Climate Change Committee advice: expert reaction

The Climate Change Committee has responded to the government’s request for advice on stronger climate adaptation objectives. Among the key takeaways is a recommendation that the UK should now be prepared for climate change beyond the long-term temperature goal of the Paris Agreement. Planning for 2°C by 2050 is now a prudent minimum level for the country to prepare for.

Professor Chris Hilson, Director of the Reading Centre for Climate and Justice at the University of Reading, and Professor Chris Hilson, Professor in Ocean and Earth Observation, comment. 

To arrange interviews, contact the University of Reading Press Office on 0118 378 5757 or pressoffice@reading.ac.uk

Professor Chris Hilson said: “This advice comes hot on the heels of party conference season where both the Conservatives and Reform said they would scrap the UK Climate Change Act. What both parties miss is that the Act doesn’t just contain the UK’s net zero commitments, which are about reducing emissions of global warming gases like CO2. It also covers the UK’s climate adaptation policy, which is about making the country more resilient and better able to cope with the extremes of climate change. If they scrap the Act, voters will quite reasonably want to know how, for example, they propose to make sure that farmers can continue to farm in periods of extreme wet and dry weather, how the elderly in care homes can be kept safe during heatwaves, and whether seaside towns at risk from sea level rise will get help to move. 

"The Committee on Climate Change’s report is basically asking the current Government to do a better job than the previous ones, who had come up with National Adaptation Plans (NAPS) required under the Act, but had filled them with rather general commitments. What the Committee is wanting to see is much better scenario planning around adaptation for the range of global temperature increases which may come our way if the world fails at reducing emissions. How many new reservoirs will we need if global warming in 2050 turns out to be 3 degrees rather than 2 degrees?

"They want the Government to move beyond general commitments to set a much clearer set of objectives and concrete targets, and then to measure and report on progress against these. In other words, they want the adaptation process to resemble the mitigation net-zero one outlined in the Act, which is much more finely calibrated. Some political parties don’t like that aspect of net zero in the Act, arguing that it constrains certain types of action (like airport construction) and dictates others (like banning gas boiler sales). The truth is it doesn’t – it merely requires the government to justify their choices and to spell out their effect on the likelihood of the net zero target being met by 2050. So it’s a matter of transparency for voters. Much the same is true for adaptation under the Act. We are experiencing extreme weather events now that have required us to adapt already. But temperatures will rise further if we don’t reduce emissions enough as part of a global effort. Voters need to know what plans governments have in place to ensure we can cope with whatever those temperatures turn out to be. And those cannot be vague plans. Adaptation has implications for numerous sectors of the economy, groups in society, and for our natural environment. We need clear planning and decent targets for all those who are at risk."

Professor Chris Merchant said: "There is real progress being made globally on decreasing our reliance on fossil fuels, including massive adoption of renewable energy. But the progress is not as fast as it could be, and not as fast as it needs to be to stabilise the climate. The Climate Change Committee are right to state that the UK should act to manage the risks and huge costs that global warming will bring if it rises beyond the 2 degrees Paris goal. At the same time, its political choices and vested interests that are holding back progress on the Paris goal. Missing that target will be a collective choice, not something that was inevitable.”