James Lovelock: You Ask The Questions

You are often described as a "green guru" and many environmentalists see you as an inspiration but do you see yourself as a scientist or as an environmental campaigner? COLIN STEVENSON, Colchester, Essex

Thank you for asking your question. I am a green but not a campaigner, and a scientist, not a guru. As a scientist, I am more a general practitioner in a world where nearly all scientists are specialists.

What should we do with all this nuclear waste that we do not know how to keep safe? IVOR HUGHES, via email

There is more nonsense and downright lies told about nuclear waste than any other topic. To start with, there is very little of it; it is far, far less dangerous than the carbon dioxide waste that will, if we don't take care, kill nearly all of us. Much is made of the fact that it will still be there in a thousand years; what nonsense, we are lucky that it decays at all. If it were like mercury waste, which is equally deadly, it would be there for ever. Incidentally, why are there not government commissions for the disposal of mercury or carbon dioxide waste?

Why did you say that you would be happy to bury nuclear waste in your back garden? BOB ANDERSON, Islington

I would be happy to have the nuclear authorities build a concrete pit on my land and put some high-level nuclear waste in it. It gives off heat that could be used for hot water and central heating. It would be entirely safe and a waste not to use it.

Have your theories been shaped by ancient eastern philosophy? PAUL LEWIN, via email

Not consciously. My theories do seem more acceptable in Japan than in the West.

What have you got against wind farms? GRIFF PETTIT, Richmond, Surrey

My main objection is that climate change is likely to make supplies of food and fuel from abroad increasing expensive and ultimately unobtainable. We will need, as we did in the Second World War, all spare land for growing food. To use land for wind farms, or worse for biofuels, could make us appreciably hungrier. But one nuclear power station produces continuously as much electricity as 3,200 1kw wind turbines.

Is humanity doomed? If so, when? KEVIN FROST, Woolwich

I hope not, since I have nine grandchildren. We are in for a tough time during this century and beyond but we are the toughest of animals and, more than this, we know how to adapt to change. Climate change could be deadly by the middle of the century.

Should we ban cars? And air travel? RAUL LOPEZ, Manchester

We may have to before long. It has happened before, after the Suez war in the 1950s.

I would like to do something apart from buying energy-saving devices to reduce climate change. How can we as individuals do anything meaningful? ADAM HERRIOTT, London

It is most unlikely that anything we do as individuals or even as a nation will significantly reduce climate change. The UK produces only 2 per cent of global emissions. You have to ask, will any gesture we make stop the Chinese, for example, building a giant coal-burning power station every five days? What we need to do is sustain our civilised way of life on these islands and for this we need a safe and secure supply of electricity, and to make sure that we have enough land that can be farmed to feed us all. This, and answering the agonising question - how many more can we let live here - are surely enough to keep most of us busy.

What is one thing that we should all do now for the sake of our children's generation? ISABELLA DUPONT, Tufnell Park, London

I was married and we started our family in London during the Second World War. Many thought us irresponsible but we were glad that we did. So I would say, make sure that your children's generation know that there is a future for them and for humanity. It will be bad and many will die but that is no reason for despair.

Do you despair of politicians? SUSAN GREEN, Ipswich

No, I think that politicians have the worst of jobs and it will not get better.

Is Tony Blair doing enough to combat climate change? S AHMED, Brighton

Tony Blair spoke strongly in favour of the Kyoto and Montreal proposals. This was the right thing to do, but Kyoto was hopelessly inadequate as a way to deflect climate change. He has listened to the wise words of the Government's chief scientific adviser, Sir David King, and acted on them in spite of strong opposition within the Labour Party.

How do you view the problem of population control in nations given that it is a no-no to argue against immigration and population control because one is automatically derided as a racist? MICHAEL BARNES, via email

When Malthus first warned of the overpopulation of the Earth in 1800, there were only one billion of us. He has been derided ever since, yet I think he was right. One billion is about the right number and I fear that we will reach it not by our own choice but by attrition.

Is there any hope for our grandchildren with what is happening to the Earth now? ZARA BROWNING, Manchester

As I said in answer to Kevin Frost, I surely hope so but it may be a tough life enlivened by excitement and fear.

Why did you decide to become an independent scientist rather than attaching yourself to a mainstream academic institute that could have given you more credibility? ROSIE HALL, Cambridge

Because I am an obstinate sod and could not bear the thought of the tramlines of security in a steady job carrying me to retirement and the grave. Who says that I lack credibility?

Is there any point in reducing our domestic energy consumption when nations such as India, China and the US are failing to act in a meaningful way? HELENA DAVIDSON, via email

Probably not, it would merely be trying to set an example that others were unlikely to follow. The important thing is to make sure that we have a secure supply of electricity and food when supplies from abroad grow scarce.

