Holy Solar

Currently the Pope is visiting the UK. Speaking on BCC news after her brief meeting with him in Edinburgh today was Stephanie Hilborne who is the CEO of 47 Wildlife Trusts. She spoke about the importance of the influential catholic church supporting our pressing need to combat climate change whether it be by getting people, businesses, governments to act on reducing carbon emissions or preparing people to accept and adapt to the inevitable changes that lie ahead. Apparently the Vatican has now solar panels on the roof which is indicative of their commitment to fighting global warming and to recognising their role in our plight. Wildlife trusts are particularly concerned about our warming planet and the growing dislocation between people and their environment. For this reason I am delighted to be connected with Wildlife Trusts via Kindnessday UK – a project I founded with David Jamilly to raise awareness of the importance of consideration to others. Of course this begins with taking essential care of the very planet we inhabit and the air that we breath.

There are a million benefits to developing our world materially whether they be greater comforts, life saving medical facilities or increased knowledge of the universe. But one of the downsides would have to be that we have lost touch with essential benefit often by the natural world. Our very existence on earth.

Flash Floods and Hot Cities

A couple of weeks ago I was in sunny La Napoule in France with my husband. Four days later, just up the road, 20 people were killed in the most extreme weather conditions the region has seen for twenty years.

Is this a side effect of global warming? And if it is, what can we do to prepare as it seems that nature has a way of selecting new and unexpected destinations to act out her wrath. Right across the world violent storms claim lives on an almost weekly basis. How many depends on the population.

No surprise city mayors in particular are concerned because of the vast numbers of people living in cities. A couple of years ago at the Institute of Physics we alerted London councillors to the possibility of an extra tropic cyclone hitting our city and the devastation that would cause.

New York has already had experience. In 2007 the Subway was paralysed during morning rush hour when flash floods deposited debris on the tracks; the same thing as happened in 1992.

Our problem? You can't climate-proof anywhere, no campsite, no village, no city.

But what you can do is continue to counter what we believe are the causes of many of these extreme weather incidents. And that’s global warming. Like reducing CO2.And you can also turn a disadvantage into a plus. Take city buildings. Buildings account for 75 % of city emissions. But much of the 150 million square meters of rooftop in New York is black tar. In the summer it bakes under the sun and compounds the heat warming of climate change. Then it the winter it cracks when it freezes. But it is also the perfect landscape for photovoltaic panels which produce clean, much needed city energy. So just one example of a win-win. Let’s hope we can find some more.

Bjorn Lomborg at the RSA

If you want to influence people around to your way of thinking then firstly you have to make some sort of empathetic connection with them. Bjorn Lomberg knows that. He also knows if he talks common sense he will get a favourable response.

For example ask an impoverished mother struggling to survive whether she would rather have food for her children this week or go without for the sake of climate change the answer is obvious. Bjorn Lomberg is right, our current needs take preference over the future.

Talk about how no one wants to give up creature comforts like heated houses, cars and air travel if they can help it and you’ll them nodding their heads. Again Lomberg is right.

But tell a room of environmentalists and activists that you believe like they do that we are responsible however for global warming and we should be investing full speed ahead in sustainable energy like geo-engineering – in fact anything effective and that’s when people get very angry with him. In fact walk out of meetings as they did last night at the RSA event chaired by the Duke of Edinburgh – stormed out without even a backward glance at the Prince.

Why? Because he causes the same sort of irritation as someone who damns with faint praise. 'Global warming is a problem but it is not that much of an issue,' is his view. There, there. Which is probably worse than the declaring himself a global warming sceptic. He sounds so plausible he can actually upset people more.

For example, how their hard earned taxes are being squandered on inefficiencies and green schemes that are useless. And how they are being manipulated and duped into thinking they are doing the right thing.

There is even some common sense in his vision that if people want to do ‘the right thing’ more people in the developing countries could be helped today by doing the opposite to what everyone is banging on about; reducing emissions. Maybe, just maybe he is right and that we are obsessed with this one panacea. Cut carbon, save the world. As he says quite correctly more people may die from heat as a result of global warming, but less perish from cold. So there could be some positive spin to our warming planet. All stuff which is perfectly plausible.

However, it is at that point where he becomes offensive by suggesting that all efforts on carbon reduction are futile and that public relations movements like Kyoto agreements are no more than hypocritical and costly gestures. As he goes on to elaborate, if we were interested in saving mankind then we would do so the way he suggests. If we want to stop people dying from heat, we can give them air conditioning. Concerned about malaria, pay for drugs.

But the problem is that he avoids the central issue. That empathising with people’s immediate concerns will only work so far. How no one can accurately foretell the tipping point, when our greed for natural resources drives us too far. How none of us will ultimately benefit from our continued use of irreplaceable natural resources. And if it hadn’t been for these dramatic scenarios – possibly a little overdone - we would not have begun the good trend of environmental concern that is genuinely underway. People the world over are now are aware that we need energy sources other than fossil fuels. The world population is aware that our rainforests are precious, that our coral reefs are poisoned and that sea levels will rise as glaciers melt.

And whatever personal preferences we hold for helping out those in need it should not veer from our focus of stemming climate change.

Hopefully we can continue discussing the way forward with an open mind and an optimistic attitude.