First, some context: humans are doing better than ever:
- extreme poverty declined from 44% to 10% btwn 1981 - 2015;
- infant mortality declined from 43% to just 4%!
- Life expectancy rose from 40 to 70
- Human population growth rate has crashed; we're having fewer children
We are more resilient than ever:
- Deaths from natural disasters declined over 90%
- We produce 25% more food than we need — our largest surpluses in history
And there is no scientific scenario for either of those trends to reverse themselves, even with high levels of warming
It's true that hurricanes and other natural disasters are causing more economic damage, but that increase can be entirely explained by increased wealth
Deaths from natural disasters are at their lowest point in 120 years.
Just 2,900 people died from natural disasters in the first half of 2020, which is far lower than the average figures for the last decade.
Neither the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) nor any other reputable scientific body predicts a reversal in the long-term trend of declining deaths, even if temperatures rise another three degrees or more.
“If you read IPCC reports, there’s no hint that we will be overwhelmed and incapable of responding,” notes leading expert @RogerPielkeJr
“Even under the most extreme scenarios of climate change, future disasters will look a lot like today’s.”
@RogerPielkeJr The US government’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) predicts the maximum intensity of Atlantic hurricanes and tropical storms will rise 5% in the 21st Century, but their frequency will decline 25%.
@RogerPielkeJr “Hurricanes in the future may be more intense than today’s hurricanes,” said Pielke, “but in the context of a 90% reduction in vulnerability, our disaster preparedness dwarfs the change in whatever your favorite hurricane metric is.”
Even if IPCC’s prediction of 0.6 meters (~2 feet) by 2100 under-estimates the change, the slow pace gives time to adapt
And the Netherlands proves that nations thrive even at 7 meters below!
@RogerPielkeJr What about the risk of climate catastrophe from crossing tipping points?
The best book on the subject ranked climate catastrophe risk lowest in terms of fatalities & probabilities compared to other risks eg wars, disease, volcanoes, tsunamis, asteroids
@RogerPielkeJr We still have big environmental problems:
- Wild animal populations declined 50% since 1970
- Critical habitat still at risk in developing world
- Humans use a shocking 25% of Earth's ice-free land surface for cattle pasture
@RogerPielkeJr And we are eating too many fish, and failing to protect sea life
- 33% of global fish stocks are over-fished
- We have tripled the share of over-fished stocks since 1975
- Demand for fish will double by 2050
- Just 8% of oceans are protected
@RogerPielkeJr But many conservation trends are going in the right direction
- We kill 97% fewer whales than in 1960
- Deforestation in Brazil remains at decade-long low
- European & other developed nations are re-foresting
- There are 25x more protected areas today than existed in 1960
@RogerPielkeJr Humans are NOT causing a "sixth mass extinction," nor will we
- Just 0.8% of documented plant, animal, and insects have gone extinct since 1500
- Three-quarters of species are *not* threatened
- Species are far better at surviving at low numbers than we thought
@RogerPielkeJr The reason we know humans won't cause a sixth mass extinction is because the land we use for meat & agriculture has peaked & is declining
- Since 2000, area humans use for pasture declined an area 80% the size of Alaska
- Total land for ag & wood fuel is at or near peak
@RogerPielkeJr The carbon intensity of energy has been declining for 150 years, and global carbon emissions either have peaked or will peak soon, such as within the next decade, as we transition from coal to natural gas and nuclear
So please don't believe the hype. We have good reason to believe that we can and will leave our children a better natural environment than the one we inherited.
But shouldn't we exaggerate environmental problems to motivate action on them? No! We should tell the truth as a matter of principle, and because it is more inspiring, as the new study proves, than environmental alarmism.
Consider how much we are improving cancer treatments, reducing mortality by turning the disease into a chronic illness. We are doing the same thing with climate change. We should celebrate and build on those successes, not deny that they exist!
Imagine the reaction from cancer doctors if there were a movement that actively denied the progress we are making, and insisted that "billions will die" from cancer in the future.
Cancer doctors would be outraged at the slander against their work!
The fact of the matter is that humans are doing remarkably well at reducing pollution and reducing land required for agriculture.
And we can do even better as those energetic and agricultural successes spread from the developed world to the developing world!
I decided to write my new book, Apocalypse Never, in part because I was bothered by the huge quantity of apocalyptic environmental misinformation that is contributing to the epidemic of anxiety and depression impacting young people.
Please consider sharing with worried friends and family this tweet thread, and the link below to all the graphs and charts of data that informed Apocalypse Never.
In the U.S., the share of electricity coming from coal declined from 45% to 25% between 2010 and 2019 not because of "our allies" but because natural gas become cheap due to the natural gas fracking revolution
In fact, the carbon intensity of energy — the amount of carbon emissions per unit of energy — has been declining for *150 years*
Nuclear waste is the best kind of waste. All of it ever produced can fit on a single football field. It never hurts anyone & never will. It will be recycled in future reactors
Nice to see stridently anti-nuclear @SenatorReid acknowledge that it is safe where it is!
@ziontree I met Zion last year when she was spokesperson for radical UK climate group, Extinction Rebellion
When it became clear Sizewell was the most important nuclear project in the world, I reached out to her, and ended up hiring her, a story I describe here.
@ziontree Zion campaigned relentlessly for Sizewell, writing articles for Britain's largest newspapers, participating, appearing in public debates, and organizing a pro-nuclear swim protest in front of Sizewell to underscore the safety of nuclear
For a more in-depth look at why power density determines environmental impact, please consider reading my best-selling and critically-acclaimed new book
Quick! Somebody alert Facebook’s censors @ClimateFdbk to slap a warning label on that San Francisco Chronicle story for being “misleading” because it failed to mention that climate change has doomed our forests to the apocalypse!!! @JohnStossel
All of this will come as a shock to East Coast journalists who are too scared to go camping but were absolutely certain climate change had burned down 2,000 year old redwood trees