The growing gap between the level of ambition recommended by climate scientists and what politicians are able to deliver in terms of commitments to cut emissions is cause for serious concern. From a nature conservation perspective, there’s a high risk of climate change taking place so rapidly that many species will be lost. Just last month, for example, our partner organisation in the US, the Audubon Society, published the results of pioneering new research that found half of all bird species in the US were imperilled by climate change.
In this light, it would be easy to condemn the deal struck by Cameron and other European leaders last night as woefully inadequate. The new EU climate target to 2030 is just 40% emission reductions by 2030, when it should be at least 55%, and targets for renewable energy and energy efficiency are equally inadequate and aren’t even binding on national governments.
Yet, until today Europe had no concrete plans to cut emissions beyond 2020. The renewable energy industries, which have been innovating and growing in recent years because of EU 2020 targets had no assurance of continued support, whilst energy conservation continued to be ignored. The latter has been particularly galling, given that reducing energy use saves consumers money and reduces the amount of large energy infrastructure needed, making it the most nature-friendly way of cutting our emissions!
Today’s deal should have done just enough to alleviate the worst of this uncertainty. What’s more, the greenhouse gas emission target includes a flexibility clause that will mean it can be increased as part of the UN negotiations over a global climate deal next year.
This is an important achievement then, particularly given the other pressures on EU leaders and the continued antagonism towards climate action from some countries, political parties and parts of the media.
Now we must focus on building on this agreement by investing in diplomacy to achieve a strong global climate deal, continuing to push for greater ambition in Europe, and focusing on delivering the emission cuts here in the UK. I hope to see all of the political parties, for example, putting forward detailed and ambitious plans over the coming months that would deliver emission reductions through reducing energy use, supporting energy efficiency and supporting sustainable, low ecological impact renewable energy. Unless this happens, and is followed by swift action by the new Government next year, we will see the UK falling from a position of a global leader on climate action to being a laggard.
Roy - You're right in that it's extremely important that whatever Government is elected next year takes its climate change responsibility seriously, as they will be responsible for shaping and implementing the EU 2030 package of climate and energy measures in the UK.
And as for getting politicians to care more about nature we think nature could be much higher up the political agenda and we want to see more politicians and members of the public saying that they will stand up for nature by backing our Vote for Bob campaign: https://www.voteforbob.co.uk/
Matt Williams, Assistant Warden, RSPB Snape.
I have a horrible feeling the next UK government could be a problem rather than a solution. At least one of the parties likely to gain seats seems to be set against any action on climate change, and others are likely to drift that way in order to limit loss of support, as they would see it. The BBC seems to be drifting along with that trend in negative reporting of renewable subsidies and developments. It also seems actively to be excluding the Green party from consideration. I think we will have to be very active over the next nine months to bring the issues to the fore. We need to make conservation of nature an election issue.