Dutch scientist Pier Vellinga is fighting to make climate change sexy again. In the years since Al Gore broke through to the general public with his film An Inconvenient Truth, a successful counter-lobby has ensured that climate change and the greenhouse effect are no longer the kind of topic you would talk about at parties.

The fossil fuel lobby and neo-conservatives have taken advantage of two disappointing UN climate conferences, doubts about the reliability of IPCC reports and leaked emails from climatologists implying that there are some data they would like to sweep under the carpet. All grist to the mill of sceptics who question the significance and consequences of climate change.

Human activity
Vellinga, from the University of Wageningen, decided to write a book - entitled Hoezo klimaatverandering? (What Do You Mean, Climate Change?) - which emphasises that the world is faced with an acute problem, not something that's coming in some vague future:

"I was truly amazed to see politicians suddenly drop this issue and start talking about 'alleged climate change' again. Science showed us 20 years ago that something is seriously wrong, something we simply can't afford to ignore."

The global warming effect has been scientifically proven: the measurements are accurate. The average temperature around the world is rising. And, regardless of what the sceptics say, it's the result of human activity.

Backlash
"The human contribution to the gases in the atmosphere may not be so great in percentage terms compared with natural sources. People who are deeply impressed by the Earth's natural forces - and that includes all of us - may think the human contribution is negligible. But the human contribution grows every year and doesn't go away, unlike the natural ebb and flow of greenhouse gases which is in balance."

The current Dutch government doesn't seem at all enthusiastic about measures aimed at limiting greenhouse gas emissions. The climatologist believes lobbying by industries which earn huge amounts of money from fossil fuels is largely to blame. They regard new clean technologies as a direct threat. The combination of financial interests and neo-conservatism (often the same group of people) has produced a strong backlash, according to Vellinga.

Meat diet
In the 1980s he was one of the first Dutch scientists to write about climate change and he is disappointed it has taken so long for real decisions to be made.

"So I hope that with enthusiasm and new technological developments in the next four or five years there will be a breakthrough in the field of climate-neutral energy sources. What I worry about, though, is the effect of changing food patterns and agriculture on greenhouse gas levels. The whole world can't afford to adopt the same meat diet as America and Europe."

He expects the next UN climate summit - in Durban, South Africa, in November and December - to take a different tack. The United States and China, for example, don't want to agree to fixed CO2 reductions per country. Most likely, Durban will produce voluntary contributions from each country. A far less effective approach, but more politically acceptable since it leaves countries in charge of their own energy and CO2 emission policies.

(imm/rk)