By Hayden Smith, Metro, 17 June 2010
High levels of scepticism and indifference among Britons continue to dog efforts to get the country to go greener, a Europe-wide study has concluded.
We continue to lag behind other major nations in our attitude to and appetite for tackling climate change. Less than a third of Britons believe the issue is ‘serious and urgent’ and requires ‘radical steps’.
A similar number of people doubt whether climate change is happening at all, according to the study.
This scepticism has contributed to the 2.1 tonnes of CO2 generated per house each year from electricity use – the highest of all ten countries examined by researchers at Imperial College London.
A little more than half of Britons are ‘quite’ or ‘very concerned’ about climate change. In contrast in Spain, which topped the poll, three-quarters said they were at least quite concerned. [Climate Change Minister] Greg Barker said he was encouraged by nine in ten Britons saying they would make changes if given financial support.
‘I think the British are inherently quite sceptical about theoretical politics and science and maybe a little more cautious than some countries in Europe,’ he said.
‘But I am convinced British people want to do something about it.’
Prof Nigel Brandon of ICL said the study, commissioned by EDF Energy for Green Britain Day, said: ‘It all helps to build a more complete picture of how habits follow attitudes when it comes to the environment.’
Britain came sixth in the poll of 5,700 people across Europe.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“This scepticism has contributed to the 2.1 tonnes of CO2 generated per house each year from electricity use – the highest of all ten countries examined by researchers at Imperial College London.”
I would like to know what evidence they base this claim on.
I only know one person who believes in this CAGW nonsense. It is rather curious, then, that whenever I visit them the central heating is turned up so high that it is physically uncomfortable for me.
Perhaps people might take them a little more seriously if they practised what they preached….
Chris
How right he was, and he wasn’t even British, Abraham Lincoln.
“You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.”
Why impose vague concerns on your population, with which justification? Once bitten twice shy, if you are caught on a ly, or several lies as is the IPCC, don’t count on the public to forget. There is no convincing evidence that human activity is het main driver of the increase in average temperatures during the last century, the climate system is still poorly understood and unpredictable, we cannot estimate any consequences of any AGW – positive or negative- and it is unlikely that we could do a lot about it, should we want to.
Commenting that Britsh are sceptical about “theoretical politics” is a laugh, how funny can you get? That they are sceptical about science is pure propaganda; which science, good science or bad “science”?
“I’ve even read in mainstream NZ papers (online) that NZ will have their goods rejected by other nations as punishment for not pulling their weight on climate.
Would such an action be legal with no international climate agreement in force?”
…No, it would be illegal and any country, or group of countries, trying to bully another in this way would be liable for massive penalties under the WTO. That’s why the EU is proposing a “carbon import tax” on goods from countries like China and India if they don’t comply with a world-wide Ponzi-style carbon trading regime. In other words, EU citizens will get hit several times with the same carbon taxes; first for their own activities and then having to pay the exporting countries’ carbon taxes as well.
“We continue to lag behind other major nations in our attitude to and appetite for tackling climate change.”
Oh really? I’m sure one snowy day in November 2008 our politicians passed our Climate Change Act and committed us to legally binding reductions of 80% GHG’s to take us back to the ’90s level. It was a good xmas that year for renewables, not so good for other businesses facing increasing costs via ‘climate change levy’ to help pay for our Carbon Trust superquango.
We are currently undergoing a bit of a spending review given our previous government maxed out our credit. There has been much wailing and gnashing of teeth about £6bn in cuts. Our shiney new government has even asked the public where the cuts should be made. Our Climate Change Act will cost us £14-16bn a year, yet for some reason wasn’t included as an option to cut. Instead, our new mental… I mean environmental minister, and Barker’s boss, Chris Huhne was in Europe wanting to cost us more. At the same time, Mrs Clegg, wife of our Deputy PM was accepting an exec director’s job with a Spanish renewables company.
So whilst the British public may be sceptical, our dear leaders are just as gullible or venal as our last lot.
It’s so refreshing and reassuring to read that other Brits are as bemused as I as to the political climate on climate. The words ‘charlatans and simpletons’ seem to cover the supporters of AGW, but the question is, “which is which?”
