Cambridge Zero Carbon Society
1, Parker Street,
27th October 2007
Dear Prime Minister,
We are a group of concerned scientists, economists and students from the University of Cambridge and are writing to you regarding Britain’s CO2 reduction targets as set out under the draft climate bill. We believe the climate bill is a crucial element of strategy aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions to a safe level and supports our international efforts to tackle climate change. We see the best approach as being a positive one and that Britain should lead by example, reducing its emissions to a sustainable level in a timescale that avoids dangerous climate change. Economic evidence suggests that conversion to a net zero carbon economy, when promoted by efficient economic instruments can be achieved at low cost or even with net benefit to the UK.
We feel it is important that the targets are chosen based on clear thinking and the most reliable up-to-date scientific evidence. We also understand the importance of a comprehensive or holistic approach taking into account pressures from the different parts of government and society.
Today we have been educating the public in London regarding these issues. It is important to simplify as much as possible this complex issue and demonstrate the choices we now face. We would like to draw your attention to the enclosed information sheet summarizing the fact that to prevent a 2°C increase in average global temperatures a 90% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 is needed in the UK.
For further information on some suggested policies or to hear more from us please feel free to visit our website and contact us, http://www.zerocarbonnow.org. We warmly welcome a response to this letter.
Economist, Cambridge Centre for Climate Change Mitigation Research
Physicist, Fellow of Emmanuel College, Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge
Some Reviews of Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist’s Guide to Global Warming by Bjorn Lomborg (Knopf/Cyan-Marshall Cavendish: 2007. 272 pp./256 pp. $21/£19.99)
Partha Dasgupta’s Review on Bjorn Lomoborg: Available in Nature, Vol 449|13 September 2007
Kevin Watkins’s review
Eban Goodstein’s review
“The place is somewhere in Turkey, 5,200 years ago. Noah has just gotten word about an upcoming episode of abrupt climate change, and he and his family are hard at work building an ark. The plan is to take on board mating pairs of every living thing of all flesh, every creeping thing of the ground, in order, as God put it, to keep them alive.
Up walks a man who introduces himself as an adjunct professor at the Copenhagen Business School. He says, “Noah, you have to stop. We’ve run the numbers and they don’t add up. I agree that there may be a few days of rain, but if you really want to help future generations, don’t build the ark. Grow the economy!”
A group of Cambridge university students descended on the capital last Saturday (October 27th) to encourage people to lobby for stronger legislation to save the planet. The Cambridge Zero Carbon Society (www.zerocarbonnow.org) wants Parliament to toughen up its planned legislation on greenhouse gases.
The Parliament Square protest was organised to increase the targets set out in the forthcoming Climate Change Bill, due to be discussed by MPs in the next parliamentary session. The legislation will make Britain the first country in the world to pass laws to restrict greenhouse gas emissions.
“This Bill gives us the opportunity to lead the way in setting meaningful targets,” says organiser Stephen Stretton. “If we get this right we can set an example for other countries to follow and create a real possibility of creating a sustainable future”.
Current calculations suggest that a sustainable level of carbon dioxide emissions would be about one tonne CO2 per person per year, averaged across the total world population. The current global average is about 4 tonnes per person and growing, while in Britain each person is already responsible for ten.
This means Britain needs to reduce emissions by 90% to reach the sustainable target. In addition, it is important that these reductions are achieved in the next twenty years. This way we could limit any global temperature increase to no more than two degrees celsius above the pre-industrial, which is the point at which dangerous feedback mechanisms could cause more serious damage to the climate.
The students, who were dressed in their academic gowns, want the Climate Change Bill strengthened to increase the proposed target of 60% reduction by 2050 to 90% by 2030.
Note for Editors:
The protest happened from 11am-1pm in Parliament Square, Westminster. The protest was organised by the Cambridge Zero Carbon Society and supported by the Cambridge Climate Change Coalition.
Find our response to the UK Climate bill here: www.zerocarbonnow.org/?p=394
Full document (pdf) here: http://www.zerocarbonnow.org/wordpress/uploads/full-response-climate-bill.pdf
For further information please contact:
Marc Kaufmann: 0789 184 9630
An upstream solution to global warming
By Ray Galvin
The only way we can save the planet from catastrophic climate change is to drastically reduce the amount of oil, coal and natural gas we are taking out of the ground. Any strategy for mitigating global warming that does not have this as its lynch-pin is bound to fail. Yet strangely, this is the one approach that no-one is talking about.
