1 / 12

Class 17: Lomborg

Class 17: Lomborg. P. Brian Fisher CofC : POLS 405 Spring 2010. Vid. Lomborg , “ Our Priorities For Saving the World ” (17m). Lomborg’s Arguments on Temperature Increase. Global Mean Temp is projected to increase 4.7°C by 2100; however, no one lives at this temperature.

joshwa
Télécharger la présentation

Class 17: Lomborg

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Class 17: Lomborg P. Brian Fisher CofC: POLS405 Spring 2010

  2. Vid • Lomborg, “Our Priorities For Saving the World” (17m)

  3. Lomborg’s Arguments on Temperature Increase • Global Mean Temp is projected to increase 4.7°C by 2100; however, no one lives at this temperature. • Lomborg: True, there will be more heat deaths from GCC, but there will also be fewer cold deaths (more people die from cold than heat). • Many deaths are from heat-island effects in cities, and we can alleviate them, by planting more trees (to create more moisture) and by creating more reflective surfaces

  4. Lomborg on Kyoto • Temperature decrease from Kyoto measures would be 0.1°F by 2050 and 0.3°F by 2100—this is insignificant • Without a Post-Kyoto agreement, the effects from the 2008-2012 would only be reduce temp for 7 days. • Costs: could be as high as $180b/yr (based on 2008 data) or 0.5% global GDP • Lomborg: World will get more efficient as technology increases (e.g. In US, avg car has “improved its mileage by 67% since 1973.”

  5. CAFE Standards 1978-2006

  6. Lomborg’s Costs of GCC • Cutting carbon dioxide costs about $20 per ton and it only does $2 worth of good. • McKinnsey Cost Abatement: They concluded that we could stabilize at 450ppm at zero net cost. • At 450ppm, peaking now, would likely result in temp increase of less than 3°C, and most likely about 2.5°C • Lomborgest that to stabilize at 2.7°C would require $84t. • Benefits wouldn’t outpace costs until 2250.

  7. Lomborg’s Proposal • Massive investments in R&D • Commit 0.05% of GDP • Should be enough to keep temp from increasing beyond 5°F (from today). • Avoid emission cuts—waste of $$ • b/c “global warming damages run about 1% GDP, while cost is at 2% GDP • Stern: Cost is 1% GDP while benefits are 20% (giving increasing costs of inaction)

  8. Evidence suggests… • 1. Understanding of GCC is shaped by exaggerated accounts by media • 2. we are overly obsessed with regulating CO2—we should consider the positive effects from increased warming • 3. GCC is not the only issue we need to tackle. There are other more important priorities.

  9. Other Issues and Facts Every year… • 4m die from malnutrition • $12b could halve the deaths • 3m from HIV/AIDS • 2.5m from air pollution • 2m from lack of clean drinking water • 1m from malaria • $13b would halve the # of deaths.

  10. Global Priority List from Lomborg’s Copenhagen Consesus

  11. Millennium Development Goals • Goal 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger • Goal 2: Achieve universal primary education • Goal 3: Promote gender equality and empower women • Goal 4: Reduce child mortality • Goal 5: Improve maternal health • Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases • Goal 7: Ensure environmental sustainability • Goal 8: Develop a global partnership for development

More Related