A Crucial Time in the Fight Against Global Poverty and Climate Change

"why he thinks those effects will be less expensive is a bit confusing."

It's not confusing if you look at the numbers.

"His thesis is a bandaid"

This is somewhat true, but part of his argument is that alternative energies are going to become cheaper than fossil fuels in about 30 years. So 30 years of slight warming is a better alternative than severely crippling the global economy.

No, he is not a "climate change denier". He believes it exists and that humans are partially to blame for it. I haven't read his entire book, but I've read parts. He does have specific ideas on how to help the poor - clean water, disease prevention, etc.

If you're truly interested in learning about what he has to say, you might want to read some of his stuff.

Squeaky, I understand your concerns. I haven't read most of his book so certainly don't quote me as an expert on the guy, but I don't think he says we in the Western world don't need to change at all. His thesis is a lot more complicated than I made it out to be. I was just giving the Cliff Notes version to help justintime out.

Thanks--I haven't read his stuff, but I'm getting the feeling he may be arguing that it is too late to turn things around, and so it is better to battle the effects of climate changes rather than the causes.

Although, with regards to DITE's comment, the only reason it would take 30 years for alternatives to take over is if we ignore the impact of fossil fuels and continue using them to the extent we do. If we ignore that, while trying to constantly deal with the impact of climate change, we are going to find those impacts are needlessly expensive. A better approach is to attack poverty while aggressively developing alternative energy technologies, which will also require conservation efforts that really aren't that hard for us to make. Also, if you factor in the external costs of a fossil fuel economy into the price at the pump, many alternative energies become instantly economically viable.

Meanwhile, many alternative energies are making huge strides but suffer from lack of investment. We have the ingenuity in this nation to develop energies that can substantially decrease our use of fossil fuels--heck, just conservation and efficiency will do that. The technology is here right now--we only need to use it.

Never heard of Lomborg or this group either.
Have you read any of his works?
If so, how about giving us one of his compelling arguments?

What's your personal working theory on global warming, DITE?
Is it 'laissez faire' for global warming too?
Let the invisible hand deal with it?

Justintime does his homework!

I think the Lithuanian Council for Scientists that Receive Grants Based on the Severity of the Impact of Climate Change (LCSRGBSIC) also disagreed with him.

Lomborg is controversial because his arguments are so compelling. He has continually been rebutting his critics since he wrote the book. He has publicly stated that he is willing to debate the issue. I don't think any of his critics have taken him up on this yet.

I agree with you that the causes of the crisis in Darfur are complex.

Many experts on the region have pointed out that drought cycles in sub Saharan Africa are linked to increases in violent civil war. Climate experts argue that the recent severe and lingering drought in sub Saharan Africa is linked to the global warming trend.

See this recent essay:

