Gautam Kalghatgi: Is There An ‘Existential Crisis’ And A ‘Climate Emergency’ & Can The World Be ‘Carbon Neutral’ By 2030?
Global Warming Policy Forum, 6 June 2019
Prof Gautam Kalghatgi FREng FSAE FIMechE FCI FISEES, Visiting Professor, Oxford University (Engineering Science), Imperial College (Mechanical Engineering)
There is widespread belief that unless “something is done”, the world will go through an “existential crisis” because of climate change. As a result, several initiatives calling for drastic cuts in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are gaining traction.
For instance, the Extinction Rebellion movement, which organized high-profile disruptions in central London recently, is demanding that U.K. GHG emissions should go to “net zero” by 2025. The New Green Deal (NGD) which is gaining increasing support amongst leading politicians in the U.S., is aiming to “eliminate the US’s carbon footprint by 2030 through a massive mobilization of renewable energy and energy-saving projects”. School strikes in support of drastic change in society are getting stronger. The U.K. and Scottish parliaments have passed resolutions declaring a “climate emergency”
1. The central premise appears to be that “science” says that the world is rapidly heading towards disaster and there is an “existential crisis” and a “climate emergency”. But is this true?
* All objective/empirical measures of human development (e.g., absolute poverty levels, life expectancy, share of the population that is undernourished, education…. ) have been improving consistently, particularly in poorer countries, over the past few decades.
* World food production (and per capita food consumption, productivity per acre) has been increasing consistently over the past few decades ). India has just announced another bumper year for food production.
* A related point is that ‘From a quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide.’ So this could repair the Earth’s climate since green plants would absorb CO2.
* According to the IPCC AR5, Ch4, the UN body which assesses the evidence for and about climate change, there is little or no empirical evidence to suggest that the incidence of tropical and extra-tropical storms, floods and droughts have increased in recent decades. The more recent IPCC report (on Global Warming of 1.5 C) does not alter these conclusions but says that there is evidence now of increased incidence of warm days and nights. However, this report also projects that such extreme weather events will increase based on model projections. To me this does not sound like an “existential crisis”, certainly not by 2030. The evidence is also discussed by Roger Pielke (see also Trends in Extreme Weather Events since 1900 An Enduring Conundrum for Wise Policy Advice)
* Though there are many claims that forest fires have been increasing, empirical evidence shows that there is no global trend. Increase of forest fires in the U.S. in the recent past has causes other than climate change.
* Deaths attributed to natural disasters have declined drastically over the past century – and because of increased prosperity and development though the financial losses have increased for the same reason.
* There is a lot of concern about sea level rise. However, sea levels have been rising consistently for at least 150 years but there have been many reports that they are rising faster in recent years. However, there are very credible assessments of data that show that the current level of rise of 3 mm/year are not abnormal.
* Of course if there are catastrophic events like the melting of Antarctic ice, that would be a serious problem but human intervention could neither cause it nor prevent it. Anyway, how likely is this? The average annual temperature of Antarctica ranges from about −10°C on the Antarctic coast to −60°C at the highest parts of the interior.
* Incidentally, polar bear populations have been increasing or are stable apart from in a handful of locations.
* Again incidentally, I have heard many people talking about CO2 as a pollutant or even a poison but the concentration of CO2 in one’s nostril when one breathes out is around 40,000 ppm or 100 times that in the atmosphere; in a closed lecture room it is around 1000 ppm. So how can it be a poison? Without CO2, no photosynthesis and no green plants.
* Interested people might also want to read The Skeptical Environmentalist by Bjorn Lomborg and Factfulness: Ten Reasons We’re Wrong About The World – And Why Things Are Better Than You Think by Hans Rosling et al.
So in summary, there is no empirical evidence that there is an “existential threat”. The world is a far better place in almost all countries not affected by war, compared to the past. Of course, there will be some consequences of increasing temperature because of increasing greenhouse gases but as economies grow, they will be better able to cope with these changes and for growth, you need affordable energy.
