Vol 464|18 March 2010 BOOKS & ARTS Tales from the climate-change crossroads Four books by prominent global-warming pundits illustrate that exhortation and authority are not enough to solve the climate crisis — it is time for some humility, concludes Roger Pielke Jr. The public debate about climate change has been human behavior and thinking”. Again, he does 2004 through his public endorsement of Senator transformed in recent months. Last autumn, not say how a new global consciousness is to John Kerry over George W. Bush in a speech many were optimistic about the December be delivered. Instead, he revisits the themes made in the swing state of Iowa. Schneider climate conference in Copenhagen. Climate of his previous book An Inconvenient Truth relates how, at an IPCC meeting, he may have science was seen as the ultimate authority in a (Bloomsbury, 2006), complete with attacks on aided the viability of the Kyoto Protocol after discussion framed as nailing down details on a the policies of former US president George W. explaining climate science to an African national global agreement to support emissions reduc- Bush and nefarious climate deniers. delegate who later changed his position. tion. Today, few observers view the Copenhagen Hansen and Schneider each provide a trou- conference as a step forward. Climate scientists bling inside view of the political battle over cli- Policy pressure are also under fire for uncaught errors and slop- mate change in their respective books, Storms Schneider’s recounting of the IPCC process piness in the latest report of the Intergovern- reveals how few people are able to influence mental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the its reports. He recalls holding “private negotia- for questionable behaviour revealed in e-mail Climate Crisis tions” over a bottle of wine with a co-chair to disclosures. by Al Gore settle how to present sea-level rise in his work- In the weeks before Copenhagen, climate Rodale Books: 2009. 416 pp. $26.99 ing group’s report. His comment that IPCC pundits rushed to publish their visions of how Storms of My Grandchildren: The Truth chairman Rajendra Pachauri was keen to the negotiations would and should play out. About the Coming Climate Catastrophe stress “the importance of the Working Group II How did their arguments fare? Al Gore’s rose- and Our Last Chance to Save Humanity report in identifying linkages between climate tinted vision failed to square with Copenhagen’s by James Hansen change and sustainable development around outcome, leaving us with little guidance going Bloomsbury USA: 2009. 320 pp. the world” raises questions as to whether simi- forward. Two first-hand accounts by distin- $25, £18.99 lar pressures might have affected quality control guished climate scientists who advocate action, in that report — particularly on such topics as James Hansen and Stephen Schneider, left me Science as a Contact Sport: Inside the Battle the Himalayan glaciers or the economic costs feeling that their convictions have pushed to Save Earth’s Climate of natural disasters and African agriculture, for them towards simplistic, almost authoritarian by Stephen H. Schneider which the IPCC has recently been criticized. visions of political decision-making. However, National Geographic Society: 2009. Schneider and Hansen relate how they have the technical deliberations of less well-known 304 pp. $28 had considerable access to government deci- names, in a volume edited by Dieter Helm and sion-makers around the world, with whom The Economics and Politics of Cameron Hepburn, remain compelling. they have shared their policy recommenda- Climate Change In Our Choice, Gore speculates on how a tions. Given such opportunities, it is difficult Edited by Dieter Helm and future generation might look back at our deci- to understand Hansen’s frustration that the Cameron Hepburn sions. Writing before Copenhagen, he hedges governments of the United Kingdom, Ger- Oxford University Press: 2009. 400 pp. $55 his bets on the agreement that he believed would many and Japan failed to alter their climate be delivered, calling it historic but insufficient. policies in response to letters that he wrote to He hoped that the meeting would be viewed as of My Grandchildren and Science as a Contact their leaders and meetings he attended with the start of a global shift in attitudes, bolstered by Sport. Hansen invokes religious terms, charac- cabinet ministers. US legislation that was passed on the eve of the terizing himself and Schneider as witness and Hansen’s complaint that leaders of sovereign conference. Clearly, Gore’s assessment was far preacher, respectively. Both are evangelists who countries have not acceded to his demands from the diplomatic meltdown that occurred. hold science as an ascendant authority. implies a criticism of democracy, also present Observers are still trying to make sense of what The tension between the role of scientists as in Schneider’s book. If science leads inexorably happened and what should come next. political