Energy

In the wake of Harvey, Irma and Maria, there is intense pressure to use hurricanes to galvanize support toward carbon emissions cuts.

This is unfortunate. The pundits have convinced more than half of Americans of something that is factually wrong.

Hurricane Harvey had no sooner struck in August of this year than the pundits jumped in:

A Politico commentator wrote, “We knew this would happen, decades ago.” Joe Romm at ThinkProgress warned ominously, “Harvey is exactly the kind of off-the-charts hurricane we can expect to see more often because of climate change.”

When famine strikes, governments and international donors step in with life-saving aid. And rich countries give more than $130 billion each year not only to feed the starving, but also to build crucial infrastructure and reduce gaps in access to education, health care, and clean water and sanitation worldwide.

All of this is vitally important. But one of the most powerful investments the development community could make is not in today’s problems, but in research that will address tomorrow’s challenges.

Politiker bör inte applåderas för att de säger sådant som låter trevligt, utan när de är beredda att genomdriva politik som har riktig effekt. Statsvetaren Bjørn Lomborg i Elvakaffet om hur man hjälper regeringar att få ut mest effekt för pengarna, det problematiska med orealistiska mål, om kritiken han får från sina motståndare och varför världen tveklöst kommer att vara en bättre plats om 20 år.

Al Gore wdał się niedawno w wiele mówiącą sprzeczkę z dziennikarzem. Ross Clark ze „Spectatora” chciał spytać go o podnoszenie się poziomu wód morza w Miami, sugerowane w jego nowym filmie “An Inconvenient Sequel”. Dziennikarz zaczął wyjaśniać, że konsultował się z specjalistą w kwestii poziomu morza z Florida International University, Shimonem Wdowinskim. Gore odpowiedział: “Nigdy o nim nie słyszałem – czy jest negacjonistą?” A potem zapytał dziennikarza: „Czy pan jest negacjonistą?”

The concept of trade-offs has become unfashionable. Politicians around the world like to pretend that their choices will bring us nothing but superlative benefits.

Nowhere is this whitewashing more pervasive or accepted than in climate change. There is a prevalent, comforting notion that we can have our cake and eat it too: that cutting carbon need not involve financial sacrifice.

Así es como se ve el cambio climático”, declaró rápidamente CNN sobre el devastador huracán Harvey. Poco después, los medios de comunicación y los políticos decían exactamente lo mismo sobre los huracanes Irma y María.

Es peligroso precipitarse y relacionar los desastres con el cambio climático, porque nos orienta hacia políticas que tendrán poco o ningún efecto en la reducción de la devastación futura.

The concept of trade-offs has become unfashionable. Politicians around the world like to pretend that their choices will bring us nothing but superlative benefits.

Nowhere is this whitewashing more pervasive or accepted than in climate change. There is a prevalent, comforting notion that we can have our cake and eat it too: that cutting carbon need not involve financial sacrifice.

"Climate change has been a key issue at the United Nations General Assembly this week. Meetings at the U.N. about the topic have been taking place during a season of calamitous weather events, including a series of devastating hurricanes.

While he believes that world leaders cannot ignore climate change, Bjorn Lomborg, president of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, says he is concerned that precious resources are too often squandered on ineffective solutions, and that aid money could be spent on better interventions that do the most social good."

This is what global warming looks like, opinion pieces quickly declared in both Politico and CNN about devastating Hurricane Harvey. A week later, news media around the globe and politicians were saying the exact same thing about Hurricane Irma.

Jumping the gun on linking disasters to climate change is dangerous. It points us toward policies that will have little to no effect at reducing future devastation. 

The science is clear but also nuanced: Climate change will worsen some extreme weather events, and it will improve others.

Så här års är det svårt att undkomma hettan, och då talar vi bara om medierna. ”Klimatändringar gör dödliga värmeböljor vanligare”, förklarar CNN. ”Extrema värmeböljor kommer att förändra våra liv. Vi är oförberedda”, varnar Time. Somliga historier är mer sensationsdoftande än andra, men det finns ett gemensamt tema: farliga värmeböljor kommer att öka i antal och grymhet till följd av jordens uppvärmning.