examines only briefly the problems he sees both with the science behind global warming and with the devastating economic impact of enacting international policies to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Instead, he chooses to “err on the side of caution,” accepting the worst predictions of the effects of climate change at face value and offering a measured assessment of how we could–and even should–realistically respond to the threats.

Lawson’s conservative approach undercuts knee-jerk reactions by accepting the legitimacy of warming concerns. And acknowledging the seriousness of climate change warnings by discussing real policy solutions should ensure him the same treatment in turn. But this courtesy, he notes, is rarely extended to those in the doubting camp: Scientists and politicians who express skepticism about global warming are treated as heretics for questioning the received wisdom: “[I]ndeed, I have been able to write this book only because my own career is behind me,” he says.

He is, as he emphasizes, not a scientist–and his approach also demonstrates a sense of what is appropriate for him to undertake. But he is more than credentialed to talk about implementing policy and, at the outset, he articulates exactly what is at issue–surprisingly easy to lose sight of–for policy- makers addressing climate change: “What has been the rise in global mean temperatures over the past hundred years; why we believe this has occurred; how much, on this basis, are temperatures likely to rise over the next hundred years; and what are the consequences likely to be.”

Acknowledging that “the twentieth century ended slightly warmer than it began” (by 1.3 degrees Fahrenheit), Lawson points out that there has been no significant warming since the beginning of this century. This cessation was not predicted by the computer models that experts rely on for forecasts of future warming. Predictions have been adjusted to account for the pause, and warming is now expected to resume next year. But, says Lawson, “we shall see” whether it does.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)–“far and away the most authoritative and influential” of existing climate change organizations, according to Lawson–predicts in its latest report that, by 2100, the global average temperature will have risen between 3.2 degrees and 7.2 degrees Fahrenheit. The general consensus for preventing this predicted warming is to enact policies that force the reduction of man-made carbon dioxide emissions, which create a greenhouse effect in the atmosphere. But the cost of mitigation would be extraordinary because of global reliance on carbon-based energy.

According to the IPCC, stabilizing “CO2-equivalent concentrations in the atmosphere” at 535-590 parts per million by volume (currently around 430) by 2050 could cost up to 4 percent “of that year’s global GDP.” Mitigation would have an enormously negative effect on developed economies and would cause a serious setback for emerging nations–in the unlikely event that they agree to emissions reduction targets–because carbon-based energy is a major factor in rapidly growing their economies.

Even if the global average temperature increases by 7.2 degrees–the upper end of the IPCC’s range–is it worth wreaking havoc on the global economy to prevent a level of warming to which we could adapt in the course of a century? Lawson suggests that a wiser and more plausible approach is “autonomous adaptation, buttressed where necessary with positive policy measures to assist it.”

If policy action were taken now in the interest of future generations, it would be unprecedented, Lawson says, pointing out that protecting against projected catastrophe and loss of human life in future centuries has never been the responsibility of today’s policymakers.

“Is there something so special about global warming,” he asks, “that it should receive this exceptionally lenient treatment?” Environmental concerns, while appropriate and of great importance, are “no excuse for abandoning reason,” and Lawson offers his “appeal to reason” to people who “have not yet made up their minds” about global warming. A slender volume written in a refreshingly rational–even reasonable!–manner, An Appeal to Reason is an excellent resource for anyone who wants a brief, logical education on the issues surrounding the rhetoric of climate change, and the implications of proposed cures.

Christy Hall Robinson is an associate editor at the American Enterprise Institute.