Product Description

In recent years, sensational warnings about climate change have dominated the headlines. In this hard-hitting response to the scaremongering of climate alarmists, Nigel Lawson, former Chancellor of the Exchequer and Secretary of State for Energy, argues that it it is time for us to take a cool look at global warming. Lawson carefully and succinctly examines all aspects of the global warming issue - the science, the economics, the politics and the ethics - concluding that conventional wisdom on the subject is deeply flawed. He asserts that, even if the majority view of the science is correct, the proposed solution to the problem would be more damaging than the threat it has been designed to avert - and, in any case is, for very good reasons, not politically attainable. Insightful, brilliantly reasoned and thoroughly researched, this is a much-needed corrective to the barrage of hype and spin surrounding a subject that affects every one of us.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #1419 in Books
• Published on: 2009-03-26
• Original language: English
• Binding: Paperback
• 160 pages

Review
'Splendid ... elegantly written, thorough, entertaining and, above all, convincing' -- Financial Times. 'Clear, analytical and compelling' -- Economist. 'This is a fascinating tome, the best exposition of the sceptical view on global warming that I have yet come across. It is comprehesive, packed with useful and clearly referenced facts and refreshingly free of the fanatical tone that plagues so many works on the subject' -- Literary Review. 'It is intensely refreshing to find in Nigel Lawson someone who, without claiming to have all the answers, is at least brave enough to ask emininently sensible questions' --Spectator.

'Only one senior political figure in Britain has dared stand apart from [the] stifling orthodoxy: Nigel Lawson' -- Telegraph. 'A valuable antidote to the sloppiness surrounding climate change. This short book forces a rethink not only of some of the more alarmist predictions of global warming theory, but also of the fundamental underpinnings of the theory itself' -- Mail on Sunday. 'I'm dismayed to discover that I agree with considerable amounts of what Lawson is saying' --Sunday Times.

'This cogently-argued book has provoked the usual quasi-religious bile reserved for those who dare question the conventional wisdom on climate change' -- Evening Standard. 'Almost 20 years after Margaret Thatcher's chancellor walked out of government, Lawson is back, defying scientists and politicians in a punchy book ... Some of the attacks on Lawson are unfair. He has every right to assert his opinions. He is right that scientific predictions of future climate change from computer models are inherently unreliable and right to warn that Stern's market-led solution to climate change may not work' -- Julian Glover, Chief Correspondent, Guardian. 'I'm with Lawson in not wanting to succumb to the doomsday scenario and he is right in thinking a carbon tax is a more reliable policy measure in the short run than hoping for international agreements to cut emissions' -- Scotsman. 'A good book on global warming ... He's right, we should never allow it to be considered a crime to ask questions about this complex subject. Some of today's assumptions are bound to be exposed as absurd ... His intellectual Punch and Judy show will appeal to anybody who secretly wants to see the unreadable eco-texts of the IPCC filleted, challenged and cut down to size by an educated man' -- Earth Logo. 'Nigel Lawson makes an entirely reasonable and thought-through plea here to temper our emotional desire to save the planet with sound economic and political sense ... It is a brave man who goes against the flow of current opinion' --Resident. 'At last a well argued rebuttal has been published countering the flawed and excessive claims trumpeted by green climatologists and their computer models, along with the masses who have been converted to the faith through the actions of lobbyists and all too gullible politicians, who think they are on to a vote winner ... Succinct ... well researched ... Let us hope that this excellent little book does find a wide market, because that is what it certainly deserves' --www.land-care.org.uk.

About the Author
Nigel Lawson, Baron Lawson of Blaby, served in the Thatcher administration between 1979 and 1990 in the constituency of Blaby, Leicestershire. He was Chancellor of the Exchequer between June 1983 and October 1989. He has written about global warming in 'The Times' and 'Prospect', and presented a lecture on the subject to the Centre for Policy Studies think-tank in 2006. He lives in France.

Customer Reviews

Great common sense critic of Global Warming, and a smart discussion on the most cost-effective way to address the consequences
This is a short and well-written book, provocative and full of smart and no nonsense arguments. Lawson provides end notes for each chapter and all bibliographical sources are properly referenced. The book's aim is to examine each of the dimensions of the consensus view of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW), including the science, the economics, the politics, and the ethical aspects. He is concerned with the uncertainties of long-term forecasting and the lack of a real cost-effectiveness analysis in the policies recommended and advocated by the majority view on climate change, particularly by the radical change in lifestyle that will have to take place in the developed countries, and the unnecessary burden that will be put on the poor in the developing world. Lawson questions the fundamentals of AGW orthodoxy just armed with common sense, his political experience, and some very clever back-of-the-envelope calculations.

