David Fickling's April 28 column “Climate targets must be realistic and demand the impossible” appears to be well grounded to support his agenda for a beautiful and sustaining planet. However, I cannot support his thesis that a minuscule increase in carbon dioxide and warmer planet are bad things, just ask a farmer.
Our economy is robust and energy dependent; solar cells and windmills, even with subsidies, will not fulfill our barest needs.
Taxing the use of fossil fuels to promote electric vehicles and then not having sufficient power generation to run them without rationing is foolish.
Look at what havoc is being wracked upon our Earth in the headlong search for materials to make batteries to run the electric vehicles; and store power from solar and wind to use it off hours when it is needed. As well as when after 10 or 20 years when the useful life of batteries or windmills ends, will we be able to recycle the materials or just junk them?
As an engineer and physicist, my science does not agree with your claims. I suggest you take off your rose-colored glasses and think things through anew.