We must now do something about climate crisis

Britain’s record-breaking summer of heatwaves could prove to be one of the coolest of future years. The hottest and driest summer in Britain is only part of the growing effects of the climate crisis being felt around the world. The Independent’s compilation of data ought to compel a rethink on the world’s response to what is an increasingly evident problem.

There has not been for many decades any doubt that climate change, mostly caused by human activity, is happening. That argument is over. There are those who do not accept it, but they are a minority and should have no purchase on the debate.

Yet there is still a great deal of discussion and disagreement about how best to respond to the crisis, according to The Independent. In our view, there are two parts of the debate that need to be reset. The first is how best to reduce worldwide emissions of the greenhouse gases responsible for global warming. There has been a recent shift in opinion among the populations of the rich nations towards the belief that the costs of the transition to clean energy are too high.

In Britain, while public opinion still supports action to reduce climate change, and the target of achieving net zero emissions by 2050, the phrase “net zero” has been taken over by those who argue that, because the British contribution to global emissions is so small, it is not worth our trying to achieve it.

This is a dismal and defeatist view, and it should be resisted. But those who promote it should be condemned as defeatists rather than climate-crisis deniers, which most of them say they are not, because supporters of Britain taking a leading role should aim to win the argument rather than to polarise opinion. In the end, this argument should be a pragmatic one about costs.

In the long term, renewable energy is cheaper than fossil fuels, and it has other benefits including security of supply. Nevertheless, it must be accepted that there are high capital costs in the short term — especially in rebuilding the grid so that it can take electricity from new wind and solar generators that are far away from the old power stations.

Miatta Fahnbulleh, the energy secretary, showed a welcome flexibility in her first substantive interview in her new post yesterday, saying, “We need to keep momentum” towards clean power, “but we’ve also got to do it in a way that works for people. And that is about affordability.” She is absolutely right to say that “my job is to keep people with us”.

The transition to renewables will not happen unless public opinion remains onside. That means some flexibility over timescales in order to avoid higher costs. The target set by Ed Miliband, her predecessor, of decarbonising 95 per cent of electricity generation by 2030 was always ambitious – and rightly so, to send a signal — but it was always likely to be adjusted if it became too expensive to maintain popular consent.

The second way in which the climate-change debate needs to be renewed is that greater attention must be paid to adapting to higher global temperatures. In the past, advocates for climate action have been reluctant to devote their time to adaptation on the grounds that their focus ought to be on reducing emissions as much as possible. Work on making societies more resilient was seen as “giving up” on trying to minimise global warming — in effect saying, let the world heat up, we can adapt.