Here in the UK, March 2016 broke climate change records –
those records had been set in February 2016! 2015 was the warmest year on
record; most of the 10 warmest years have been in the last decade. On the other
side of the globe, 11,000 miles away in Tasmania is an observatory which
records greenhouse and ozone-depleting gases in an uncontaminated, ‘clean air’
location. The journal Science published on May 20th includes a news
briefing titled ‘Atmospheric CO2 reaches a milestone’ and
reports “Last week, carbon dioxide .. levels at Cape Grim, an observatory on
Tasmania in Australia rose above 400 parts per million (ppm) …”.
Elaborating on the significance of this fact, the short article explains that
because of the nature of seasonal variations in CO2 levels in the
northern hemisphere, the record of 400 ppm CO2 at Cape Grim, is a
more accurate reflection of global atmospheric CO2 levels.
Climate change is well underway; records are tumbling
quicker than predicted under most climate models. This is partly due to natural
variation but scientists agree that the over-riding cause is human activity.
The significance of the 400 ppm CO2 figure is that it shows we’re
closing on the point at which a global average 2oC temperature rise
is inevitable (that threshold is estimated at 450 ppm CO2), with
major consequences for our climate, the world’s weather systems and the way we
live.
There has been lots of talk since the UN Framework
Convention on Climate Change was launched 25 years ago this week on June 4th,
1992 at the Earth Summit. There’s been some activity, but we are leaving it
very late to make the level of change needed to avoid that 2oC
temperature rise and damaging climate change. Individual action is important,
but this is not something that can be solved by any country working in
isolation. International co-operation is vital.
So, there is a question to both sides of the EU
debate: How will remaining in, or leaving the EU help drive the
international action necessary?
Some members of the “leave” campaign have, unfortunately,
become associated with climate change denial. Pretence that it is not happening
does not fill one with confidence that there will be strong leadership, even
co-operation, from Britain if we isolate ourselves. Whilst it might be possible
for the UK alone to lead the rest of the world in this area, indications so far
are that the “leave” campaign wish to slow down progress on climate change, not
accelerate it. If willing, we could go further and be in advance of the EU. But
this is not the message we are getting from the “leave” campaign.
The “remain” campaign, however, is little better. Whilst
there are strong voices pushing for climate change progress, the campaign as a
whole is bedevilled by demands for deregulation. A huge emphasis on economic
growth (at any cost, and whatever it means) and the removal of any perceived
barriers shifts the whole frame of any discussion away from the need to
safeguard the environment and the ecosystem functions on which we depend. This
could undermine attempts to address significant areas of market failure – and
climate change is about the biggest market failure we’re likely face!
On one hand we could become separate from the EU and show
unilateral leadership in the response to climate change (but all indications
are that we would do the opposite). On the other, we could stay in the EU and
be part of a powerful group influencing international agreements to combat
climate change (against the background of a UK trying to weaken international
progress). That is the choice.