Full Article: An_Upstream_Solution by Ray Galvin
众所周知，通过燃烧 化石燃料(比如煤)，石 油和天然气所释放到 大气层中去的二氧化 碳会导致全球范围内 的升温。
这个效应被 称为“温室效应”。 科学家们预测气候只 要比工业革命之前升 高两度（就可称为气 候的危险变化）将导 致大面积的沙漠化和 生态系统（比如亚马 逊热带雨林）的崩溃
。从而更多存储在树 木中的碳将以二氧化 碳的形式释放到大气 层中去。按我们目前 的发展趋势，在未来 几年内这种变化就会 发生。
Translation by Jiawen Chen & Helen Li
“The Great Global Warming Swindle”: Response by Geoff Wexler
rtf – html
This programme shows that artificially created CO2 is not the cause of global warming. This is a remarkable achievement considering that so much research on the attribution problem points to CO2 as being the main cause of the last thirty years global warming. It had looked as if the alternative explanation based on sunspots was not doing at all well during the last few years because the sunspots had leveled off whereas the temperature had just kept rising. So what was wrong? The idea behind the new approach is quite revolutionary, it involves overthrowing the calendar, the evidence and the physics.
No, it is not 2007 now as you have been told. The date is now 1975 or 1988 depending on which source you use. Applying these corrections has the effect of removing most of the contentious warming from the data. What’s left correlates quite well with the length of the sunspot cycle especially if you start with an obscure set of temperature data , pull it about a bit and attribute it to NASA for the sake of familiarity. Going back in time there was a shortage of sunspot data, so it is convenient for educational reasons to make it up. After all, it makes it easier to see the relationship between the two curves if they coincide completely.
Continue reading “The Great Global Warming Swindle”: Response by Geoff Wexler
The UK Government is committed to addressing both the causes and consequences of climate change and has published its proposals for a Climate Change Bill. We are consulting widely – with a closing date for comments of 12 June 2007.
Our objective is to ensure that all interested parties have the opportunity to contribute their opinions at an early stage of policy development. We are asking important questions about the shape of our policy proposals and what issues we should take into account, when developing the Climate Change Bill.
Comment on the draft Bill
Several other documents have been published alongside the draft Bill as follows:
The debate on climate change has shifted from whether we need to act to how much we need to do by when, and the economic implications of doing so. The time is therefore right for the introduction of a strong legal framework in the UK for tackling climate change. The draft Climate Change Bill is the first of its kind in any country.
The proposed Bill provides a clear, credible, long-term framework for the UK to achieve its goals of reducing carbon dioxide emissions and will ensure that steps are taken towards adapting to the impacts of climate change.
Key provisions of the Bill
- This Bill puts into statute the UK’s targets to reduce carbon dioxide emissions through domestic and international action by 60% by 2050 and 26-32% by 2020, against a 1990 baseline.
- Five-year carbon budgets, which will require the Government to set, in secondary legislation, binding limits on carbon dioxide emissions during five year budget periods, beginning with the period 2008-12. Three successive carbon budgets (representing 15 years) will always be in legislation.
- Emission reductions purchased overseas may be counted towards the UK’s targets, consistent with the UK’s international obligations. This ensures emission reductions can be achieved in the most cost effective way, recognising the potential for investing in low carbon technologies abroad as well as action within the UK to reduce the UK’s overall carbon footprint.
Committee on Climate Change
- A Committee on Climate Change will be set up as an independent statutory body to advise the Government on the pathway to the 2050 target and to advise specifically on: the level of carbon budgets; reduction effort needed by sectors of the economy covered by trading schemes, and other sectors; and on the optimum balance between domestic action and international trading in carbon allowances.
- It will take into account a range of factors including environmental, technological, economic, fiscal, social and international factors, as well as energy policy, when giving its advice.
- The Bill contains enabling powers to introduce new trading schemes through secondary legislation. This increases the policy options which Government could use to stay within budgets and meet emissions targets.
- The Committee on Climate Change will have a specific role in reporting annually to Parliament on the UK’s progress towards achieving its targets and budgets. The Government will be required to lay before Parliament a response to this annual progress report.
- Every five years, the Committee’s report will contain an explicit review of the UK’s performance over the last budget period, and the implications of this for keeping on track to meet future targets and budgets.
Reporting Progress on Adaptation
- The Bill will also allow Parliament to monitor the Government’s proposals and policies for integrating adaptation to climate change into its work by establishing regular reporting to Parliament.
It is right that It is right that the public, Parliament and a wide range of interested organisations have an opportunity to discuss and debate these proposals – as climate change is an issue which affects us all and this Bill is intended to create a framework that lasts for more than a generation. The Government therefore looks forward to receiving a wide range of views on its proposals.