Richard Dawkins of Selfish Gene fame once tore into your Gaia theory, essentially saying that it could not evolve by natural selection and that it was a rather romantic view of the Earth. Was he right? SALLY MARSTON, York

No he was not. Although, when Dawkins said that there was no way for global altruism to arise by natural selection, he was correct within the context of Darwinism. We now know, and most eminent biologists accept, that it is the whole Earth system that evolves, not the organisms alone and the self-regulation of the climate and chemistry are emergent. This is what is meant by Gaia theory or, as the Americans call it, Earth System Science.

As a father of two young children, how can I prepare them for the realities of life in a post-global warming world? LEE DARRINGTON, Birmingham

The post-global warming world, perhaps 100 years from now, may well be like that of the early Eocene period, 55 million years ago. At that time, most of life had moved to the Arctic where conditions were almost tropical. Your children, if they are young, might live long enough to see it but the stages in between will be the hard times. Once the Earth settles down in a hot state, the survivors will have time to adapt.

What is your proudest achievement, and why? MOHAMMED SARWAR, Edinburgh

Keeping trust in Gaia for more than 40 years despite continuous opposition from most scientists. It was worth it because now it is accepted.

For the past 10 years, I have planted thousands of trees, self-sustained with an organic garden, used fossil fuels sparingly and lived as simply as I could. Should I have smoked, eaten battery animal flesh and gone for the billion dollar income ? DONALD DRINKWATER, via email

I did the same and planted 20,000 trees. It was a mistake but a needed one because we learn a lot from our mistakes. Like you, my wife and I try to be good and green, but it is only one step on the way to wisdom.

Considering the incalculable complexity of the Earth's climate mechanisms, how can any numeric model trying to explain climate change represent scientific fact rather than over-simplistic hypothesis? DAN PAGET, via email

There are few things in the universe more complex than you or me. There is no complete mathematical model of a human and there never will be but there are good physiological models of temperature and blood pressure regulation analogous to Earth models. Despite this we can discuss, make love or trade with other people. We have to learn to know the Earth in a similar way.

Why does almost everybody believe in global warming when nobody argues with the fact that global temperatures have risen by less than one degree in more than a century? RICHARD ASHTON, Maidstone

Good question. One degree globally is much more locally. The further north or south you are the greater the change. That is why in a few decades you will be able to sail a boat to the North Pole even though globally the temperature may have risen only two degrees.

I wish to buy a house. In 20 years' time, I will be looking to release some equity from it to supplement my state pension. Is there a minimum altitude above sea level below which I would be unwise to purchase a property? ANDREW RANSHAW, via email

The sea level is unlikely to rise more than two or three feet by the end of the century, but storm surges could flood up to 20 feet temporarily. The Environment Agency and insurance companies have maps that show where flooding is likely. I would think that anywhere 30 feet above these official high water maps would be safe from flooding.

How do you have fun? Or are you too depressed by the looming end of the world to enjoy yourself? MARK TAYLOR, Liverpool

I am an optimist and always have been. I remember waiting for heart surgery 24 years ago with a sense more of adventure than fear.

What career did you dream of as a child, and why? DEE GRANT, Toronto

From as young as I can recall I wanted to be a scientist. I was always curious about the world and soon realised that quite often I would have to find the answers myself.

A month ago I arrived home to find more than 100 flying ants in our kitchen. I located an ants' nest under a unit as the source and eliminated it. a) Was killing the ants best for our planet? b) How can the planet be a "self-regulating being" when it seems to have a built-in rule that different life forms must kill each other to survive? GORDON MUTCH, Surbiton

Yes, they are a nuisance. We have them building nests in our cob walls most years. The evolution of our self-regulating Earth requires natural selection of the winners from the losers.

You support nuclear power as civilisation's defence against destruction. From the point of view of Gaia, what is the benefit of human civilisation's continued existence? GEORGE HOSKIN, Cambridge

After 3.5 billion years of blindness our planet can, through our eyes, at last see itself from space in all its beauty. This alone justifies humans, but obviously there is a price because we are harmful as well.

When I was a child it was the bomb, now it is global warming. Is it human nature to imagine that disaster is about to befall us? PHYLLIS MCPHEE, Battersea

Humans have lived through about eight vast climate changes when the Earth moved from an ice age to an interglacial age, like now. Perhaps the persistent legends of the flood are part of it and, if so, we have reason to be anxious.

Were you saddened by the ferocious backlash against you when you voiced your support for nuclear power in 2004? JEAN D'ESCRIVAIN, Kingston

Yes I was. But I suppose it came from the real fear that most of us had of nuclear war.

What is your favourite place on earth, and why? ANNA-RITA BARBIERI, Dulwich

Where I live here in Devon. We have made it our favourite place by letting it go back to Gaia and by giving it away to our charity, GAIA, so that we could not now sell it and go somewhere else.