Drought and Political Violence in sub-Saharan Africa by Christian Webersik
Summary:
The study of environmental change and civil war onset in Africa has become a major focus of attention in the scholarly literature. This paper argues that a negative change in rainfall in sub-Saharan countries is associated with higher risk of armed internal conflict. Societies, in particular in the developing world which are dependent on renewable resources are more vulnerable to environmental stress, such as erratic rainfall. In most sub-Saharan economies the manufacturing and industrial sectors are in preliminary stages. Instead, agriculture constitutes a large percentage of overall national economic income. In some countries, such as the Central African Republic, Ethiopia and the Democratic Republic of Congo, the share of agriculture in the gross domestic
Moreover, most agricultural production is based on rain-fed agriculture rather than irrigation agriculture. In Africa, less than 7 per cent of the overall agricultural production derives from irrigated lands. As a result, changes in rainfall patterns that can lead to drought translate into increased vulnerability and hence poverty. Compared to other parts of the world, Africa has the highest economic loss risk due to droughts. In turn, poverty can increase political instability and eventually culminate into violent conflict with possible spill-over effects to other countries, posing a threat to international security. As a general proposition, I argue that water scarcity induced by sudden rainfall shortages can lead to wealth deprivation that increases the likelihood of an armed rebellion. I hypothesize that regions with a higher dependency on agricultural production are more likely to experience civil conflict in a given drought year. It is in this context that a sudden economic shock caused by failing rains free labor leading to an abundant supply of potential rebel soldiers with low opportunity costs. Consequently, in an environment with reduced economic returns caused by
drought the incentives to engage in a war economy increase. This argument is in line with the civil war literature that attempts to explain armed conflict by focusing on economic opportunity costs whether or not an individual is joining a rebellion If rainfall is shaping economic conditions in sub-Saharan African countries, then changes in
rainfall patterns induced by either anthropogenic interference can be associated with the outbreak of civil violence, a connection, however, that has been not tested rigorously. There are few studies that have provided evidence that climate change will lead to decreased rainfall causing more widespread poverty while lowering rebel recruitment costs.
Other authors arrived at similar conclusions using monthly rainfall data.
A recent article published in the Atlantic Monthly argues in favor of an "ecological origin of the Darfur crisis" making climate change responsible for the death of thousands of people. This paper aims at making the connection between failing rains and armed conflict using a large-N study. Along these lines, a recent study published by the UN Environment Programme claims that "there is a very strong link between land degradation, desertification and conflict in Darfur."

Also see:
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200704/darfur-cl...
This article was the first to alert me to the link between global climate change and poverty.
As one would expect, there are those who dispute these conclusions.

See the following link on how to help.

http://www.lomborg.com/publications/how_to_spend/

It's very encouraging to see the efforts of the current administration to implement efforts to halt the growth of global warming - especially after the "head in the sand" approach that we've witnessed for the past 8 years. Failure to adopt measures to address this issue will first affect those who live in areas that are already struggling with food shortages. I believe that ignoring these problems is very un-Christ like.

nevermind

Not only un-Christ like but stupendously stupid.

"Today, there is a particular and pressing responsibility to examine and act on the growing challenge of global climate change and its implications for God's creation and for the poor and vulnerable. During his angelus address on August 27, 2006, Pope Benedict XVI called for a commitment to care for creation. He said creation is "exposed to serious risks by life choices and lifestyles that can degrade it. In particular, he said, "environmental degradation makes the lives of the poor especially unbearable."

"The U.S. Catholic bishops have declared, "At its core, global climate change is not about economic theory or political platforms, nor about partisan advantage or interest group pressures. It is about the future of God's creation and the one human family. It is about protecting both 'the human environment' and the natural environment." (Global Climate Change: A Plea for Dialogue, Prudence and the Common Good, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2001, p.1)."

http://www.usccb.org/sdwp/ejp/climate/index.shtml

See the following link on how to help.

http://www.lomborg.com/publications/how_to_spend/

I agree with you that the causes of the crisis in Darfur are complex.

Many experts on the region have pointed out that drought cycles in sub Saharan Africa are linked to increases in violent civil war. Climate experts argue that the recent severe and lingering drought in sub Saharan Africa is linked to the global warming trend.

See this recent essay:

