Climate Change Scepticism

Climate Change Scepticism -

A qualitative study of Clexit and their arguments against the Paris Agreement and the European Union

Amanda Thiman

Essay/Thesis: / 15 hp
Program and/or course: / European Studies
Level: / First Cycle
Semester/year: / At/2017
Supervisor: / Mats Andrén
Examiner:
Report no:

1

Abstract

Climate change scepticism is a concept that refers to people or groups that mistrust, reject or question the mainstream view of the climate change threat. The purpose of this thesis is therefore to illuminate climate change scepticism by doing a qualitative analysis of the arguments by an organisation called Clexit. The study finds out that arguments most frequently used by Clexit are motivated by emotions and relate to a worry of economic downfall and supranational governments. Clexit want countries to leave the UN Paris Agreement and they are especially focused on the EU. The EU is, according to them, a growing supranational government that focuses on setting goals to hinder climate change to get their own agendas through. Although answers as to why climate change scepticism exists cannot be given, in this type of study, assumptions about organisations like Clexit and how the arguments by Clexit could be understood and classified, from previous theories and research, can be made. These assumptions conclude that culture and economy has great influence on people’s opinions and that the arguments are based on existing debates and issues that concern a great deal of people.

Key words: Climate change, Environment, Scepticism, Clexit, European Union, Paris Agreement, United Nations.

Word count: 12 994

Pages: 36

1

Table of content

1. Introduction

1.1 Purpose

1.2 Research questions

1.3 Delimitation and structure of the thesis

2. Background

2.1 The history of Climate Change Scepticism

2.2 Clexit

2.3 The UN Paris Agreement and the EU as a driving force

3. Theory and previous research

3.1 Theories and previous research

3.2 Previous research regarding Clexit and Climate Scepticism

4. Method and material

4.1 Argument analysis

4.2 Reasons to use argument analysis in this thesis

4.3 Materials

5. Result & Analysis

5.1 Arguments from “The Clexit Founding Statement”

5.2 Arguments from “Party for the Climateers”

5.3 Arguments from “Swedish Clexit”

6. Conclusion

Reference list

Appendix

1

1. Introduction

One of the most discussed topics today is climate change. A topic that bears much concern for some people and a problem many of us know we need to do something about. Because global climate change see no borders, it is a problem that will affect all living things, despite one’s distance to the source of the pollution emission.[1]

The climate changes we have seen over the past century is, according to ninety-seven percent of climate scientists, a result of human activities. Because of carbon dioxide’s nature of heat-trapping, there is no question of the fact that the increased pollutions are causing the global temperature to rise. The Earth’s temperature has increased, since the late 20th century, by almost 1.1 degrees Celsius. As a direct result of the increased temperature our environment is changing and consequences has already been reported; ice sheets are starting to decrease in mass, oceans are getting warmer, sea levels are rising, extreme nature events are more frequent and glaciers are retreating more and more around the world.[2]

To prevent the global temperature from rising even more and hindering the climate to change beyond recovery, the UN and the EU have been big promoters for implementing an international agreement. In this agreement countries around the globe help to reduce emissions, and apply more green energy policies.[3] But despite all the steps taken to prevent further changes and the scientific unanimity regarding climate change, some people persistently stay sceptical.[4] Therefore importance lie in finding out how climate sceptics, in this study an organisation called Clexit, argue and how these arguments can be understood.

Clexit was formed not long after Brexit, and they stand for a similar campaign as the “Brexiteers” did, only instead of exiting the EU they represent a “Climate Exit”. The organisation is especially focused on the EU, who were big promoters for the UN Paris Agreement, and one of their slogans are; “We need our own Clexit – climate exit from the energy vandals of Europe”.[5] Therefore, I have chosen to focus my research on Clexit solely in Europe and the member states. Because I want to see how the organisation argues for countries in the EU to exit the climate change agreement and understand where these arguments come from. The organisation is not formed in Europe but its mistrust against the Paris Agreement and the EU are visible. I want to explore this mistrust further and up till now, research about Clexit is missing from academic circles.

1.1 Purpose

With this thesis I want to illuminate climate scepticism and study the relatively newly founded organisation called Clexit and their arguments. This will be done by using an argument analysis method to see how the organisation express themselves and how they argue for their cause. Significance lies in finding out the arguments of Clexit, which sort of argument they use and why they have a mistrust for the Paris Agreement and the EU. By using the information gattered from my analysis and connect the result to theories from previous research I hope to better understand Clexit’s view on the EU and climate change. By doing this I will contribute to the general scientific knowledge about climate change sceptics. With Clexit as the general sceptic group I will be able to draw assumptions about other organisations like Clexit and hopefully better understand these organisations standpoint in our society.

