Bjorn Lomborg, author of The Skeptical Environmentalist, explains that more polar bears can be saved and deaths reduced from malaria through targeted direct interventions rather than initiatives under the Kyoto Protocol.
Largely accepting the IPCC scenarios and costing, the Professor claims:
1. Kyoto would save one polar bear a year. Outlawing the hunting of polar bears could save up to 500 polar bears a year.
2. Kyoto would reduce the risk of malaria by 0.2 percent. Through an investment in mosquito nets and medication the incidence of malaria could be reduced by almost 50 percent within a decade.
Interesting Lomborg also estimates that by 2050 global warming will cause almost 400,000 more heat-related deaths each year. But 1,800,000 million fewer people will die from cold.
Read the complete article entitled ‘Chill Out: Stop fighting over global warming here’s the smart way to attack it’ published in the Washington Post on October 7, 2007 here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/05/AR2007100501676.html
And what about someone volunteering to review Bjorn Lomborg’s book ‘Cool it’?
http://www.amazon.com/Cool-Skeptical-Environmentalists-Global-Warming/dp/0307266923
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD has worked in industry and government. She is currently researching a novel technique for long-range weather forecasting funded by the B. Macfie Family Foundation.
Travis says
October 21, 2007 at 9:42 pmSo to 1. and 2. why have we not done it yet? Coz we don’t bloody care about bears or Africans, but dengue fever in Sydney or toppled Surfers Paradise sky rises make us scratch our heads and reconsider.
SJT says
October 21, 2007 at 9:48 pmThat old Kyoto lie again. Kyoto was initial plan to get together a working, international protocol and system for reducing emissions, so that when the next round of negotiations takes place, a global system with more ambitious targets can be implemented.
Of course Lomborg already knew all that, so why he tells these lies I have no idea.
Woody says
October 22, 2007 at 8:09 amKyota was an “initial plan?” Isn’t it funny how the “real reason” for something changes when its proponents find that it didn’t accomplish what was claimed?
Winston Smith says
October 22, 2007 at 9:17 amYeah weve seen that in the Iraq War and a number of other US “initiatives”.
SJT says
October 22, 2007 at 9:48 amWoody
the plan right from the start was for a multi stage implementation. Nothing was changed half way through. No, correct that, the estimation of those hoping for countries to sign up to Kyoto and implement it was changed from optimism to pessimism.
Green Davey Gam Esq. says
October 22, 2007 at 12:39 pmNow Bjorn Lomborg – there’s an intelligent fellow. We greenies need a more thinkers, less parrots.
SJT says
October 22, 2007 at 2:00 pmHe’s intelligent, Davey, but he’s wrong.
SJT says
October 22, 2007 at 2:01 pmI woke up to Lomborg when I read his book, and he claimed that statistically, Australia has no water problems. It just shows how shallow and superficial his analysis can be. All he did was average the rainfall for the country across the population.
louis hissink says
October 22, 2007 at 7:17 pmSJT,
I live in Halls Creek and we do not have a water problem.
Or are you referring to modelled water problems?
Green Davey Gam Esq. says
October 23, 2007 at 6:24 pmWestern Australia has a thousand years of water in the Yaragadee Aquifer. The rest of Australia is just an appendage anyway. Let them flee to Tasmania, or Aotearoa.