On Tuesday November 28, Environment Secretary David Miliband joined Jeremy to discuss Climate Change.
There was only time for Mr Miliband to answer a handful of your questions during the programme, but he agreed to answer an addititional selection of questions from listeners exclusively for the Radio 2 website. Here then are a random selection of your questions together with the minister's responses:
Q: Why are the government not putting more pressure on car manufacturers to produce vehicles that do 150 miles/gallon? (Steve Newman, Bury St Edmunds)
A: This is decided on an EU wide basis. There are voluntary targets at the moment for the manufacturers and the UK has made clear that we are ready to negotiate for these to be superceded by mandatory targets.
Q:I think the government has failed to take into account the scale of the problem. Simply reducing and taxing people more will not solve the problem. If you look at the melting of the polar caps, glacial melting and changing global weather patterns, the irreversible may already be happening! Take the gulf stream for example, the southward flow has dropped by almost 50%. I think Kyoto has seen countries justifying more emissions and private companies making money from it. (Stephen Mckeown)
A: Sorry you don't think we have smelt the coffee but we are trying to engineer a major shift for this country and to be part of a major global shift. Kyoto has not been a joke - remember our greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced by more than double the Kyoto target (c.25%).
Q: Only two weeks ago I travelled to Germany in my 4.0litre SUV. I did this because it was cheaper to do that than anything thing else I could find including flying and taking the train! How can the government expect us to leave our cars at home when other modes of transport are so expensive? (Robert Megicks)
A: Good point about cost - the policy in London of cheaper bus/tube fares by Oyster card has worked.
Q: Why don't we turn off every other streetlight from midnight to five in the morning? (Robert Megicks)
A: No one has ever suggested that to me. Let me look into how the energy is generated.
Q: Energy companies have not taken up wind power universally because they are inefficient and do not produce a great enough amount of energy. Why on earth is the government harnessing tidal power or river power (which will have little impact on the surroundings, unlike wind energy)? (Joanna Seward, Manchester)
A: Wind is not the only answer - it is part of the answer. And we are investing in tidal - for example £4m project off the Cornwall coast. We are not ignoring "permanent renewables sources" - in fact by 2008 £1 billion a year will be supporting them through the Renewables Obligation on the power companies.
Q: Instead of building new nuclear power stations, why not spend the money on a national scheme to fit solar panels on every single house in the country? Think of all the new jobs created by this and the cost savings to pensioners. (John Taylor)
A: At the moment the science on solar suggests it is less cost effective than other sources. The point about nuclear is not that it is THE answer, but it can provide baseload (at the moment around 17% of electricity).
Q: Why are bike spaces so limited on trains whilst first class compartments are often virtually empty? Strip out half the first class compartments, fit out for bikes and offer fare reductions for cyclists - this should get more people out of theircars. (Dr Robin Bedford)
A: Interesting point. Don't know. Will try and find out.
Q: Why can't we burn more rape seed oil instead of diesel. I've read about the planting of rape seed on mass instead of farmer’s subsidies for fallow landand thus being able to provide masses of bio fuel? Also I believe that bio fuels are carbon neutral. (Mike Maynard)
A: Bio fuels are important for the future. Government has said that 5% of all fuel sold on forecourts by 2008 must be bio fuel and we are looking at potential for doubling this requirement.
Q: If global warming is as bad as the government says why don't they do something positive - like banning patio heaters or supermarket plastic bags? (Jeff Gregory, Carshalton)
A: Amazingly the evidence suggests that the carbon cost of paper bags is greater than for plastic. Strange but true.
Q: What is this government doing to stop the eradication of the rain forests which help in the reduction of the CO2 in the atmosphere? (Ian Easton)
A: Really good point - 18% of greenhouse gases come from deforestation. We need a) to work with sovereign national governments within their own countries e.g. Brazil, b) dedicate resource for sustainable forestry. This is what Gordon Brown is trying to lead with the German government.
Q: As a 4x4 owner I ride a motorbike to work during the week. But I have this vehicle to tow my caravan in this country. I have never been abroad; therefore can I offset my carbon emissions from flying against running my 4x4? (Dave Fothergill)
A: The simple thing about global warming is that a tonne of emissions anywhere are a threat across the globe, and a reduction in any industry is equally valuable (for the same type of gas). So the basic answer is yes.