Lawson opens the book arguing that although he agrees that there is a real warming trend, he is skeptical of the validity of predictions made with global climate simulation models, and more importantly, he questions if indeed the sole cause of this warming is man-made greenhouses and how big the contribution of CO2 is. Lawson also raises several issues regarding the IPCC process, its findings and policy recommendations, and throughout the book he strongly criticizes the The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review, which he considers "at the extreme end of the alarmist camp".

He might not be right in all the issues, but certainly he will at least let you wonder about some of them. Besides the reasonable critic of the economics, I found particularly robust his argument regarding the lack of falsifiability of climate simulation models and their predictions, which means that these complex models do not meet one of the most basic criteria required for any theory to be considered within the domain of science (for more on falsifiability read Karl Popper's The Logic of Scientific Discovery (Routledge Classics)). He sarcastically notes the fact that all models have failed so far to predict that there has been no further warming between 2001 and 2007. And by the way, this trend continued during 2008, ending with one the coolest boreal winters in recent decades (just Google to verify by yourself). Personally I do not think this recent short trend means that AGW is not real but more likely just part of the normal blips within long term climate patterns, in this case regarding the effects of the normal sunspot cycles and La Niña, as Lawson later in the book explains. However, it is a good example of the risks of advocating a cause with incomplete science, oversimplifications and by obstructing any real scientific debate.

After making his case in Chapter 1 about why he thinks "the science of global warming is far from settle", Lawson proceeds as any respectable economist would do, and assumes a prudent position "to err on the side of caution". Therefore, for the rest of the book he works under the assumption that the AGW theory is correct as reported by the IPPC's 2007 Report (see Climate Change 2007 - The Physical Science Basis: Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC (Climate Change 2007) - a PDF version is available for free through the web) .

First he goes on to discus the practical consequences of the predicted warming over the next hundred years, based on the IPCC scenarios and policy recommendations. Next he analyzes the importance of adaptation, what Lawson claims is the IPPC's most serious flaw regarding the impact of global warming, as there is a "systematic underestimation of the benefits of adaptation" and "the most cost-effective way of addressing the likely consequences" as opposed to reducing CO2 emissions. He also is critical of the Stern Review and the Kyoto Protocol and the practical difficulties of reaching a global agreement. Then he discusses the different technologies and market alternatives being implemented and available to reduce emissions, closing with his own proposal to impose a carbon tax across the board, but implemented simultaneously with a reduction of other taxes to compensate for the extra revenues and avoiding any additional burden on the taxpayer. The book closes with a discussion about the discount rates used by the IPCC and the Stern Review in their economic analysis, with a more detailed discussion on the latter. The book ends with a warning about the dangers of the environmental movement, calling it "the new religion of eco-fundamentalism" and claiming that "we appear to have entered a new age of unreason."

I highly recommended this book for those with a genuine interest in the AGW controversy, and particularly in the aspects regarding the economics of mitigation and/or adaptation that will be necessary and that is being debated right now.

Just what it says on the tin
This is a wonderful book. As the title suggests, it is cool, reasonable, and patient, looking carefully at all the evidence and coming to conclusions which it is hard to disagree with.

Like other reviewers, I find it hard to take excerpts from the book because I would have to quote the whole thing! However, perhaps I may try to help anyone who is wondering whether to read it. One way to look at the global warming/climate change debate is to ask oneself three questions.

First, is the world getting warmer?
Second, is human activity, and specifically CO2, a major cause?
And third, does it matter? Will there be harmful consequences? And if so, what should we do about them?

Much of the angry debate between believers and sceptics rages round the first two points. Lawson surveys the evidence on both, and comes to a conclusion. But what makes this book so powerful is its focus on the third question: whether a warmer world is one that will harm people, animals, plants, and our descendants. The Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) argues that it will. Lawson disagrees. He takes us through the IPCC scenarios, and their range of predictions relating to five potential impacts of a warmer world: on water, ecosystems, food, coasts, and health. In each case he demonstrates, with evidence, that a warmer world will either be neutral or even beneficial. What makes this evidence particularly persuasive is that much of it is drawn from the IPCC's own 4th report (2007)!.

It would be wrong to think of this book as complacent, a kind of 'I'm all right, Jack, pull up the ladder'. As Lawson points out, the single major cause of ill-health and death in the world is poverty, and if we take the standpoint of human welfare, the surest way to benefit humans is to lift them out of poverty. Lawson sees many serious problems facing the world, and many things that urgently need putting right. The view of this compelling and convincing book is that global warming isn't one of them.

A reasonable summary of the evidence
As a professional scientist I get tired and annoyed when so many non-scientists tell me about the so-call scientific consensus and the over-whelming evidence to support man-made global warming. At last someone who has written a clear and thoughtful layman's guide to the scientific support (or lack of) for the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis. Although the book lacks real scientific rigor which I would prefer, I can recommend it to thinking non-scientists who wish to know more about the real facts as opposed to the many unsupported claims made by the alarmist sector of the society.