The EDF adverts make me sick. For an energy company to be chastising sceptics suggests they are being paid way too much to be going ‘green’, and I find it offensive to be ripped off by them, and them using part of that money to advertise regularly on national television chastising those that don’t think being ripped off is a good idea.
Frankly going green should be rephrased going red, as reducing plant food won’t make the world green, but command and control economies a la cap and trade will be reminiscent of communism. Begging government beaurocrats for permission for more production for next year, while they huddle around deciding production quotas for every industry.
Geronimo wrote (and I paraphrase) “the Brits all use tumble dryers…”
We have lived in or near london for the thick end of a decade and have very rarely used a tumble dryer, similar to most locals we have come to know here. English houses are generally heated by means of wall-mounted hot water radiators driven by gas-fired boiler systems. In Winter, although it is officially frowned upon, most householders use commercially-made wire racks clipped to the top of radiators to drape and dry clothes in front of said radiators. Looks a bit messy, but very effective. In the good weather, outdoor clothes lines are generally used to dry washing. South-East England has significantly less rainfall than Spain or Portugal and we find the climate very mild, dry and gentle compared with where we lived in sub-tropical New Zealand where 25cm of rain is ‘a good shower’ – here it is a deluge of epic proportions! To listen to most English people discussing their weather, one would get the impression that they live somewhere near Moscow!
As I wrote in a reply to an an earlier post, there is frequently insuficient wind here in outer London to fly a child’s kite and one can often walk to the pub and back in the rain without needing rainwear, and still remain dry. The South-East is currently close to having hosepipe/garden sprinkler bans imposed and Thames Water, the local supplier of fresh water, has just completed an enormous desalination plant in London ready to suck water from the tidal River Thames and pipe it to their nearby and rapidly emptying reservoirs.
A demarkation line for weather seems to run coast to coast across the Midlands – to the North of this line, the weather is frequently very wet and cool, while below the line the climate tends be more akin to the Mediterranian regions.
Despite the alarmist utterances of mainstream politicians, I have met very few Brits who see CAGW as anything but alarmism based on science that cannot be falsified.
I, too, would like to see a full copy of the survey the minister quotes and to see his sources for his irrational claim of being supported by a majority of voters.
Are politicians elected to represent the population?
Or is the population suppose to follow the elected?
So far most of my voting has been “Who will screw me the least”.
Well, the UK coalition government had their chance. The honeymoon is over. It’s now abundantly clear, that at least with the “big” issues, we’re just in for more of the same as with the last lot.
Huhne’s influence within the cabinet really disturbs me. I think in particular, the decision to cancel the loan to Sheffield Forgemasters (which was to fund a new programme to build exportable parts for the manufacture of new nuclear power stations) bodes very ill indeed.
Is it a coincidence that the French electricity company, EDF, has a virtual monopoly of all the sites currently licensed for possible new nuclear power stations? The French know that windmills will never generate enough power, hence France’s reliance on nuclear and, to a lesser extent, tidal.
“Britain came sixth in the poll of 5,700 people across Europe.”
What is the point of such a statement ?
It actually seems to makes Britain appear rather better than one suspects was intended.
“geronimo says:
Then there is the poverty gap between Northern Europe and Southern Europe, which means the Brits, with their rainy weather, will almost all have tumble driers that are in use throughout the year.”
I do believe you have never paid a UK power bill in your life. Yes, the “Brits” do use their driers, but let me assure you, the cost of power, even in 1995 (The last time I paid a UK power bill), was so high that, we just dealt with the situation with airing cupboards around hot water tanks and indoor clothes lines. And as some posties has pointed out, we hung clothes over the radiators of the gas fired central heating system.
Can you imagine if over the next 20 years we have entered a strong cooling trend and the UK still has a Climate Change Minister? The post would become the butt of jokes in the local pubs and private dinners. Scepticism is getting stronger while signs point to cooling, you’ll have to laugh! :o)
” Less than a third of Britons believe the issue is ‘serious and urgent’ and requires ‘radical steps’.”
Then Why is their newly elected government not representing that view ?
