Er is goede hoop dat de klimaatconferentie in Parijs een nagenoeg globaal akkoord oplevert om de klimaatverandering tegen te gaan. De Deense statisticus Bjorn Lomborg vindt het te duur en te weinig.

Desde el 30 de noviembre hasta el 10 de diciembre los ecologistas y ciudadanos comunes estarán a la expectativa de que sus líderes logren un acuerdo lo suficientemente ambicioso y vinculante que permita mantener el calentamiento global por debajo de los 2 grados centígrados. De lo contrario el planeta de los humanos estaría en peligro. 

Paris will soon host the 21st global climate conference (November 30-December 11) — and environmentalists have high hopes that this time, negotiators will agree on a carbon-cutting treaty.

En preparación para la cumbre del clima de París (COP21) en diciembre, países ricos y organizaciones de desarrollo se esfuerzan por unirse a las filas de moda de los países donantes en “ayuda climática”. Esto significa decirles a las personas más desfavorecidas del mundo, que sufren de tuberculosis, malaria o malnutrición, que lo que realmente necesitan no es medicinas, mosquiteros o micronutrientes, sino un panel solar. Es una noticia terrible.

Los políticos del mundo tienen el diagnóstico correcto, pero proponen una medicina equivocada. En unos días cientos de ellos se reunirán en París, en la Conferencia de la ONU sobre Cambio Climático, para hablar sobre un problema real pero con propuestas de solución que no sólo no reducirán el calentamiento sino que multiplicarán la pobreza.

With leaders gathering in Paris later this month for a major climate summit, it is clear that our modern-day approach to climate change is backwards. We spend a massive amount of effort trying to make carbon too expensive and unappealing for the world to use. Instead, we need to make green energy much cheaper.

Our dependency on carbon-emitting fuels is overwhelming. The fact is that the world will not stop using fossil fuels for many decades. Despite all the excitement about green energy, globally we get a minuscule 0.4 percent of our energy from wind and solar panels.

The United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris later this month is being billed as an opportunity to save the planet. It is no such thing. As I show in a new peer-reviewed paper, even if successful, the agreement reached in Paris would cut temperatures in 2100 by just 0.05° Celsius. The rise in sea level would be reduced by only 1.3 centimeters.

I sidste uges blog fortalte jeg om Dharnai – en by i Indien som fik solceller fra Greenpeace, men som ville have ”rigtig strøm”. Altså strøm fra det centrale el-net, i Indien typisk produceret med kul, som både er langt mere stabilt, har større kapacitet og er tre gange billigere.

Kigger man isoleret på historien om Dharnai er den et tragikomisk eksempel på en naiv feel good-tilgang som ikke leverer, hvad den lover og hvad modtagerne så desperat ønsker.

Men Dharnai er ikke et isoleret tilfælde. 400 millioner mennesker i Indien lever uden adgang til strøm.

The United Nations climate conference in Paris starting Nov. 30 will get under way when most minds in the French capital will still understandably be on the recent terror attacks. But for many of the 40,000 attendees, the goal is to ensure that climate change stays on the global economic agenda for the next 15 years.

My peer-reviewed research paper sparked an emotional response from environmentalist Joe Romm. His complaint is that I am overly pessimistic about Paris. In his customary style of ad hominem attacks and fervid language, he calls me a "widely debunked confusionist", labels my research "nonsense", a "lie" and "intellectually indefensible", and suggests his supporters use social media to go after the journal that published it.

Setting aside Mr. Romm's insults and attempts at provocation, I'd like to respond to the actual assertions.