• News
• Sport
• Comment
• Culture
• Business
• Money
• Life & style
• Travel
• Environment
• Blogs
• Video
• Jobs
• A-Z

The new low carbon diet

Ed Miliband has got good advice from the Climate Change Committee on cutting emissions. Now he must act on it

If Ed Miliband, secretary of state at the new Department for Energy and Climate Change, fails to take radical action to decarbonise the UK's economy, it's not for lack of good, expert advice. Taking pride of place on his desk this morning must be the letter from Adair (Lord) Turner, chairman of the Climate Change Committee, which makes an unarguable case for deep and rapid reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, built on sound science and economics.

The 60% emissions reductions target contained in the Climate bill is not good enough, it says. We need a cut of at least 80% cut by 2050, and this target "should apply to the sum of all sectors of the UK economy, including international aviation and shipping". Moreover, the cut can be achieved affordably, costing the UK just 1-2% of GDP in 2050. Given uncertainties about fossil fuel prices, this estimate – in line with Nicholas Stern's projections in his famous Review – is close to saying that there will be no cost at all. In the event of high fuel prices and supply constraints, decarbonising the UK's economy will almost certainly yield net economic benefits as it ends our dependence on fossil energy.

One important reason for tightening the target is that the committee has grasped an important truth. As temperatures rise, non-linear effects will come into play that will amplify warming, such as methane release from permafrost and oceans. Beyond a threshold level, these runaway warming processes are likely to become uncontrollable, and lead to further irreversible impacts, such as the melting of the Greenland ice sheets. "The world may be able to adapt to small changes in temperature change," writes Lord Turner, "but once higher increases are experienced damages will exceed the adaptive capacity of many biological, physical and social systems."

Thus, it is essential to steer well clear of a 4C temperature rise, which would lead to "extreme consequences potentially beyond our ability to adapt", and "limit the central expectation of global temperature rise to, or close to, 2C". Taking into account the larger than anticipated role of greenhouse gases other than CO2 – such as methane and the HFC gases used as refrigerants – and the need for the UK as a wealthy and highly polluting country to lead on emissions reductions, the UK's proper share of emissions reductions comes to at least 80%, within a global emissions reduction of 50-60%.

My only objection to the committee's interim advice is that while it is making all the right arguments, it does not go far enough. We are already experiencing positive feedbacks in the climate system with our present degree of warming of barely 1C, notably with the Arctic summer ice melt. The idea that a 2C temperature rise is in any way safe is more wishful thinking than science – for all the reasons set out by Turner about the non-linear climate response to emissions. There is now a growing awareness that we should achieve global emissions neutrality by 2050 – that is, that all residual greenhouse gas emissions taking place by that date should be balanced by CO2 uptake in soils, forests and oceans.

But the committee's advice has to be welcomed, nonetheless. It spells out the actions we should be taking: the systematic decarbonisation of the entire UK economy, including power generation, transport, heating and industry, with a strong reliance on technological innovation backed by public investment and regulation – and the urgency of embarking on that path without delay. Gordon Brown has already indicated that he will accept the target, and Ed Miliband has been left with little wiggle-room – just supposing he wants it.

The target must now be made law in the forthcoming Climate Act – but most importantly, it must be backed up by action. As we know from the government's failure to meet its legally binding target on fuel poverty, to pass a law is one thing, to fulfill the obligation is another. The real challenge is for the future.

Ed, for all our sakes, don't flunk it!

Close