A former member of the Thatcher government writes a book about global warming from a provocative position; what if the worst scenarios are correct and what can we do?
The review is in the Weekly Standard. (link requires subscription to read in full)
An excerpt.
“He is, as he emphasizes, not a scientist--and his approach also demonstrates a sense of what is appropriate for him to undertake. But he is more than credentialed to talk about implementing policy and, at the outset, he articulates exactly what is at issue--surprisingly easy to lose sight of--for policy- makers addressing climate change: "What has been the rise in global mean temperatures over the past hundred years; why we believe this has occurred; how much, on this basis, are temperatures likely to rise over the next hundred years; and what are the consequences likely to be."
“Acknowledging that "the twentieth century ended slightly warmer than it began" (by 1.3 degrees Fahrenheit), Lawson points out that there has been no significant warming since the beginning of this century. This cessation was not predicted by the computer models that experts rely on for forecasts of future warming. Predictions have been adjusted to account for the pause, and warming is now expected to resume next year. But, says Lawson, "we shall see" whether it does.
“The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)--"far and away the most authoritative and influential" of existing climate change organizations, according to Lawson--predicts in its latest report that, by 2100, the global average temperature will have risen between 3.2 degrees and 7.2 degrees Fahrenheit. The general consensus for preventing this predicted warming is to enact policies that force the reduction of man-made carbon dioxide emissions, which create a greenhouse effect in the atmosphere. But the cost of mitigation would be extraordinary because of global reliance on carbon-based energy.”
