Every few months the leaders of the Group of 8 industrialised nations (USA, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, and the United Kingdom) meet. They call themselves the G8. The purpose of each meeting is to fix the world’s problems. It is nothing to do with the leaders getting some excellent publicity so that they may show to their electorates what a great and difficult job they are doing and the purpose is also completely unconnected with each leader showing their electorates just how much other all the important world leaders respect him or her.
During each meeting the world is treated to bits of “news” (presumably prepared weeks in advance) to show us what magnificent progress these leaders are making. Yesterday we heard how the G8 had agreed to limit global warming to 2⁰C (3.6⁰F) above “pre-industrial levels” (whatever that means) by 2050 and 50% cuts in global emissions by 2050.
Well, that is a wonderful idea. We would all agree to limit global warming. No one wants to burn. That is the easy part. However, this easy part has been hailed by the G8 as an important statement.
Some politicians, like Mr Miliband the United Kingdom’s Department of Energy & Climate Change’s Secretary (DECC), have pointed to that statement as being important because, it is argued, that if we can get the developing nations to sign up to the two degree limit, then all the detail about how to achieve that limit, can be put in place. The detail includes the cost of financing measures, identifying and requiring measures, deciding when those measures shall start and a whole host of other details about which governments across our slowly overheating world have not even begun to think about.
Mr Miliband pointed out that the European Union has directed that its member states will reduce emissions by one third by 2020 compared with 1990 and said that we must persuade all countries to raise their ambitions to reduce emissions significantly by 2020. He complained about a lack of ambition. He says that we need more ambition to limit climate change to a two degree rise by 2050.
I understand Mr Miliband’s position, because he wants to achieve international climate change co-operation, which will be the only way to achieve any result on climate change. This means, however, that he does not want the United Kingdom to do the right thing if it is the only nation doing the right thing. For that, I criticise him.
Mr Miliband’s department is in charge of anti- global warming measures, as the name of his department implies. Mr Miliband is in charge of his department and has been in charge since October 2008. It is not possible to identify a single ounce of carbon dioxide that DECC has caused to be saved since Mr Miliband came into office which would not have been saved otherwise.
Even if DECC has saved some emissions, overall the United Kingdom’s emissions are not falling. The Department is not helping to reduce the risks of climate change.
In other words, Mr Miliband seems to be as lacking in ambition to save emissions and to keep the planet’s temperature low as those he urges to increase their ambition. However, he has been responsible for ensuring that there will be increasing emissions by failing to ban coal burning power stations, like the one proposed by e.on (formerly Powergen) at Kingsnorth.
So much for ambition.
Mr Miliband should care for the future. Last month his partner, Justine Thornton, gave birth to a son, the couple’s first child. If their child is to have a future that is worth living then Mr Miliband must raise his own ambition and his game, ensuring that real climate change measures are brought into being by the government department for which he is responsible.
Filed under: Coal, carbon dioxide, carbon emissions, climate change, energy, global warming | Tagged: climate change statements, climate change targets, coal burning power stations, DECC, e.on, Ed Miliband, G8, justine thornton, Kingsnorth