“Britain came sixth in the poll of 5,700 people across Europe.”
Is that statistically significant in a population of ~ 500 million in the EU alone ?
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-QA-09-031/EN/KS-QA-09-031-EN.PDF
@Joe Kirklin Spencer: “Then Why is their newly elected government not representing that view ?”
I completely agree. The stated policy is, for the most part, frankly terrifying:
http://programmeforgovernment.hmg.gov.uk/energy-and-climate-change/
The only bright spot is the amount of sceptical voices represented in the comments to the above.
One in ten Britons would not make changes even if offered a bribe (financial support)!
I like that Britons.
Don’t do it for the money, do it or don’t do it according to how you view the principles and the science involved.
Mooloo says:
June 17, 2010 at 9:40 pm
They know this is not true. How many countries have actually engaged properly in a meaningful reduction policy? One that has actually achieved a deliberate reduction in CO2? None.
—
Nail on the head!!! We have been at this nonsense for such a long time with very little achieved in co2 reduction globally. The only time you might see a reduction in co2 is when the recession has an impact. Now we are being rushed in a “10 years”[again] deadline to save the planet. What a complete waste of time and even IF they acheived the reductions they wanted I be my hat it won’t mean a thing to global mean temps. AGW is hysteria gone ape!!!
Something to keep in mind when these sort of statistics are presented is the functional illiteracy rate among the respondents. The phrase “illiteracy” applies to more than a simple inability to read or write. There is also “functional illiteracy”, defined as ignorance of the fundamentals of a particular area, or minimizing an expected standard of competence regarding some skill or body of information. Functional illiteracy indicates that a large segment of society has been taught how not to rely on reading as a primary source of information. This goes to comprehension and hence the ability to make an informed decision.
When the subject being asked about is as complex as climate, I have no doubt that the “functional illiteracy ” rate is quite high.
I suspect that the polls are likely skewed to a significant degree as a result of this.
“Darkinbad the Brightdayler says:
June 18, 2010 at 5:45 am
One in ten Britons would not make changes even if offered a bribe (financial support)!
I like that Britons.
Don’t do it for the money, do it or don’t do it according to how you view the principles and the science involved.”
What principals? What science? So far there are no principals behind the science, beyond making a lot of money, and there is no science behind the theory (Of CAGW). Manipulate temperature data, lose original data records, “adjust” data? Where is the principal in that?
EDF Energy financed and commissioned the report. So once again “Big Energy” funds the research that suggests – or rather conforms to their pre-conceived notion – that behavioural changes as individuals are required to reduce the amount of energy we consume from them (EDF)… Their proposed method for forcing the reduction in energy comsumption is simply energy price increases that are marketed and justified as “saving the planet”.
It beggars belief that people still cannot see that the biggerst promoters, advocates, lobbyists and endorsees of “climate change policy” are the very energy companies who are painted by the warmists as the “fossil fuel” industry.
Red Hot Lies by Christopher Horner is an excellent expose of the green industrial machine masquerading as evil fossil fuelists…
You know, commoners use to have common sense and see reality. Global Warming is over since 1998 and, politically, died on November 19th 2009, its funeral was held at the city of Copenhagen last december. This is a reality check. Whomsoever do not see this is making the ridicule.
…….or commiting treason on purpose, because all green policies are devastating.
“It actually seems to makes Britain appear rather better than one suspects was intended.”
It was intended.
So, the UK boys manufacture a hockey stick with a chopped blade, delete documents re AR4, cannot locate missing temperature data and break the spirit of the law and the Britons are skeptical because they are ‘inherently skeptical’???
There is a natural limit to what you can take credit for.
With the honorable exceptions, Britain has been in the forefront in climate alarmism and moralism from day one.
Well you reap what you sow.
First they claim to be climatologists, and above it all.
Then give weather predictions – snow a thing of the past – like common weathermen.
Exaggerate, lie, and make up things – glaciers.
Get caught saying things like “no significant warming”, after claiming unprecedented warming.
Not one prediction comes true, They really are a joke.
and then claim that they are misunderstood LOL
They really are the weakest link………….