In the first part of this post, I suggested that the global banking crisis, and an economic downturn that may lead to years of recession, will bring about a change in the general public’s attitude to global warming.

Concerns about climate change are hardly likely to compete for our attention with real day-to-day fears about employment, the cost of living, pensions, and even the security of our savings and our homes. Exhortations to have blind faith in a ‘scientific consensus’ are likely to fall on deaf ears, and appeals for self-sacrificing compliance with costly schemes to save the planet will prompt question about what these measures are likely to deliver.

Of course, this applies mainly to the domestic sector of the economy, but what will be the reaction in the commercial world and in the public sector? Will the currently fashionable acceptance of the doctrine of climate alarmism continue to be the norm, or will there be a growing scepticism here too?

When a recession bites, plans for long-term capital expenditure come under scrutiny; uncertainties are likely to be reassessed and particularly the credibility of predictions that underlie plans for the future. Here are some examples of how predictions about the future climate influence decision makers who need sound guidance if they are to avoid making very expensive mistakes.

In the wake of the West Country floods last summer, the Environment Agency launched a campaign to publicise the need for a new Thames Barrier to protect London from flooding.

The BBC reported the story in these apocalyptic terms: Continue reading »