1.2 Research questions

What are the arguments of climate scepticism by Clexit?

How can these arguments be classified and understood?

1.3 Delimitation and structure of the thesis

This thesis is focused on explaining what Clexit is and stand for, by analysing their arguments. Together with the opinions of Clexit and background information about the UN Paris Agreement and climate change scepticism, the study focuses on the complexity of climate change in Europe. It clarifies what ambitions Clexit has and their relation to the EU. The study is centred on the present, because the problem area is so relevant and can easily be put into contrast with recent events in Europe, specifically related to Brexit and the ongoing struggle to hinder climate change. Therefore, much information was gathered from the EU, the UN and sources representing Clexit.

One delimitation necessary to this thesis, was to not include all the different terms used to define climate change scepticism. Such as denialism, contrarianism, anti-science, mistrust and dismissal.[6] In this thesis, only previous research about climate change scepticism, and not climate change denial is used. Because the study about Clexit does not related to climate change denial, as the organisation does not deny that the climate is changing. They are aware of climate change, but claim it is natural and not a result of human impact.[7]

The structure is as follows: The thesis starts with an introduction which presents the subject and continues to explain the purpose of the study. Secondly, some background information is given about climate change scepticism, Clexit, the Paris Agreement and the role of the European Union. After that, theories and previous research is presented, followed by method and material. Subsequently, the result of the analysis is presented and to conclude the study, answers to the questions and summaries of my conclusions are given.

2. Background

To give all readers an insight in the subject: climate change scepticism, I have chosen to present a brief background on the topics most significant throughout this study. The background is divided up in the following headlines, The history of Climate Change Scepticism, Clexit and The UN Paris Agreement and the EU as a driving force.

2.1 The history of Climate Change Scepticism

Climate change is much more than a problem waiting for a resolution. It has evolved into a phenomenon of ecological, political and cultural differences, which has changed the way we regard ourselves and humanity’s mark on this planet.[8] But because of this, climate change has also become a subject where people disagree. Conversations about dangerous climate changes first started in Europe and North America in the beginning of the 1960s. This together with Rachel Carson’s book, Silent Spring prompted a green wave.[9] The book documented the danger and the effects caused by using the toxic, DDT (a synthetic pesticide), that was being used during the time. This was something that stirred up a difference of opinion regarding climate change. Rachel Carson was slandered by industries promoting the pesticides and governments that stood behind the production. But the book also generated fans and started a movement that we still see traces of in today’s debates about climate change.[10]

In 1971, a Swedish report was published. It bored the title Study of Man’s Impact on Climate. After this, at the first conference of the United Nations concerning the environment, held in Stockholm 1972, the UN wanted to determine and create awareness regarding the human impact on the global environment and climate. Unknown at this stage was whether the human impact was inducing the global temperature to rise or fall. The statement that human activities could alter climate change was concluded but also, by some, met with distrust.[11]

This distrust later grew and now, in recent debates people are still sceptical about the human impact. Observations after this has settled in two positions which, both cannot be true. One is that global warming is occurring naturally and is part of a 1,500-year-old cycle. This claim is according to Mike Hulme by Dennis Avery and Fred Singer from their book Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 years, where the writers conclude that trying to control human emissions will not change anything. The other claim, put forth by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) points to an increased temperature since the 1950s and that this is caused by an increased emission of greenhouse gas. With this division, suspicion grew on why scientists could not give accurate answers about what the main cause for climate change was. Responses regarding how much the temperature could rise were not answered either. But according to Hulme the media was promoting the human impact, saying that scientists agreed that the temperature should not exceed above two degrees Celsius. These campaigns in media is said to have triggered nations to take action and lower their emissions, but it is according to Hulme also a reason as to why people doubt the scientific community. The media has generated greater change than scientific discoveries, which has caused mistrust.[12]

Hulme’s theory above is still a cause for doubt within the sceptical organisations but also a bit different from today’s scepticism or the campaigns to create more distrust against the reliability of scientific data. In the article, “Climate and environmental science denial”, the writers point out that political leaders that express doubt in the conformed climate change debate has a big opportunity to generate more mistrust, and in the future the consequents of this could result in policies that are not based on scientific findings. Organizations that work with spreading doubt are already a reality and scepticism continues to live on. So, by classifying arguments and trends within the scientific literature the aim is to illuminate climate scepticism and to understand the arguments.[13]

