Environment

Economically Speaking Is Climate Change A Priority? by DAVID KESTENBAUM

December 15, 2009 Bjorn Lomborg, author of The Skeptical Environmentalist, is roaming the halls of the U.N. climate talks in Copenhagen. While Lomborg believes climate change is real, he thinks the approach being taken to fight it is doomed to failure. Lomborg also famously led a team of economists who ranked climate change low on a list of priorities when compared to things like combating disease. Needless to say, Lomborg is not a popular figure at the talks. Listen to the interview online

Dans son premier ouvrage – L’Écologiste sceptique, le véritable état de la planète1 –, Bjørn Lomborg analysait les évolutions et les données actuellement disponibles concernant le climat, la démographie, l’énergie ou encore la biodiversité, pour conclure, à rebours de la doxa environnementaliste, que la prospérité sans précédent de l’humanité à notre époque n’était pas menacée, malgré des déséquilibres réels et des problèmes sérieux, par un péril imminent.

A kritikusok szerint a lámpaoltásnak legfeljebb szimbolikus értelme van. A híres szkeptikus enviromentalista, Bjorn Lomborg pedig egyenesen azt állítja, hogy a sok gyertya, amely az egyórás elsötétítés alatt ég, több szén-dioxidot bocsát a levegőbe, mint az elektromos égők. 

Zgodnie z obiegową mądrością zachłannie zużywamy zasoby świata i biorąc pod uwagę możliwości Ziemi żyjemy ponad stan. Ten pesymizm i opowieść o grożącym upadku leży u podstaw całej niemal debaty o środowisku i często jest bardzo prosto sformułowana: ze względu na wyższy poziom życia i wzrost populacji do roku 2030 będziemy potrzebowali dwóch planet, żeby przeżyć. Gdyby dzisiaj wszyscy żyli na amerykańskim poziomie, potrzebowalibyśmy niemal pięciu planet. Jednak ta obiegowa mądrość jest całkowicie błędna. (...) 

According to conventional wisdom, we are voraciously using the world’s resources and living way beyond Earth’s means. This narrative of decline and pessimism underlies much of today’s environmental discourse, and is often formulated in a simple fashion: by 2030, we will need two planets to sustain us, owing to higher living standards and population growth. If everyone managed to live at American living standards today, we would need almost five planets. But this received wisdom is fundamentally wrong. (...) 

Bjørn Lomborg, Excerpt from the book "Stiamo Freschi" I paesi del Terzo mondo hanno moltissimi problemi urgenti da risolvere, come per esempio quasi 4 milioni di morti per denutrizione, 3 milioni per l'HIV/ AIDS 2,5milioni per l'inquinamento dell’aria degli ambienti sia interni sia esterni, più 2milioni per carenze nutrizionali (ferro, zinco e vitamina A), quasi 2 milioni per mancanza di acqua potabile.

THIS Saturday, the World Wildlife Fund wants everybody on the planet to switch off their lights for an hour in a "global election between Earth and global warming", where switching off the lights "is a vote for Earth". In Australia, where Earth Hour started, it evidently enjoys strong support from politicians, celebrities, corporate backers and the public. The efforts this Saturday certainly will be well-intentioned. Many of us worry about global warming and would like to be part of the solution.

Bjorn Lomborg said the event could actually increase emissions (...) 

Better to leave it off. Bjørn Lomborg: Stefan Rahmstorf is a respected climate change scientist but by labelling me a 'spin doctor' who 'fools the public' he shows weakness in his argument on sea level rises Bjørn Lomborg, Guardian, Monday 9 March 2009 12.58 GMT In an article in the Guardian last month, I criticised an effort by a group of scientists and activists to cast aside the consensus view of thousands of scientists from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The group is organising an emergency summit on global warming in Copenhagen this month.

I Danmark har vi mange mennesker, som vi anser for at være indflydelsesrige. Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Mærsk McKinney Møller og Per Stig Møller kan blandt andet nævnes.  Trods dette så har der i flere år i træk blot været én enkelt dansker på listerne over verdenens mest indflydelsesrige personer. Han er kendt for hans altid saglige og kritiske kommentarer, når der er debatter omkring global opvarmning. Os liberale har under slogans, som ”mest for vores penge”, nærmest taget ham til os, som et barn.