mike | Shared With: Everyone - Oct 30 2007 | video, climate change, environment, economics
click to playExcellent video about Global Climate Change risk of inaction. But, I don't agree with the analysis for several reasons:
- The cost of action is greater than he portrays. Column "A" includes massive world-wide deaths through starvation and exposure.
- Column "A" has no "smiley face": outcome. Even if we are "right", the scale of economic sacrifice is paid on both row 1 and row 2 -> he'd avoiding saying that though I'm sure he knows it's true (this was just dishonest on his part).
- Column "B" worst-case scenario is not as bad as he portrays it. The effects of global temperature increase are likely those we can accommodate - and some of those effects are actually GOOD!
- Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, we may not have ANYTHING we can actually do to significantly reduce the human output of CO2 emissions. Our real choice is more like "how much should we spend to marginally slow the increase of human emissions of greenhouse gases over the next 100 years". There is no plan that can actually create significant reductions that will have ANY effect (short of mass executions/sterilization of humans).
Related Content from Around Faves
climate change
-
delay delay delay. message to world leaders: we've already delayed too much!!
1 FaverViewed: 4 TimesQuoted: Among the chief barriers to a comprehensive deal in Copenhagen was Congress’s inability to enact climate and energy legislation that sets binding targets on greenhouse gases in the U.S. Without such a commitment, other nations are loath to make their own pledges.
- mohit - Jan 01 20071 FaverViewed: 1 Time
- cwjones - Jun 12 20071 FaverViewed: 3 Times
