The heat, Europe and the habit of always feeling guilty

A: As the heat sets in, the trial of Europe begins anew. Is it thirty-eight degrees? It’s our car’s fault. Is a forest on fire? It’s the steak’s fault. Is there a drought? It’s the fault of holidays taken by plane. Every summer turns into a moral tribunal in which European citizens must confess to living too much, consuming too much and travelling too much.

B: And every summer, a section of the right reacts as if climate change were a Brussels invention. Global warming is real; it is largely driven by human emissions and is making many heatwaves more intense. This is not self-flagellation: it is reality.

A: The reality is somewhat different. Europe accounts for only a limited proportion of global emissions; it has imposed strict standards and made factories, cars and buildings more efficient. Yet it continues to portray itself as the main culprit.

B: Because it industrialised before the others and has a historical responsibility. We cannot tell China or India: ‘We developed using coal and oil; you cannot do the same.’

A: But historical responsibility cannot become a life sentence. If we close a European factory and import the same product from a country that uses more coal, we haven’t saved the planet: we’ve simply exported emissions and jobs.

B: That’s a valid point. Moving production outside Europe improves the statistics, but not the atmosphere. The answer isn’t to abandon the transition: it’s to make it smarter.

A: And less punitive. A section of the environmentalist movement has turned it into a catalogue of sacrifices: fewer flights, less meat, fewer cars, less air conditioning. As if the fate of the planet depended on the guilt of an Italian family.

B: Individual behaviour matters, but it is no substitute for industrial policy. You cannot decarbonise a continent with sermons alone. We need electricity grids, research, renewables, nuclear power where possible, energy-efficient buildings and new technologies.

A: And it is worth remembering that Europe alone is not enough. If it reduces its emissions to zero whilst the rest of the world continues to increase theirs, the result will still be insufficient. Climate policy must also be industrial, commercial and technological.

B: However, the heat mainly affects the elderly, outdoor workers and those living in poorly insulated homes. Climate is also a social issue.

A: That’s precisely why the moralising against air conditioning irritates me. On certain days, it’s not a luxury, but a means of protecting one’s health. Politicians should ensure a reliable energy supply, not make people feel guilty for trying to protect themselves.

B: On this point, the environmental movement needs to change its language. We need energy-efficient appliances, better buildings and cities designed to withstand the heat. Simply saying ‘switch everything off’ is a classist response.

A: We should be talking much more about adaptation: trees, shade, water, fire prevention, resilient networks, well-prepared hospitals, schools and air-conditioned public transport. For years, this word has seemed almost taboo.

B: On the other hand, adaptation and mitigation must go hand in hand. Reducing emissions limits future warming; adaptation protects people from the effects that are already being felt.

A: When a heatwave strikes, however, the discussion immediately shifts from the weather to the question of blame. People look for the usual culprits: motorists, tourists, livestock farmers.

B: And some on the right make the opposite mistake: they turn every environmentalist excess into an excuse to downplay the problem. Just because the left argues a true point poorly, that doesn’t make it false.

A: I agree. Climate change is not a figment of the imagination. But not every crisis can be turned into an indictment of the European way of life. Europe is not blameless, but it is also one of the few major players that has actually reduced its emissions.

B: We should shift our focus from blame to accountability. The former assigns blame; the latter measures results and selects the most effective tools.

A: The question is not how much we must suffer to appear virtuous, but which policy actually reduces global emissions without destroying our productive capacity.

B: And what policy protects those already suffering from the effects of the heat, without turning the transition into a privilege for those who can afford it?

A: Fewer symbolic restrictions and more innovation.

B: More responsibility and less moralising.

A: What about when it’s 40 degrees?

B: We’re protecting people, preparing our cities, producing cleaner energy and asking others to do their bit too.

A: Without turning every thermometer into a confessional.

B: And without turning every environmentalist exaggeration into an excuse for inaction.

The EU now accounts for around 6 per cent of global CO₂ emissions and has reduced its emissions more than other major blocs. It cannot simply wash its hands of the matter; what is needed is greater responsibility, technology and adaptation, but less self-blame. Two panellists discuss this