The scientist credited as being the first to convince Tony Blair of the urgency of the climate crisis has accused green activists of being Luddites who risk setting back the fight against global warming.
In an interview with the Guardian today Sir David King, who stepped down last month after seven years as the government's chief scientific adviser, says any approach that does not focus on technological solutions to climate change - including nuclear power - is one of "utter hopelessness".
He says: "There is a suspicion, and I have that suspicion myself, that a large number of people who label themselves 'green' are actually keen to take us back to the 18th or even the 17th century."
He characterises their argument as "let's get away from all the technological gizmos and developments of the 20th century".
"People say 'well, we'll just use less energy.' Come on," he says. "And then there's the real world, where everyone is aspiring to the sort of standard of living that we have, which is based on a large energy consumption."
King calls global warming the biggest challenge our civilisation has ever faced, and famously, in a 2004 article in the journal Science, berated the US for its inaction, describing climate change as "more serious even than the threat of terrorism". But his vocal support for nuclear power and genetically modified foods has led to tensions with environmental campaigners.
In a new book, The Hot Topic, he invites further hostility, arguing that aviation has been unfairly scapegoated, and that a localist approach to grocery shopping, aimed at reducing food miles, may sometimes result in bigger carbon dioxide emissions than purchasing food transported from overseas. Making people feel guilty about their energy use, the book argues, "makes them less likely to act, not more". "What I'm looking for are technological solutions to a technologically driven problem, so the last thing we must do is eschew technology as we move forward," says King, 68.
...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jan/12/climatechange.carbonemissions1
Love it when the leftists and environmentalists start infighting.
Under the assumptions relied upon by "Global Warming" (or "Global Climate Change," if the day happens to be colder than usual) he is correct, an anti-tech approach still leaves us with greatly-elevated greenhouse gas levels and no way to mitigate them without killing about two-thirds of the population of Earth (which would produce lots of CO2 and other more-noxious greenhouse gases in itself).
IF we had already reached a point of pushing the climate into change by this mechanism (ignoring solar variations or causality issues in the gas/temperature relationship), Luddism would just amount to trying to keep more snow from falling on the avalanche while it was in progress.