A week after ABC tried to boost 20/20's late-summer ratings with the quasi-apocalyptic "Last Days on Earth" that ranked global warming ahead of nuclear war, supervolcanic eruption and asteroid impact as the greatest threat to human existence, the Weekend Australian reports that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has revised downward its estimate on global warming in the next century.
To wit: in the worst case, earth will be warmer by three degrees Celsius in 2100. With significant reduction in greenhouse-gas emissions, it will be warmer by two degrees C. Total rise in sea level will be between 14 and 43 centimeters. Storm surges will be stronger, hurricanes and cyclones will be stronger, and some regions will become more arid.
On the other hand, Australia estimates that cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 50% by 2050 would result in a reduction of 20% in real wages of Australians. The article contains no estimate of the global economic impact of such a move.
So the question becomes whether one wants to cope with gradual, mild change to the environment or significant, centrally-planned restrictions on economic productivity. Given the legions of the world's poor who would be devastated by a long-term global recession brought on by governmentally enforced restrictions on economic activity, and given the ever-changing estimates of the actual impact of climate change, we'll take our chances on the weather.
3 comments:
And that great climatologist Al Gore said the oceans would rise 20 feet! It's all meaningless unless they include water vapor in the calculations. Even then, it's still a natural cycle, nothing we can significantly affect.
BTW- I watched "The Last Days on Earth" (don't ask me why--good grief!) and I'm kind of waiting for the robots to take over. Doh!
If the environment can gradually get warmer, you'd think that SWNID could too.
He can, but only one or two degrees.
Post a Comment