The publication of Bjørn Lomborg's meticulously researched tome The Sceptical Environmentalist in 1998 shocked the environmental movement.
Supported by 2930 footnotes and a bibliography that extended to 70 pages, Lomborg clinically examined the grand environmental issues of the day against the scientific evidence.
While far from complacent, his analysis demonstrates that cataclysms are not imminent. In fact, at least among richer countries, air and water are getting cleaner, forests are expanding, energy supply is getting cheaper and very few species have been recorded as becoming extinct.
In poorer countries, too, the problems have been exaggerated and also can be abated if those countries adopt policies that favour economic growth.
Remember the alarmists' panic about the decline in sperm counts, claims that we're running out of space for waste dumps, the hole in the ozone layer, acid rain? Lomborg shows how many of the save-the-world solutions of environmentalists were tilting at non-existent problems and would have no effect other than wasting money.
Much of his work looks at tomorrow's problems. He accepts that global warming will occur, but does not see it as catastrophic, and believes it will be self-correcting over the long term.
More importantly, he shows that the forecast warming is relatively slight.
Such warming and cooling trends are part of the Earth's history and even before the invention of airconditioning, mankind had adapted to much greater temperature swings.
He also shows that all the apparent hardships developed nations have imposed on themselves in agreeing to the Kyoto protocol will have the most trivial effect on global temperature -- at best delaying the trend by six years.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found there was no evidence of net change in extreme conditions.
But in any event, as Lomborg claims, with increased wealth comes a capacity to avoid the consequences of hurricanes, heatwaves and cold snaps.
And, as is also clear, increases in wealth are jeopardised by measures to prevent increases in greenhouse gases.
We already can see this in Australia, where the Federal Government has said we must spend $380 million in increased electricity bills for renewable energy.
In addition, Australian governments are pouring subsidies into windmill power and other renewables.
In Queensland, the Government has declared that consumers must forgo cheaper coal-powered electricity and use electricity fuelled by gas.
Lomborg is much reviled by "politically correct" scientists who are often in positions of great influence.
Similarly, contributors to Scientific American, many of whose arguments Lomborg roasted in his book, also piled into the critical feast. Their arguments also were criticised.
One claim he made that has been targeted as false is that he was once a Greenpeace member.
He was never a Greenpeace member, since membership of that multinational is confined to an elite of a few dozen in each of its country franchises. He thought offering money and support meant being a member.
He exposed the humbug and specious arguments put by eco-superstars like Paul Ehrlich -- who claims the world is running out of resources, that we will soon face mass starvation and aid to India is simply putting off the day when millions will die.
Resources have become cheaper and India now exports food.
It is not surprising that Lomborg is so reviled. He uses the best scientific sources to deflate fraudulent claims.
Sadly, many of these claims are endorsed by some who, calling themselves scientists, are simply clothing their green fanaticism with their academic credentials.
ADVERTISEMENT
No comments:
Post a Comment