Sjá hér að neðan svar Dr. Robert T. Watson, forvera Rajendra K. Pachauri í embætti yfirmanns Milliríkjanefnd Sameinuðu þjóðanna um loftslagsbreytingar, IPPC. við fullyrðingum Sir Nigel Lawson, öðru nafni Lord Lawson, í tilefni útgáfu bókar eftir hinn síðar nefnda um loftslagsbreytingar og kynnt var hér á landi í Silfri Egils s.l. sunnudag.

Grein Dr. Watsons birtist í Financial Times og þar segir meðal annars:
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which shared the 2007 Nobel peace prize, is the most authoritative voice on the current understanding of climate change. Unfortunately, Lord Lawson selectively quotes the IPCC report while perhaps not completely understanding the current scientific and economic debate. There is no doubt that the earth's climate has warmed since the pre-industrial revolution and that future warming is inevitable, primarily due to human activities; ie, the use of fossil fuels to produce energy and tropical deforestation. The rapid rise in surface temperature since 1950 cannot be ascribed to any natural phenomena, and in contrast to what Lord Lawson reports, global average temperatures continued to increase between 1998 and 2007.

The IPCC reported in 2007 that without concerted international action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions the planet could warm an additional 1.1°C to 6.4°C during this century, with predominantly adverse consequences for most ecological and socio-economic sectors and human health, with poor people being most vulnerable. Climate change is a major environmental, development and security issue that, left unaddressed, threatens a sustainable future for both developed and developing countries. As noted by the Stern Report the costs of inaction exceed the costs of action, ie mitigating greenhouse gas emissions. There are many cost-effective energy production and use technologies that can currently be used to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, there are many technologies that are pre-commercial that can be brought to the marketplace in the near future (with appropriate policy frameworks) to further reduce emissions cost effectively, for example, carbon capture and storage, future generation biofuels, electric cars.

Basically, Lord Lawson's argument that action to reduce emissions will hurt the economy is misguided. It is inaction that will impact adversely on economic growth, cause social disruption and lead to further destruction of the world's natural resources, land, water and biodiversity.
April 18, 2008
Árni Finnsson
Árni Finnsson „Fullyrðingar Sir Nigel Lawson misvísandi“, Náttú April 18, 2008 URL: [Skoðað:Jan. 26, 2023]
Efni má nota eða vitna í samkvæmt almennum venjum sé heimilda getið með slóð eða fullri tilvitnun hér að ofan.