Blog powered by Typepad


Monday, March 26, 2007



From what I have read there are too many politicians giving their opinions on matters that they appear to know too little about. The debate about climate change is very muddle, with scientists and economists approaching the argument from completely different angles. From what I have read scientists and Lomborg do agree to an extent, the problem is with the approach each take. I agree with much of what Lomborg has written in the past, that there are other pressing issues, which will perhaps save more lives and be more worthwhile tackling instead of climate change. Either way it is worrying to see increasing talk amongst British politicians of unilateral action. To me, multilateral global agreements must be made for there to be any successful framework to try and tackle climate change and to avoid many of the possible economic problems that will be associated with it.


Be very suspicious of Bjorn Lomborg's claims regarding the costs of Kyoto. In his book "The Skeptical Environmentalist," Lomborg ran a scornful cost-benefit analysis of Kyoto based on 100 years of continuous implementation, when in reality the plan is only meant to last 10 years. The other 90 years he made up. I say that in Kyoto's fictional latter 90 years, Tinkerbell the magic faerie will wave her wand and make the plan cost nothing. My analysis is just as solidly grounded in facts as is Lomborg's, but is much nicer.

The comments to this entry are closed.