An interesting interview with Mike Hulme, looking at the changes in climate science and climate policy. (Look for episode 101205 from 5 December 2010).
Part 1 is mainly about the policy aspects of climate, focusing particularly on the change in the landscape in the last twelve months, which Hulme traces particularly back to the failure of Copenhagen with the ensuing disillusion opening the way to a less top-down approach to climate policy.
There is also discussion of climate science and Hulme cites a couple of changes in the way climatologists work:
i) People now paying more attention to data - curation, accessibility, reanalysis of data (ie thermometer data).
ii) Climate scientists pay more attention to caveats and uncertainties now.
A particularly interesting question was whether Climategate was healthy for the longterm future of climate science and science policy. Hulme's answer was an unequivocal "yes", describing the CRU affair as a reality check, which knocked down untenable rhetoric from science commentators and the "infallable status" of the IPCC. The changes in the last twelve months had brought policy back into alignment with the way the world is.
Part 2
In the second part of the interview, Hulme again showed that he has travelled a considerable distance, noting that we are not going to decarbonise the economy with windmills and solar PV. We need real innovation in energy technology and we don't need global carbon targets or top-down approaches like COP.
Asked what role there is for climate science and the IPCC, Hulme noted that there has been some tinkering around the edges with the IPCC, but it continues on its own track. There is no political significance to that: another IPCC report will simply add to the complexity and uncertainty and will not make life easier for politicians.
Hulme wants to deemphasise the science: if we think science determines policy we play into the hands of those who say we can't have action because the science is uncertain, and also the hands of those who say that the science demands certain actions.
The interview closes with what I would describe as a significant pause. Hulme discusses the pressure on him to take a particular line on climate, first discussing a discussion with some green campaigners who harangued him for discussing uncertainties, and then goes on to discuss his conversations with his colleagues. There is what appears to be an almighty struggle, as he tries to conjure up a diplomatic form of words to describe the pressure he is under. Take a listen.