Copenhagen Consensus Center

For the purposes of this conversation let’s agree that global warming exists, and let’s not argue about whether it is, as those who use big words say, “anthropomorphic”  “anthropogenic” or, as you and I might say, “man made”.

Bjorn Lomborg doesn’t focus so much on the causes of rising sea levels; he proposes alternative ways to address the effects. In his latest Newsletter he explains why he disagrees with the conventional reactions to the devastation caused by Hurricane Sandy and advises what should be done to avoid future catastrophes.

His points are, among others:

  • The goal of reducing carbon emissions is far too costly for future generations to afford and won’t make a timely difference anyway. The benefits don’t justify the costs.
  • Because of those costs and the delayed effect it is, in his words, “morally irresponsible” to go about protecting coastlines by CO2 reductions. 
  • Carbon cuts won’t be effective for 50 to 100 years, during which time there will be much human suffering that could be avoided.
  • There are better, more practical, and quicker acting ways to address rising sea levels that attempting to reduce CO2 levels.
  • Prominent “environmental experts” such as Robert Redford and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg attract lots of attention but have it wrong.

Those who doubt Mr. Lomborg’s position will find comfort in several comments posted with the newsletter. 

A blog from Wendell Cox for the National Center for Policy Analysis on California’s Global Warming Solutions Act is an example of what Mr. Lonborg is worried about. The report questions whether cap and trade is a cost-effective way to reduce carbon emissions.   

An appropriate musical interlude ?

 

It is difficult to resist shameless promotion of natural gas, especially when to do so makes sense.  Here is an article by Bjorn Lomborg,   A Fracking Good Story . Mr Lomborg is is an adjunct professor at the Copenhagen Business School, and founder and director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center and is known as a global warming skeptic, not because he denies the phenomenon, but because he has alternative ideas about how to address it. And he isn’t from Texas or Louisiana!! 

Among other points in this article:

  • U. S. CO2 emissions have dropped 20 percent despite adding 57 million energy consumers.
  • Overall, U.S. emissions have been reduced by 400 to 500 megatonnes a year, which is twice the total effect of the Kyoto Protocol on the rest of the world.
  • Wind turbines in the United States reduce emissions by only one-tenth the amount natural gas does. The European Union, for example, has invested over $20 billion annually into solar and wind energy, but its per capita CO2 emission have fallen by less than half of what the United States has achieved.
  • Natural gas emits 45 percent less carbon per energy unit than coal.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBDF04fQKtQ