Drought and Political Violence in sub-Saharan Africa by Christian Webersik
Summary:
The study of environmental change and civil war onset in Africa has become a major focus of attention in the scholarly literature. This paper argues that a negative change in rainfall in sub-Saharan countries is associated with higher risk of armed internal conflict. Societies, in particular in the developing world which are dependent on renewable resources are more vulnerable to environmental stress, such as erratic rainfall. In most sub-Saharan economies the manufacturing and industrial sectors are in preliminary stages. Instead, agriculture constitutes a large percentage of overall national economic income. In some countries, such as the Central African Republic, Ethiopia and the Democratic Republic of Congo, the share of agriculture in the gross domestic
Moreover, most agricultural production is based on rain-fed agriculture rather than irrigation agriculture. In Africa, less than 7 per cent of the overall agricultural production derives from irrigated lands. As a result, changes in rainfall patterns that can lead to drought translate into increased vulnerability and hence poverty. Compared to other parts of the world, Africa has the highest economic loss risk due to droughts. In turn, poverty can increase political instability and eventually culminate into violent conflict with possible spill-over effects to other countries, posing a threat to international security. As a general proposition, I argue that water scarcity induced by sudden rainfall shortages can lead to wealth deprivation that increases the likelihood of an armed rebellion. I hypothesize that regions with a higher dependency on agricultural production are more likely to experience civil conflict in a given drought year. It is in this context that a sudden economic shock caused by failing rains free labor leading to an abundant supply of potential rebel soldiers with low opportunity costs. Consequently, in an environment with reduced economic returns caused by
drought the incentives to engage in a war economy increase. This argument is in line with the civil war literature that attempts to explain armed conflict by focusing on economic opportunity costs whether or not an individual is joining a rebellion If rainfall is shaping economic conditions in sub-Saharan African countries, then changes in
rainfall patterns induced by either anthropogenic interference can be associated with the outbreak of civil violence, a connection, however, that has been not tested rigorously. There are few studies that have provided evidence that climate change will lead to decreased rainfall causing more widespread poverty while lowering rebel recruitment costs.
Other authors arrived at similar conclusions using monthly rainfall data.
A recent article published in the Atlantic Monthly argues in favor of an "ecological origin of the Darfur crisis" making climate change responsible for the death of thousands of people. This paper aims at making the connection between failing rains and armed conflict using a large-N study. Along these lines, a recent study published by the UN Environment Programme claims that "there is a very strong link between land degradation, desertification and conflict in Darfur."

Also see:
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200704/darfur-cl...
This article was the first to alert me to the link between global climate change and poverty.
As one would expect, there are those who dispute these conclusions.

It's very encouraging to see the efforts of the current administration to implement efforts to halt the growth of global warming - especially after the "head in the sand" approach that we've witnessed for the past 8 years. Failure to adopt measures to address this issue will first affect those who live in areas that are already struggling with food shortages. I believe that ignoring these problems is very un-Christ like.

nevermind

Why?

Global poverty is expanding rapidly in the sub Sahara region -- due to global warming.
You must have read about Darfur.
The impact of global warming on global poverty is about to increase exponentially.

Huh? Global warming causing poverty in Darfur? The causes of the crisis in Darfur are complex, but never before have I heard anyone claim that they are the result of global warming. Please elaborate.

"Today, there is a particular and pressing responsibility to examine and act on the growing challenge of global climate change and its implications for God's creation and for the poor and vulnerable. During his angelus address on August 27, 2006, Pope Benedict XVI called for a commitment to care for creation. He said creation is "exposed to serious risks by life choices and lifestyles that can degrade it. In particular, he said, "environmental degradation makes the lives of the poor especially unbearable."

"The U.S. Catholic bishops have declared, "At its core, global climate change is not about economic theory or political platforms, nor about partisan advantage or interest group pressures. It is about the future of God's creation and the one human family. It is about protecting both 'the human environment' and the natural environment." (Global Climate Change: A Plea for Dialogue, Prudence and the Common Good, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2001, p.1)."

http://www.usccb.org/sdwp/ejp/climate/index.shtml

I'm not surprised you have never heard of Lomborg. He is a Danish academic. He wrote "Environmental Skeptic." It's an incredibly thorough and well researched book (something like 3000 footnotes) about climate change. He doesn't deny that humans are changing the climate, and he's hardly a Righty. If you don't want to read the book, some of his lectures can be found on youtube.

I agree with you that the causes of the crisis in Darfur are complex.

Many experts on the region have pointed out that drought cycles in sub Saharan Africa are linked to increases in violent civil war. Climate experts argue that the recent severe and lingering drought in sub Saharan Africa is linked to the global warming trend.

