This year has been the hottest in our recorded history and, most likely, over the last 100,000 years. “Heat domes” across the northern hemisphere saw temperatures soar. There were heatwaves during winter in the Andes. Extreme weather saw unprecedented flooding in Asia. The wildfires that swept Canada this summer were the largest in modern history – and produced more carbon emissions than all of the country’s other human-related activities combined. After a Mexico-sized chunk of Antarctica failed to refreeze, the UN secretary general, António Guterres, proclaimed that “the era of global boiling has arrived”.
There can be little comfort taken from the fact that the average global surface temperature in 2023 was 1.48C hotter than that of the preindustrial period, a fraction below the UN’s 1.5C target. Scientists suggest that above this – but below the 2C threshold – the world is more likely to pass key irreversible tipping points: the die-off of low-latitude coral reefs; widespread abrupt permafrost thaw leading to greenhouse gas release; and the collapse of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets. One entrepreneur with an eye for the apocalyptic is already shipping glacier ice to cocktail bars in the UAE. But exploiting the current situation is the problem.
The developed world produces and consumes via billions of fossil fuel machines. Its engines and furnaces emit the carbon that cooks the planet. The inequalities are stark: the richest 10% of emitters are responsible for close to 50% of all greenhouse gases, while the bottom 50% produce 12% of the total. Yet we have the technological capacity to do things very differently. But that means financing, manufacturing and marketing new machines to replace old dirty ones. This is not happening fast enough. Electric cars provide a vivid example of how good intentions lag behind reality. Shipments of internal combustion passenger vehicles peaked in 2017 but emissions from road transport won’t peak until 2029.
The scale of the climate emergency is such that individual choices will make little difference unless certain collective decisions are taken and acted upon. Britain’s Rishi Sunak, however, believes that green measures can be left to the individual conscience. That is why he claimed last September that delaying the end of petrol and diesel car sales would let people choose when to make changes rather than facing unnecessary costs. Licensing new oil and gas fields shows, as former Tory cabinet minister Alok Sharma said, that the government is “not serious” about meeting its international climate commitments.
Mr Sunak’s turn away from science for supposed political gain began last summer when a high-profile campaign against the expansion of London’s ultra-low emission zone was seen to help the Tories hold a parliamentary seat. It is a concern that the government doesn’t think the environment deserves a practical response and depressing to find that Conservative ministers view climate science through a conspiratorial lens to such a degree that they prioritised driving over walking and cycling. Sensible Tories such as Chris Skidmore are jumping ship. Wealthy societies tend towards complacency. That needs to be combated. Anticipating a dangerous future should not mean we fail to act now.
