In and interview with flagship German business daily Handelsblatt here, Danish economist Björn Lomborg warned of the “inefficiency in climate protection” and says Germany is a “deterrent example” in this respect.
He told the Handelsblatt that the once highly praised “Energiewende” was “poorly implemented” and that the costs will be “gigantic”.
“Germany, with its promotion of renewable energies, is a particularly deterrent example in this respect. Such mismanagement adds up to gigantic additional costs,” said Lomborg.
Great doubts concerning costs
The high profile Danish economist also told the Handelsblatt that the goal of climate neutrality makes no economic sense, saying: “That is easy to say, but extremely difficult to implement. I have great doubts as to whether all these states will be able to answer the question of what it will cost in the end.”
Lomborg also told the Handelsblatt that bans would be counterproductive, and that consumers will simply spend the money they save by not flying on other CO2-causing products. “The only sure way to reduce CO2 emissions is to make people poor.”
Technology is the key
Lomborg says that he supports a CO2 tax over the short-term to reduce CO2 emissions but that that ultimately the only way will be through improved technology, and not political measures. “We need innovations to combat climate change. That must be our first priority. […] The key then is innovation.”
Citizens will rise up against bans
Lomborg says technical innovation is better than demanding people pay 16% of GDP on climate protection. “People don’t want that. They will then vote for politicians like Trump or Bolsonaro.”
Only one percent comes from wind and sun
When it comes to wind and sun as a supply of energy, Lomborg says that ultimately the huge costs will have to be correctly taken into account, and warns that they are far from being a cheap supply.
“You have to see the cost of the whole system. […] And we should not lose sight of the dimensions: According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), one percent of global energy demand is currently covered by wind and sun, while the IEA estimates that it will be about four percent by 2040,” Lomborg told the Handelsblatt.
Going it alone, shifting emissions “crazy”
And the Danish economist warns against Europe going it alone on CO2 reductions. If it does, ” then the energy-intensive industry will disappear in the direction of the USA or Asia. It is crazy to drive the energy-intensive industry out of Europe and shift emissions to other regions of the world.”
Education and development
Lomborg also told the Handelsblatt that the best way to protect developing countries from climate change is to invest in their education and health care – so that they will be able to “get themselves out of sheet metal huts.” Storms wreak far greater damage on impoverished societies than on developed ones.
“If we lead people out of poverty, they will become less vulnerable to the consequences of climate change and to many other challenges. Yes, we must fight climate change, but we must do it intelligently,” said Lomborg
8 responses to “Leading Economist: “Only Sure Way To Reduce CO2 Emissions Is To Make People Poor”!”
What’s the use of education when it has become a vehicle of propaganda?
The situation in Germany today resembles the days of Galileo – it is dangerous to reveal the results of scientific research when it is not in accordance with the doctrine of the (green) church, the spiritual leader of the political class, the state, and the media.
There is no evidential basis for the need to reduce CO2. Therefore, spreading the true state of science on this matter ought to be top priority, rather than making concessions to a fundamentally flawed approach.
People need to understand that freedom of expression and freedom of science are being massively curtailed in Germany to push and imprudently act on a theory of global warming that is supported by nothing but the privileged, state sponsored ability of the alarmist camp to delude the public.
We need a movement in Germany (not in Africa) to restore sound education and science.
I think I agree with you on the issue of freedom of expression and freedom of science. Nevertheless, to claim that the state is the danger in this regard is to approach the issue with just one eye open – and we need both open. Can you think of any other non-state group that might be interesting to “delud” the public?
!00% agree. Education and Science are too important for our future.
[…] Read more at No Tricks Zone […]
The Amish have a low carbon footprint. They need a lot of land, but they are “green”.
Yup. Make people poor, …and then …EAT THEM.
No one can ever convince me that warmism isn’t a serious mental pathology.
Jump that shark. Too funny, good lard.
Don’t wind turbines shut down in extremely cold temperatures during the winter months?
You will need coal-fired power plants that are delivering the electricity without interruption when the winter months roll around during which wind turbines have proven to be useless and worthless when it counts the most. There you have it.
If you have a lick of sense whatsoever, you’ll have coal-fired power plants supplying electricity in copious amounts. Just the way it is, end of story.
Cognitive dissonance at its finest for Bjorn.
It is easy to say that things can become extremely difficult for Bjorn if he were to follow his own nonsensical buffoonery. lol
He should travel to China and inform the Chinese that they need to reduce the coal mining and consumption by at least 50 percent or even more. If the coal consumption in China were reduced by 50 percent, emissions from coal would be reduced by 30 percent.
Might as well start there, the Chinese can become poor first.
Mongolia uses, mines, consumes, coal too. 98 percent of Mongolia’s electricity is produced using coal. Bjorn better head for Mongolia and be the bearer of bad news for the Mongolians.
The Chinese will tell him to take a hike, Mongolia can be the destination so the Mongolians can tell Bjorn to take a hike. Mongolians don’t really want to be poor, just how they view things. Poverty sucks, if you really need to know, not that you want to.
Mr. Lomborg can start right now if he wants everyone to become poor. Move out of your dwelling, sell your cellphone, your computer, sell your car, your television, your refrigerator, all of your household goods. Disconnect your electric service, don’t use any of it, just become poor and beg for some sustenance to continue to eek out some kind of existence.
Go for it, it could be lots of fun. Street life day and night, living under a bridge is a goal, inspiring for Bjorn, I’m sure.
Make your way to San Francisco, Seattle, Los Angeles, and join the homeless population in those overcrowded places where the homeless dwell. Not New York City, there is no more room for the homeless there, it’s full. lol
The homeless are all obviously poor for one reason or another, join the crowd. Piece of cake. It is going to be an eye-opening learning experience, Bjorn has to learn something during his lifetime.
A very easy thing to do, don’t need anyone’s help, go on out and be poor.
If you want rules for people to become poor, you’ll just have to do as you say.
Poor for thee but not for me? Is that more like it?
That’s it, that’s the ticket.
Hey Pierre how did your 100k walk go or should I not ask?
[…] Leading Economist: “Only Sure Way To Reduce CO2 Emissions Is To Make People Poor”! […]