See this recent essay:

Drought and Political Violence in sub-Saharan Africa by Christian Webersik
Summary:
The study of environmental change and civil war onset in Africa has become a major focus of attention in the scholarly literature. This paper argues that a negative change in rainfall in sub-Saharan countries is associated with higher risk of armed internal conflict. Societies, in particular in the developing world which are dependent on renewable resources are more vulnerable to environmental stress, such as erratic rainfall. In most sub-Saharan economies the manufacturing and industrial sectors are in preliminary stages. Instead, agriculture constitutes a large percentage of overall national economic income. In some countries, such as the Central African Republic, Ethiopia and the Democratic Republic of Congo, the share of agriculture in the gross domestic
Moreover, most agricultural production is based on rain-fed agriculture rather than irrigation agriculture. In Africa, less than 7 per cent of the overall agricultural production derives from irrigated lands. As a result, changes in rainfall patterns that can lead to drought translate into increased vulnerability and hence poverty. Compared to other parts of the world, Africa has the highest economic loss risk due to droughts. In turn, poverty can increase political instability and eventually culminate into violent conflict with possible spill-over effects to other countries, posing a threat to international security. As a general proposition, I argue that water scarcity induced by sudden rainfall shortages can lead to wealth deprivation that increases the likelihood of an armed rebellion. I hypothesize that regions with a higher dependency on agricultural production are more likely to experience civil conflict in a given drought year. It is in this context that a sudden economic shock caused by failing rains free labor leading to an abundant supply of potential rebel soldiers with low opportunity costs. Consequently, in an environment with reduced economic returns caused by
drought the incentives to engage in a war economy increase. This argument is in line with the civil war literature that attempts to explain armed conflict by focusing on economic opportunity costs whether or not an individual is joining a rebellion If rainfall is shaping economic conditions in sub-Saharan African countries, then changes in
rainfall patterns induced by either anthropogenic interference can be associated with the outbreak of civil violence, a connection, however, that has been not tested rigorously. There are few studies that have provided evidence that climate change will lead to decreased rainfall causing more widespread poverty while lowering rebel recruitment costs.
Other authors arrived at similar conclusions using monthly rainfall data.
A recent article published in the Atlantic Monthly argues in favor of an "ecological origin of the Darfur crisis" making climate change responsible for the death of thousands of people. This paper aims at making the connection between failing rains and armed conflict using a large-N study. Along these lines, a recent study published by the UN Environment Programme claims that "there is a very strong link between land degradation, desertification and conflict in Darfur."

Also see:
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200704/darfur-cl...
This article was the first to alert me to the link between global climate change and poverty.
As one would expect, there are those who dispute these conclusions.

No, he is not a "climate change denier". He believes it exists and that humans are partially to blame for it. I haven't read his entire book, but I've read parts. He does have specific ideas on how to help the poor - clean water, disease prevention, etc.

If you're truly interested in learning about what he has to say, you might want to read some of his stuff.

Thanks--I haven't read his stuff, but I'm getting the feeling he may be arguing that it is too late to turn things around, and so it is better to battle the effects of climate changes rather than the causes.

Although, with regards to DITE's comment, the only reason it would take 30 years for alternatives to take over is if we ignore the impact of fossil fuels and continue using them to the extent we do. If we ignore that, while trying to constantly deal with the impact of climate change, we are going to find those impacts are needlessly expensive. A better approach is to attack poverty while aggressively developing alternative energy technologies, which will also require conservation efforts that really aren't that hard for us to make. Also, if you factor in the external costs of a fossil fuel economy into the price at the pump, many alternative energies become instantly economically viable.

Meanwhile, many alternative energies are making huge strides but suffer from lack of investment. We have the ingenuity in this nation to develop energies that can substantially decrease our use of fossil fuels--heck, just conservation and efficiency will do that. The technology is here right now--we only need to use it.