Governments in a democracy are elected to represent the voting public, but also to take the lead on necessary but sometimes controversial issues. Sometimes, legislators respond to lobbying from interest groups with an agenda for change, and are ahead of public opinion. In the rich world, this is very obvious in the education sector for example, where a strong clique of academics and professionals have moved teaching away from disciplined learning of facts to a more creative, child-centred approach. Most parents did not ask for this, and many right-of-centre politicians might be expected to disagree with the thrust, but reform continued whether right- or left-leaning parties were in power. Pressure from the educational establishment was constant and public opposition patchy; after all the changes were made in the name of equality and fairness, and who doesn’t want that?
Governments of whatever stripe tend also to move to the middle ground, whatever their instincts are and their manifestos say. Politics is, after all, the art of the possible. They will take the path of least resistance on many issues, saving their political capital for the things which matter to them most. Despite the clamouring of single-issue activists, electorates are broadly inclined to a consensus and distrust politicians who introduce more radical ideas, unless these show signs of working quickly. The middle ground is what most people want, and it takes a brave and committed government to deviate far from this, especially when the early results are not as good as they might like.
No single issue has been near the top of the agenda for so long as climate change and energy policy. In this case, pressure for action has been well-nigh irresistible, with both the scientific establishment and environmentalist and development NGOs pushing the message that concerted action must be taken to avert the risk of dangerous global warming over the coming century. Small sections of the public have taken up the message with enthusiasm and support a major expansion of renewable energy, measures to improve energy efficiency and policies which encourage cycling and public transport over the private car. Many of them would be enthusiasts for green living in any case.
At the other end of the spectrum is another minority that takes the opposite view because they are deeply sceptical about the narrative of dangerous, human-induced climate change. Some of these people may have come to their view because they have looked at the evidence and found it lacking, but for most of them there is a degree of basic disbelief in the green agenda. Neither they nor the green living enthusiasts at the other end of the spectrum will have looked at the scientific case in much detail; in both cases their world view makes a particular position inevitable.
And then we have the majority of the population – generally the silent majority – who have passively accepted the case for a radical shift in energy policy to mitigate the projected climate change disaster. This acceptance has been osmotic, with global warming and climate change having been a regular part of the news for many years, and very little being reported which deviated from the mainstream line on the dominant influence of carbon dioxide. Of course, not having thought about it in any depth, they have been happy to respond positively to questionnaires about wind farms and solar panels. After all, the wind and sun are free, so surely this all makes sense. Because of this tacit approval, governments have been able to use tax revenues to subsidise renewable energy schemes and the complexities of the policy – such as the Emissions Trading Scheme, the Renewables Obligation and Feed-in tariffs – have developed behind the scenes with little immediate impact obvious to voters.
But over time, and with the same osmotic slowness, many of the majority have taken more of an interest in the topic and have become less silent. Approval of wind farms in the abstract has often been transformed into intense local opposition when one is planned in the neighbourhood. The economic downturn has accelerated a process which would have happened anyway: consumers have seen their energy bills rising and asked whether there are factors other than the price of gas and the supposed greed of the suppliers which have contributed to this. In the UK, the closure of some coal-fired power stations and the knife-edge gas supply situation have focused more minds on whether or not the lights will stay on next winter.
Those who have dug a little deeper will have seen that they are directly subsidising renewable energy, largely from wind farms which have attracted increasing opposition. They will also be aware that this ongoing expansion of wind and solar generation is reducing energy security. And for North-West Europe, the recent cold winters, the record wet summer of 2012 and this year’s exceptionally late spring jar with the hot, dry summers and mild, wet, snow-free winters which they have been told to expect. The climate change establishment continues to say that such extreme weather patterns are ‘consistent with’ climate models (which begs the question that, if everything is consistent with them, what real value do they have?) but people’s commonsense and instincts make them sceptical.
There is no reason why this groundswell of concern, scepticism and downright opposition should not stop growing. As we have seen, newspapers are beginning to give more prominence to articles which question the received wisdom of dangerous, anthropogenic global warming. There is no real light visible at the end of the economic tunnel yet and consumers have been warned to expect further steep increases in energy bills. The two EU Member States which have gone farthest with expansion of renewable energy – Denmark and Germany – have the highest electricity prices in Europe, and this will not have escaped the notice of the better-informed public in other countries. At the same time, many will be aware that China’s continuing rapid growth is literally fuelled by coal.
Before too long – in a few years, maybe, but perhaps before the next election in some countries – mainstream political parties will have to pay heed to this opposition and think again about their energy policies. None of them has publicly renounced their views, but it may only be a matter of who blinks first. In a democracy, governments cannot afford to stay too far ahead of public opinion if they want to be re-elected.
The Scientific Alliance
St John’s Innovation Centre
Cowley Road
Cambridge CB4 0WS
_____________________________________