advocates and as expert advisers is an to particular political outcomes, then it would Missing from Gore’s account, despite its sub- undercurrent in both books. Schneider explains seem to favour autocratic forms of governance. title, is any “plan to solve the climate crisis”. He that “as scientists, we never recommend which The middle man — the general public — is eas- provides a colourful overview of low-carbon policies should be chosen”; Hansen similarly ily ignored if heads of state need only hear the technologies — wind, solar, nuclear — and sees himself as an “objective scientist”. Yet both expert voice of science. Schneider worries that discusses aspects of the Earth system, such as books largely comprise strong ideological and democracy finds it hard to deal with complex forests and population, that are related to the political commentary based on an unstated issues: if only the public understood the real climate problem. He does not quantify how assumption that science compels action on cli- risks, he explains, they would be “much more those technologies and practices might come mate change. Neither author accepts the label likely to send strong signals to their representa- together to decarbonize the global economy, of advocate, claiming to be speaking for science; tives”. He bemoans a public debate that includes through what policy mechanisms and on nor do they see the paradox in their position. the participation of “special interests” and that what timescale. It is jarring to learn that Gore Both scientists express a desire to influence is filtered through an inept media, a perspective thinks that the solution to the climate crisis will political outcomes. Hansen describes how he echoed by Hansen. come about only through “massive changes in hoped to sway the US presidential election in In The Economics and Politics of Climate 352 © 2010 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved NATURE|Vol 464|18 March 2010 OPINION policy-makers and the public as an important global problem. At the same time, that approach has shown its limitations. Climate science has become deeply politicized and climate poli- tics is in gridlock. Climate change is at risk of becoming an issue of cultural politics, similar to the evolution debate in the United States and elsewhere. If the climate-policy debate is to continue as it has, we should expect more of the same. An alternative way forward would start by admitting the limitations of science in compel- ling political agreements, and by admitting that we do not know how to complete the challenge of decarbonizing the global economy. There may be greater prospects for political consen- sus if scientists acknowledge their humility rather than asserting their authority. Incre- mental approaches to climate mitigation that can be modified by experience offer a chance that realistic and democratically grounded actions might rise to a challenge that will be A solar-power plant in Wuhan is part of China’s plans to produce 10 billion watts of solar energy by 2020. with us for decades to come. Each of these contrasting books offers a Change, Helm, an economist at the University with which to embark on the challenge of valuable perspective on how we got to where of Oxford, UK, agrees that the policy outlook responding to climate change, we are nowhere we are, but each gives only limited insight as to for stabilizing atmospheric concentrations of close to a complete solution. where climate policy may be going. The future, carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases Together, these four books highlight that as Gore says, remains our choice. ■ is “very grim” owing to the myriad complexi- climate policy is at a crossroads. The journey Roger Pielke Jr is professor of environmental ties and contradictions of policies for reducing so far has emphasized science and exhortation: studies at the University of Colorado, Boulder, emissions globally. He argues that far more than that facts, spoken loudly enough, are enough Colorado 80309, USA. His forthcoming book is CHINA DAILY/REUTERS/CORBIS political will is required to make progress on to win the argument. That path has succeeded The Climate Fix. this issue, the magnitude of which has been in bringing climate change to the attention of e-mail: [email protected] underestimated. A “fundamental rethink” is needed, he says, with a greater focus on interna- tional and long-term technological solutions. Other authors who contribute to this impressive volume highlight the challenges A misguided attack on evolution of securing a global agreement. Economic growth, suggest Australian economist Ross What Darwin Got Wrong evolutionary biology has become complacent Garnaut and his colleagues, has entered not by Jerry A. Fodor and Massimo Piattelli- with the nearly 70-year-old Modern Synthesis, just a golden but a “platinum age” that, beyond Palmarini which reconciled the original theory of natu- the current recession, is likely to continue for Farrar, Strauss & Giroux/Profile: 2010.