25 July 2020 | New Scientist | 45no evidence that climate change is causing
migration from eastern Africa, but it is a
question we must address. We can’t just
ignore parts of the world and think it doesn’t
affect the rest of us.
With respect to responsibility, I believe
Europe should not complain about
migration completely independent of
climate change. But from a causality point
of view, attribution studies do allow for a
better understanding of the consequences
of our political decisions, and that does beg
questions of responsibility too.
You grew up outside the city of Kiel in
northern Germany, and your mother was a
teacher and your father a biologist. How did
your upbringing shape you?
My parents were hippies. They were the
‘68 generation, protesting on the streets
for social reforms and sexual freedom.
It was very much not a conservative
household. They lived in the middle of
nowhere because they found that very
romantic. Mainly, it meant a relatively lonely
childhood. And I just read. I still live half my
life in novels. Above all, though, what my
parents gave me was a tendency to question
norms and rules.
Germany is often held up as a world leader on
climate change because of renewables, but
may take until 2038 to phase out coal, while
the UK currently plans to do so by 2024. How
well do you think Germany is doing in tackling
carbon emissions compared with the UK?
It is very good at talking but very bad at
doing. I think Germany is an example of how
not to do it because it implies it is this green
leader, but German politics is still to a large
degree dictated by the car industry. There are
a lot of things very wrong with UK politics,
but on climate change, the way it has
approached this has been better.
Still, it’s not great. Its words still need
to be followed up with legislation. But it
is encouraging that the UK government
did announce a net-zero emissions target
very early, it has science-based adaptation
plans and it has the Committee on Climate
Change, which is bringing science directly
into government.What do you think the covid-19 crisis means
for the fight against climate change?
What I’m worried about is people thinking
we have to do the same things we’re doing to
tackle coronavirus to tackle climate change.
It could reinforce this fear that climate actionwould completely disrupt the economy.
What we need to do for climate change is
very, very different. The changes have to
be long term, so you don’t shut down the
economy, you just change things – and there
are a lot of winners and a lot of things that
are better in that scenario. In that sense, it’s
an opportunity. In our plans for economic
recovery after coronavirus, we have to
think about climate change.How optimistic are you that we are going to
get a handle on reducing emissions globally?
I’m very optimistic we will have a world we
can still live in. One of the main reasons for
hope is what has happened in the past two
years in terms of how the conversation has
changed on climate change. For most people
in my generation, and definitely the people
in the younger generations, climate change
is something that is important and there’s
no question that it’s something that needs
to be tackled. ❚Adam Vaughan is chief reporter
at New Scientist. Follow him
@adamvaughan_ukA resident of Houston,
Texas, is rescued after
hurricane Harvey hit
the city in 2016