The consultation document discusses the context and rationale behind the draft Climate Change Bill and sets out the main reasons why the UK Government considers legislation in this area is required. It outlines the background to and the proposed contents of the draft Bill, summarising its key elements and how they are expected to fit together.
Regulatory Impact Assessment
As part of this consultation a partial Regulatory Impact Assessment has been produced and provides initial assessments on the impact of the proposals in the draft Bill.
The strategy document, published alongside the Bill, sets out the broader context for the Bill. It highlights some key announcements coming up in the next few weeks and months. And it gives the broader international context, where the UK will continue to press for action through the EU, the G8 and the UN.
The government wants to get our emissions down to from 10 to 4 tonnes
of CO2 per person per year. But 4 tonnes CO2 per person per year is
the CURRENT global average of CO2 from fossil fuel alone…
Where the UK hopes to be in 2050, even if adopted by everyone, would
not reduce global emissions (and certainly not get them to a safe
To keep global warming below 2 degrees, We need 1 tonne per person per
year (by 2030 if possible, but certainly before 2050). (See “how much
CO2 can we emit” attachment)
Anything above 2 degrees and we hit tipping points and we have a mass
extinction event (of plants, animals and the poor). (See “Six degrees
*We need a national campaign for 1 tonne per person per year, a 90% reduction on 1990 levels.
This can be achieved while maintaining a healthy and vibrant low-carbon economy.
China pollution fuelled by heavy industry
By Richard McGregor in Beijing
China’s rapidly worsening pollution is being driven by a surge in
investment in energy-intensive heavy industry caused by cut-throat
competition among cities and provinces, according to a study released
The study, by the Peterson Institute for International Economics in
Washington, says the huge investment in steel, aluminium, cement and
other plant has begun to reverse almost three decades of gains in
“It is not air-conditioners and automobiles that are driving China’s
energy demand but rather heavy industry,” say Daniel Rosen and Trevor
Houser of China Strategic Advisory, the authors. “Consumption-led
demand is China’s future energy challenge.”
China’s huge growth has made its economy a global issue because of
rising exports of steel, in particular, and the impact on
inter=ADnational markets for related commodities.
Greenhouse gases are also under scrutiny; the Inter=ADnational Energy
Agency predicts China could surpass the US as early as this year as
the largest emitter of CO2, a figure Beijing disputes.
Chinese leaders have set tough new targets to reduce the use of energy
per unit of economic output by 20 per cent and pollution by 10 per
cent, between 2006 and 2010. But the rise of heavy industry, which the
study says caught even Beijing by surprise, means China failed to meet
the benchmarks in 2006 and will find it hard to do so by the end of
China now accounts for almost half of the world’s flat glass and
cement production, more than a third of steel output and 28 per cent
of aluminium. Heavy industry consumes 54 per cent of China’s energy,
up from 39 per cent five years ago.
A structural bias towards heavy industry, which dominated in the
centrally planned Maoist-era economy, means energy intensity has
worsened even though Chinese steel plants have become more efficient.
“A new steel plant, no matter how much more efficient than its peers,
uses substantially more energy than a garment factory,” the study
The study blames the growth of heavy industry on cut-throat internal
competition. “The rules of competition are set not just by Beijing but
also by local interests, including state-owned heavy industrial
enterprises,” it says. “And regardless of who sets the rules, the
reality of how they are implemented is almost entirely a local
The National Reform and Development Commission, the economic planning
agency also responsible for energy, has tried for years to curb
Although nominally all-powerful and with the right to stop projects
over a certain size on a range of grounds, the commission has been
largely helpless to stop the flood of new investment.
The commission’s power is not reflected in the size or skill of its
staff or in the research base and industry expertise from which it
operates. Its energy bureau has 100 staff and the State Energy Office
under the cabinet 30-40, in contrast to 110,000 at the US Department
Individual state companies are better equipped than the ministries.
The State Grid, which is responsible for power transmission, has more
research staff than the commission’s energy bureau.
Weak regulation also makes it difficult to cut pollution and
greenhouse gas emissions. Fewer than 15 per cent of coal-fired plants,
which generate 80 per cent of China’s electricity, have systems to
remove sulphur dioxide from emissions, and even fewer use them, the
report says. Most new plants have sulphur scrubbers.
The authors say that China will not make unilateral adjustments in the
absence of changes to US policy. “China is an 800lb gorilla on the
world energy stage that cannot be ignored, but there is a 1,600lb
gorilla in this room too: the US,” they said.