AN Appeal to Reason: A Cool Look at Global Warming Paperback – December 29, 2009

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.PS (2009): For a bold and politically incorrect critic of the reliability of climate science and modeling, as well as a proposal of more affordable mitigation solutions read Chapter 5 of  SuperFreakonomics: Global Cooling, Patriotic Prostitutes, and Why Suicide Bombers Should Buy Life Insurance

"An Appeal to Reason: A Cool Look at Global Warming" is exactly the book I was looking for: a straightforward, analytical, and logical look at global warming and the hysteria behind it, and the dire consequences if politicians - out of ignorance, political correctness, or greed - cling dogmatically to this new religion of the Left. Author Nigel Lawson is a credible spokesman: the former Secretary of State for Energy under Margaret Thatcher; hardly an apologist for or pawn of corporate energy concerns. He admits to being no scientist, which is a blessing, as he states his case in layman's language, steering clear of the tedious charts, graphs, and subterfuge that so often hamper the debates of climate believers vs. skeptics. Here, Lawson takes apart what he describes as three lies of global warming: 1) that the science is certain and settled, 2) that global warming is actually happening here and now, and 3) that carbon dioxide "pollutes" the atmosphere.But Lawson does not simply focus on denial of global warming; rather, beyond making a quick case in the opening chapter for the dubious evidence supporting the relationship between CO2 produced by man and catastrophic temperature rise, Lawson is content to accept the conclusion of the UN's controversial and politically-charged Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - that global temperatures may indeed rise over the next century. While Lawson makes the case that this is unlikely, at least in the extreme, based on the computer models continued failures in predicting what has actually been observed - including the recent dramatic cooling which was not predicted by the models. His premise is that actions proposed today to prevent possible consequences a century or more in the future is neither practical nor feasible - a recipe for economic collapse today in a misguided effort to remove the risks that may possibly inconvenience our children's- children's-children's- children. Along the way, he debunks some popular myths - like hurricane frequency and intensity related to global warming, or the highly hyped - but inaccurate - news stories claiming alarming reductions in the polar ice caps, and rising seas that follow. With clear and compelling analysis, Lawson concludes that "'Save the Planet' must surely be a strong contender for the most ludicrous slogan ever coined."If you've been following Al Gore and the "climate change" debacle, you'll know that credible scientists with dissenting views have been ridiculed and effectively blocked from the debate, thanks to a gullible media and a well-funded "Big Green" agenda. And for sure, the hard-core greeniacs with discredit Laeson's research out of hand, ignoring economics and instead relying on the usual ad hominine attacks. If there is good news in the insanity, it is that cooler heads, faced with the financial reality and the practicalities of growing fledging economies, are turning away from the draconian measures being pushed by Gore and his disciples. Mankind faces many challenges, Lawson argues, and, when ranked against the real risks of nuclear weapon proliferation or supplying enough food to feed the masses, and dealing with limited resources to effect change, prevention of the potential risks associated with global warming fall very low in the priority stack. In short, neither scientific theory, or the evidence on the ground, or the considered views of reputable climate scientists support the Gore-style views of alarmist politicians that we are on the road to catastrophe as a result of the planet reaching some irreversible "tipping point." Whichever side of the debate you land on, if you read Lawson's books with an open mind, it will be difficult not to cringe when next hearing impassioned pleas from politicians for "cap and trade" or other means of the State to curb energy use while limiting individual choice, or when seeing yet another well-meaning but deluded youth waving a "Save the Earth" placard.

Regardless of one’s views about global warming/climate change, it is hard not to agree that a dogma has been established (which is being supported and actively promoted by the mainstream media) to the effect that urgent and drastic action is needed with regard to carbon emissions in order to avoid catastrophic consequences for the planet. This position has become akin to a religion, in the sense that it is believed fanatically and any questioning of it (even by scientists and politicians) is forbidden and considered heresy. As a result, many intelligent people are accepting this position on face value without attempting to look deeper into the issue and form their own views about what has actually happened with the climate to date, what can be expected to happen in the future, and what steps should be taken as a policy matter. Refreshingly, in this book Lawson provides a thorough and thoughtful analysis of the issue. Even though he makes a strong case that the scientific position remains far from settled, he acknowledges that he is not a scientist and he “errs on the side of caution” by starting with an assumption that that the forecasts on global warming made by the “consensus” are true. He then undertakes an analysis of what such forecasts mean and what should be done in response to them. In addition to being essential for getting a real understanding of the climate change issue, this book could serve as a model for how to throughly analyse a policy issue, in a measured way, taking into account economics, politics and ethics.

No wonder Sir Nigel Lawson is still so highly regarded. Cool, reasoned and researched argument versus overblown green net zero hype.Maybe if Boris had read this book he wouldn’t be the blustering ninkumpoop he appears to be . Britain to become the Saudi Arabia of wind power indeed!Offshore wind farms - or just all wind and water?

Well written and researched. He does not say global warming isn't happening but he does challenge the voracity of the science. Most of all he questions the quasi-religous ferver that is associated with the subject and how debate is being stifled by denying any platform to those who challenge the 'perceived wisdom'! Furthermore he questions the 'science' as to what might be achieved in stopping or slowing down global warming, the vast amounts of money being spent and the questionable methods being used, and finally the potential futility of what it is hoped to achieve. Certainly makes one think seriously that this has become more political than science and ultimately who or what is driving the agenda and why.

Should be read by all those who want to keep an open mind about global warming. Lawson is vilified as a climate change denier but he actually makes a compelling case for seeing climate change as an economic challenge. He is prepared to stick his head above the parapet and challenge the accepted orthodoxy. It makes no sense to shut down the world economy to prevent climate change. Doing so will condemn those already living in poverty to a very bleak future. He argues that we should support economic growth and use our wealth to mitigate the effects of climate change. Well written and persuasive.

Nigel Lawson's key premise is not that global warming is a cult (it is) but that if it is occurring the world should take practical steps to mitigate or prevent its impact. With the current progression of world development the green energy plank is not a practical solution for many decades so it is far better to plan expenditure for adaptation.