Get the facts straight
Published by 6PR
Dr. Bjorn Lomborg speaks with Adam Shand of 6PR Drive to discuss why it is so important to set smart development priorities and the myth around organic foods.
Published by The Daily Star
The project 'Bangladesh Priorities' set out to have a conversation on what is best for Bangladesh. In that spirit, I welcome the commentary from Nick Beresford of UNDP Bangladesh on September 29. His concerns merit a considered response.
Published by The Australian
With more than 17 million hectares devoted to growing certified organic produce — more than any other nation — Australia is a “green food” economic powerhouse.
Published by The Wall Street Journal
Once a year or so, journalists from major news outlets travel to the Marshall Islands, a remote chain of volcanic islands and coral atolls in the Pacific Ocean, to report in panicked tones that the island nation is vanishing because of climate change. Their dispatches are often filled with raw emotion and suggest that residents are fleeing atolls swiftly sinking into the sea.
Published by BBC More or Less
It is now a year since the UN set its new Sustainable Development Goals to try to make the world a better place. They include 17 goals and a massive 169 targets on subjects like disease, education and governance. But some people like Bjorn Lomborg are saying that there are just too many and they are too broad, and left like that will never achieve anything. Is he right? Is there a better way to make the world better and stop some countries lagging behind?
I had the privilege of meeting the President of Colombia to discuss priorities for the implementation of the UN's Sustainable Development Goals, last year. We had an excellent discussion about how to make the world a better place as well as achieving the most good for Colombia specifically.
Published by Star Tribune
In “Solar and wind are viable, not just ‘feel-good’ climate solutions” (Sept. 27), Jim Davidson made a Counterpoint to my recent arguments about green energy (“Feel-good solutions won’t solve climate change,” Sept. 22).
Davidson supports my championing of spending $100 billion a year on green energy R&D. He suggests that this is a new position. But I have in fact advocated it consistently for a decade, including in a front-page article in the British newspaper The Guardian in 2010.
Published by The Washington Post
The next administration must recognize not only that climate change is a real problem but also that we are not on course to solve it. The next president needs the courage to discard our current feel-good but ineffective solutions. Ending our reliance on the fossil fuels that have powered two centuries of economic growth will require an energy revolution.
Published by The Telegraph
This week has seen debate rage about whether the Hinkley Point deal represents good value. But there is another vital element of energy policy that is not being discussed. For one of the key benefits of the vote to leave the European Union is that Britain will not longer have to cooperate with overzealous regulations on shale gas extraction, or fracking, which has the potential to transform the energy market.
Published by Project Syndicate
The 2030 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals have among their objectives primary-school education for all children, jobs for all adults, and an end to hunger and poverty. These are noble aspirations – but very expensive. Can we really afford them all?
The OECD has estimated that meeting all 17 SDGs, which comprise 169 specific development targets, would cost $3.3-4.5 trillion annually – about the same as the United States’ 2016 federal budget, and far more than the nearly $132 billion spent globally on overseas development aid last year.