Alan Rudge

Credentials

Background

Alan W. Rudge is an electrical engineer and a member of the academic advisory council of UK climate science denial think tank the Global Warming Policy Foundation.⁴

He is perhaps best known for losing a £1000 bet on the extent of climate change in 2016 to Cambridge University academic Chris Hope [editor’s note: Chris Hope is the father of DeSmog UK’s editor, Mat Hope].⁵

Rudge is also a member of the Royal Society, the founding chairman and subsequent president of the ERA Foundation, a British engineering-focused organisation, and a former member of the government’s Scientific Advisory Committee. He is also former deputy chief executive at British Telecommunications (BT).⁶

Rudge is also a trustee and chairman of Civitas, a British education charity based at 55 Tufton Street, home to a small network of pro-Brexit, anti-regulation and climate sceptic think tanks.⁷

Stance on Climate Change

May 2013

In an ERA Foundation lecture, Rudge called for the repeal of the UK’s 2008 Climate Change Act, which he argues “is acting directly against the economic interests of the nation.”⁸

November 9, 2010

Rudge has supported the argument that because the UK is responsible for “only 2 percent” of global emissions, any action taken at home won’t help tackle climate change, according to a summary of his talk at an All Party Parliamentary Engineering Group debate.⁹

On renewables, Rudge argued wind power is “not practical” and that solar power is “too expensive.” Instead he favours shale gas and nuclear power.¹⁰ ¹¹

Key Quotes

January 2016

After losing a bet on climate change, he told the Times:¹²

“You could say I was the mug for taking the bet. I feel a bit stupid about it. Lucky Chris Hope — and a lesson for all who would gamble on the planet’s unpredictable weather to look carefully at the terms before signing up!”

May 2013

Speaking to the ERA Foundation he said:¹³

“The 2008 Climate Change Act was conceived during a period of great alarm over the consequences of man-made Global Warming. The Act was intended to reduce carbon emissions and thereby save the planet from imminent catastrophic overheating. However, in practice it does nothing of the sort. It is more about dogma and posturing than reducing carbon emissions. It is also evident that the science upon which it was based had rather more uncertainties and was less settled than was being mooted at the time.”

May 29, 2010

Rudge was one of the leaders of a petition to the Royal Society to rewrite it’s official position on climate change. He told The Times:¹⁴ ¹⁵

“I think the Royal Society should be more neutral and welcome credible contributions from both sceptics and alarmists alike. There is a lot of science to be done before we can be certain about climate change and before we impose upon ourselves the huge economic burden of cutting emissions.”

“One of the reasons people like myself are willing to put our heads above the parapet is that our careers are not at risk from being labelled a denier or flat-Earther because we say the science is not settled. The bullying of people into silence has unfortunately been effective,” Rudge continued.

Rudge refused to name any other of the signatories of the petition.