Guest post by Emma Quilligan

“Unless we act like we can sort this out, you might as well just get a hat and some sunscreen and write a letter of apology to your grandchildren.”

Professor Lord Stern (he of the eponymous report into the economic impact of climate change) certainly had no intention of mincing his words at LSE last night. In fact, this lecture to promote his new book, A Blueprint for a safer planet: How to Manage Climate Change and Create a New Era of Progress and Prosperity, was a whirlwind tour of why our carbon emissions are destroying the Earth, and what we should all be doing to stop it.

As he laid out the six essential elements of a global deal, he made it all seem so easy. Yet the more I learn about the issue of climate change, the more confused I get and the more I feel we are facing an almost insurmountable challenge.

One of these six components was the development of new technologies, and not just carbon-neutral tools such as wind and solar power, but carbon-negative technologies such as biomass with carbon capture and storage (CCS). Apparently one of Lord Stern’s friends is even trying to develop an idea of capturing CO2 and turning it into cement for our roads…

We are encouraged to embrace these technologies, to urge our governments to take more action against climate change. Yet ‘nuclear’ still seems to be almost a ‘dirty’ word among the younger generation (myself included), and just the other evening I sat listening to my parents’ friends ridicule the idea that wind farms could provide even a small percentage of our energy needs, while their gas fire flickered happily away in the corner of the room. Even if governments do successfully negotiate a global strategy in Copenhagen, as is the wish of the environmentalists and economists, will the public accept it too?

If we don’t take action, the figures indicate that there is almost a 50% chance of global temperatures rising by over 5°C by the end of the century. The last time the Earth was that warm was 30million years ago, and unlike the last ice age, there weren’t any humans around then. Even if we could cope with these higher temperatures, the mass migrations alone would be unlike anything seen before. It’s not like we’ve got time to think about it either; delaying action by just 10 years would probably make it impossible to stabilise carbon levels at less than 500ppm (current levels are 435ppm).

With figures like these, you have to admire Lord Stern’s optimism. He even went as far as to say that low-carbon growth over the next few decades could solve the world’s two major problems; not only climate change but world poverty too. I only wish I could be as confident as him that individuals, corporations and governments will come to see it that way too.