Latest @BjornLomborg FACT CHECK 🧵

Climate Change Saves More Lives Than You’d Think by @BjornLomborg wsj.com/articles/clima… via @WSJOpinion
Assertions:

"Global warming does cause more heat deaths"
"Global warming now prevents more than 166,000 temperature-related fatalities annually"

Both of these are claims of attribution of causality

Such attribution is simply not possible ... I'll explain
Over 20 years 2000-2019 cold weather was associated with almost 10x the number of "excess deaths" than was hot weather

But that tells us nothing about the role of climate change, much less the effects of human caused climate change

doi.org/10.1016/S2542-…
Remember climate change is defined as a detectable change in the statistics of weather over many decades (conventionally 30 years or more)

Climate isn't the only thing that changes on this time scale - demographics, economics, adaptation, exposure, etc etc
No one should die because of temperature extremes

Indeed the WHO assumes that 100% adaptation means no attributable deaths to temperature extremes

Thus, the direct cause of a temperature-related death is a failure to successfully adapt

apps.who.int/iris/bitstream…
Most studies projecting future mortality related to temperature extremes assume no adaptation

Why?

Because once you project future levels of adaptation the signal of climate changes become far less important, vanishingly small with successful adaptation
We do know that (as is the case with almost all extremes) humans are better adapted to high temperature extremes than we used to be (but of concern, not so for cold extremes)

ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.11…
So bottom line:
"climate change does not influence temperature-related mortality"
Yuming Guo
co-author of thelancet.com/journals/lanpl…

I agree

Source: climatefeedback.org/claimreview/gl…
We want deaths related to both hot and cold extremes to go down

The only way to do that is to improve adaptive capacities & practices

Climate change does not cause attributable extreme temperature deaths, nor does it prevent those deaths

FACT CHECK: 👎👎👎👎👎

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Roger Pielke Jr.

Roger Pielke Jr. Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @RogerPielkeJr

22 Sep
A slightly below average year for Northern Hemisphere tropical cyclones in 2021 to date
via @CSUAtmosSci
Well below average year for US tornadoes
via @NWSSPC
Wayyy below average year for US hail
via @NWSSPC
Read 6 tweets
22 Sep
Here is the “hot house world” scenario underpinning the new @ecb climate stress test

Read more: rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/the-ecbs-cli…
My recent @FT op-ed on the misuse of scenarios in “climate stress testing”:

ft.com/content/a82a7b…
The NGFS released radically new scenarios in June 2021 but today’s report is based on the obsolete old scenarios

A little like managing the 2021 economy using economic data from 2015, not a good idea

ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/scpops…
Read 4 tweets
18 Sep
A preview of updated “social cost of carbon” methods under the Biden Administration—> brookings.edu/wp-content/upl…

While key details are TBA, once again all of the heavy lifting is done by (newly-created) extreme scenarios & damages post-2100

Includes ~12C temp increase in 2300 🤨
The new RFF-SC scenarios (apparently not publicly available) have a median emissions trajectory similar to 3.4/4.5 SSPs, but include a ridiculously wide uncertainty range (from net-zero CO2 ~2050 to ~3x CO2 ~2100)

Even so, SSP5-8.5 is wildly implausible
Though RFF-SC details are not yet available, we can clearly see that the PDF for future emissions is heavily skewed

Of note the emissions distribution is centered on the median result & initial SCC results on the average result, thus increasing the influence of extreme scenarios
Read 8 tweets
17 Sep
Imagine how climate policy might look if instead of CO2 emissions as the metric to be directly managed we instead focused on more concrete, manageable metrics, like power plants (start with coal)

Achieving net-zero coal power would be much easier to manage/track & harder to game
The focus on management of CO2 emissions (an outcome of many complex processes) as the centerpiece of climate policy can be traced to viewing climate change through models (going back to the Bretherton diagram) and thinking through policy via IAMs & confusing models for reality
Imagine instead a power plant treaty

Part A: Net-Zero coal
Part B: Net-Zero gas

Coal & gas are of course not all emissions, about 2/3 of total from energy

But there is no requirement that all emissions must be regulated under a single policy, that complexity is a choice
Read 7 tweets
16 Sep
Not well-thought through @TheEconomist on insurance & disasters

Consider:
➡️"Losses from disasters cost the insurance industry $144bn in 2017"
➡️"Last year the premiums paid for property and casualty insurance worldwide reached $2.4trn"

Problem?

economist.com/finance-and-ec…
Does P/C insurance look like an industry in trouble? Image
"Extreme events becoming the norm could force insurers to fork out ever greater payouts to policyholders, and lower the value of the assets they hold" 🤷‍♂️

Swiss Re founded 1863
Munich Re founded 1880

These companies exist because extreme events are the norm
Read 6 tweets
12 Sep
This is so incredibly wrong

Storm surge is a function of a storm and the current sea level

Long-term sea level rise of course raises the level of the sea but has absolutely no effect on storm surge from a particular storm

🤷‍♂️
I increasingly see the claim that SLR makes storm surge worse

This is incorrect

It’s like saying a 6 ft man is 5,286 ft tall in Denver

SLR & storm surge are both important scientific concepts, purposely confusing them is a bad idea
Even as SLR has increased over the past century+ societal vulnerability to storm surges has decreased, there is no reason to expect that with dedicated effort this trend will not continue
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(