Full post
Global Warming Policy Forum, 6 June 2019
Prof Gautam Kalghatgi FREng FSAE FIMechE FCI FISEES, Visiting Professor, Oxford University (Engineering Science), Imperial College (Mechanical Engineering)
There is widespread belief that unless “something is done”, the world will go through an “existential crisis” because of climate change. As a result, several initiatives calling for drastic cuts in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are gaining traction.
For instance, the Extinction Rebellion movement, which organized high-profile disruptions in central London recently, is demanding that U.K. GHG emissions should go to “net zero” by 2025. The New Green Deal (NGD) which is gaining increasing support amongst leading politicians in the U.S., is aiming to “eliminate the US’s carbon footprint by 2030 through a massive mobilization of renewable energy and energy-saving projects”. School strikes in support of drastic change in society are getting stronger. The U.K. and Scottish parliaments have passed resolutions declaring a “climate emergency”
1. The central premise appears to be that “science” says that the world is rapidly heading towards disaster and there is an “existential crisis” and a “climate emergency”. But is this true?
* All objective/empirical measures of human development (e.g., absolute poverty levels, life expectancy, share of the population that is undernourished, education…. ) have been improving consistently, particularly in poorer countries, over the past few decades.
* World food production (and per capita food consumption, productivity per acre) has been increasing consistently over the past few decades ). India has just announced another bumper year for food production.
* A related point is that ‘From a quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide.’ So this could repair the Earth’s climate since green plants would absorb CO2.
* According to the IPCC AR5, Ch4, the UN body which assesses the evidence for and about climate change, there is little or no empirical evidence to suggest that the incidence of tropical and extra-tropical storms, floods and droughts have increased in recent decades. The more recent IPCC report (on Global Warming of 1.5 C) does not alter these conclusions but says that there is evidence now of increased incidence of warm days and nights. However, this report also projects that such extreme weather events will increase based on model projections. To me this does not sound like an “existential crisis”, certainly not by 2030. The evidence is also discussed by Roger Pielke (see also Trends in Extreme Weather Events since 1900 An Enduring Conundrum for Wise Policy Advice)
* Though there are many claims that forest fires have been increasing, empirical evidence shows that there is no global trend. Increase of forest fires in the U.S. in the recent past has causes other than climate change.
* Deaths attributed to natural disasters have declined drastically over the past century – and because of increased prosperity and development though the financial losses have increased for the same reason.
* There is a lot of concern about sea level rise. However, sea levels have been rising consistently for at least 150 years but there have been many reports that they are rising faster in recent years. However, there are very credible assessments of data that show that the current level of rise of 3 mm/year are not abnormal.
* Of course if there are catastrophic events like the melting of Antarctic ice, that would be a serious problem but human intervention could neither cause it nor prevent it. Anyway, how likely is this? The average annual temperature of Antarctica ranges from about −10°C on the Antarctic coast to −60°C at the highest parts of the interior.
* Incidentally, polar bear populations have been increasing or are stable apart from in a handful of locations.
* Again incidentally, I have heard many people talking about CO2 as a pollutant or even a poison but the concentration of CO2 in one’s nostril when one breathes out is around 40,000 ppm or 100 times that in the atmosphere; in a closed lecture room it is around 1000 ppm. So how can it be a poison? Without CO2, no photosynthesis and no green plants.
* Interested people might also want to read The Skeptical Environmentalist by Bjorn Lomborg and Factfulness: Ten Reasons We’re Wrong About The World – And Why Things Are Better Than You Think by Hans Rosling et al.
So in summary, there is no empirical evidence that there is an “existential threat”. The world is a far better place in almost all countries not affected by war, compared to the past. Of course, there will be some consequences of increasing temperature because of increasing greenhouse gases but as economies grow, they will be better able to cope with these changes and for growth, you need affordable energy.
Full post
Wasting bytes trying to make people more stupid.
ReplyDeletePlease, close this stupid blog
Thank you for your thoughtful comment. You give me the inspiration to carry on.
ReplyDelete