2.2 Clexit

In June 2016, 51.9 percent of the British citizens voted for their country to leave the European Union. Shortly after the referendum, commonly called Brexit, the United Kingdom invoked article 50 of the Treaty on European Union and showed everyone that Britain were withdrawing from the EU.[14] Not long after Brexit an organisation, inspired by the United Kingdom’s actions to leave the EU, was formed. This international organisation is called Clexit and they stand for a similar campaign as Brexit did, only instead of exiting the EU they represent a “Climate Exit” from the UN Paris Agreement. The organisation is especially focused on the EU, who are big promoters of the Agreement, as one of their slogans are; “We need our own Clexit – climate exit from the energy vandals of Europe”.[15]

The Paris Agreement was put in place to take actions against the growing climate change and is supported by the EU and various countries over the world. But according to the secretary of Clexit, Australian Viv Forbes, the Paris Agreement, if implemented could cause a global disaster. Consequents from abiding the Paris Agreement would result in a stop of low-cost hydrocarbon transport and electricity. Which for developing countries could mean a costly future, where biomass and weather-dependent power supplies would be their only option. Countries big on manufacturing and industries would also suffer from removing the low-cost energy they use today. These consequences would according to Clexit lead to resentment and global hostility.

The ambitions of Clexit is to make the world see reason and not go through with the ratifications endorsed by the agreement. According to Clexit and its members the war on carbon dioxide must stop, because the climate change is not caused by human activities. The organisation state that the Paris Agreement must be stopped, since the EU and the UN are focusing on getting their own ambitions through and will bring global despair to all.[16]

From the perspective of Clexit, the climate change hysteria, driven forth by scientists and the EU, is a false proclamation that source back to bureaucracies and governments. Especially the EU, who is more driven than anyone on promoting green energy, carbon prices and international control. So, by doing what the UK did, more countries should see reason and exit the Paris Agreement.[17]

Viv Forbes is a returning front figure regarding Clexit and the writer of most of their texts. He is from Australia and founding secretary of the organisation. Apart from his involvement in Clexit he has according to his former biography at Stanmore Coal, where he used to act as director, 40 years of experience in the coal industry. Now Forbes is chairman of the Carbon Sense Coalition, a site that defends carbon dioxide and is sceptic against limiting carbon emissions. In 2016, the organisation Clexit was founded.[18] The organisation claim to have 190 members from 26 countries, they are listed as either members of The Clexit Committee, Founding Members or Clexit Regional Directors.[19]

In relation to other climate change sceptic organisations, Clexit is special. They are not targeting the denial of global warming or climate change such as other groups tend to do[20], instead they are focused on the UN Paris Agreement and the EU in relation to being sceptical about climate change. But as said, their main focus is the connection between the Paris Agreement and its implications, because Clexit does not believe in a climate change and they think the UN and EU aims to become more supranational. Therefore, Clexit is of interest in this study, especially to analyse the arguments and illuminate their climate change scepticism.

2.3 The UN Paris Agreement and the EU as a driving force

Greenhouse gas emissions, as a result of human activities, are driving the global temperature up and due to the changed climate and the effect the environment has on everybody, everywhere, something must be done. More individuals and governments are acting and changing to renewable energy sources, but with such a global challenge as the earth’s climate it is important to work together internationally and help developing countries to evolve into a low-carbon economy.[21]

The Paris Agreement was formed out of COP21, the 21st conference of Parties of the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change). The goal with the agreement is to reinforce a global response against climate change and avoid increasing global temperature above two degrees Celsius.[22] From the 22nd of April 2016 to the 21st of April 2017 the Paris Agreement was open for signatures. On the 4th of November 2016, the agreement came into force after more than 55 parties had signed for ratification, acceptance, approval or agreement.[23] The Paris Agreement is an historic global step towards action against climate change. On the 28th of September 2017, 166 countries had officially joined the Paris Agreement.[24] However, included in those 166 countries is not the second biggest greenhouse gas emitter in the world, the USA. On the 1st of June 2017, the Donald J. Trump administration decided to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. After the EU rejected Donald Trump’s suggestion to renegotiate the agreement.[25] Although, other big gas emitters like China, Russia, India, and Japan has either signed and, or agreed to the ratifications.[26]