Even if entire EU went net-zero today and stayed net-zero for the rest of the century

impact rather small, reducing temperature rise in 2100 by 0.14°C (0.25°F)

Because vast part of 21st-century emissions come from currently poor world

UN climate model live.magicc.org
We don't have good estimates of what the EU net-zero policy will cost,

but similar estimates for the US shows 11.9% and for New Zealand 16% of GDP (environment.govt.nz/assets/Publica…)

It would imply costs of €6.300-8.500 per person per year (lower than US, because EU less rich)
So we have well-meaning EU leaders jetting off to Glasgow to commit to even stronger climate policies

that will drive up energy costs even more

cost EU citizens 10+% of their incomes

while having an immeasurable impact on climate by century's end

Here is the equivalent impact of the US going net-zero today — 0.3°F (0.16°C)
Even if the entire rich world goes net-zero today

impact rather small, reducing temperature rise in 2100 by 0.96°F (0.5°C)

Because vast part of 21st century emissions come from currently poor world

Using UN climate model live.magicc.org
Here is a thread on the costs of almost net-zero from the new Nature study

Notice that the US cost for 80% reduction by 2050 of 5.6% of GDP fits very well with the average cost from the Stanford Energy Modeling Forum estimate of 80% reduction for the EU of 5.14% of GDP (avg of 6 models, ignoring WorldScan extreme cost estimate) worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.114…

• • •

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

Keep Current with Bjorn Lomborg

Bjorn Lomborg 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 @BjornLomborg

17 Oct
US going net-zero will cost more than $11,300 per person per year in 2050 according to new Nature study

That is almost 500x as much as average American willing to pay

That won't end well

my comment in WSJ
wsj.com/articles/clima…
archive.ph/4K48e
nature.com/articles/s4155…
Compare the cost of US net-zero at 12+% GDP with the UN Climate Panel estimate of cost if we do *nothing* against climate change:

2.6% of GDP by 2100

We are currently doing too little, but doing too much is also dumb

ipcc.ch/sr15/
Even if entire US went net-zero today and stayed net-zero for the rest of the century

impact rather small, reducing temperature rise in 2100 by 0.3°F (0.16°C)

Because vast part of 21st century emissions come currently poor world

Using UN climate model live.magicc.org
Read 7 tweets
12 Oct
Untrue Washington Post front-page story today

Claims “disasters worsen”
Study shows 𝗻𝗼 𝘀𝘂𝗰𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴

One example: heart disease up with temperature
Reality 𝗼𝗽𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗲

How is this following science?

🧵

washingtonpost.com/climate-enviro…
archive.md/m4z4d
@SallyBuzbee
Washington Post story over and again claims study shows how climate made things worse:

“weather events made worse by climate change”, “harsher events” “disasters worsen”

Actual Nature study only shows impacts – not whether positive or negative

nature.com/articles/s4155…
Actual Nature study doesn't show climate making stuff worse

It simply uses machine learning to analyze 600K article abstracts to identify climate impacts and code *where* and *what*

Conclude 85% pop lives where temp and/or precip changed detectable and attributable to man
Read 12 tweets
3 Oct
New study: climate makes children born today experience 2-36x more climate catastrophes

Lot of media coverage

But study assumes everyone stays poor and do nothing to adapt

Not remotely true of real world

So, what's the point, except to scare?

🧵

science.org/doi/10.1126/sc…
To predict 2100, scary climate study assumes nobody does anything after 2005

– how does that inform real-life decisions?

They don’t even tell you this in main study – you have to read the supplementary material, almost as if they don't want you to know

science.org/doi/10.1126/sc…
Predicting the world in 2021 with 1926 data is awful

Since 1926, sea levels risen 15-20cm so prediction: drowned significant parts of the world

But human ingenuity actually means that *more* land has been reclaimed than lost!

nature.com/articles/nclim…
Read 17 tweets
11 Sep
Global inequality is lower today than last 140 years

Ineq increase hugely in 1800s bc industrialized world pulls away

Ineq decline as poor world (China, India) starts gaining

Gini: 0=no ineq, 1= total ineq

New, amazing data from @PikettyLeMonde & co
wid.world/document/longr… Image
Income development 1820-2020:

In China, per person income dropped from 82% of world average in 1820 down to 20% in 1980, before rising to 109% in 2020

In Indonesia, it dropped from 57% in 1820 to 16% in 1950, up to 68% in 2020

wid.world/document/longr… Image
What drives global inequality?

Blue line shows domestic inequality: high, but lower in 1950s-80s

Orange line shows inequality between nations: increase dramatically after rich world industrialization, decline after 1980 as poor world is gaining again

wid.world/document/longr… Image
Read 7 tweets
6 Sep
The world’s top medical editors argue for climate action with core argument: Global heat deaths for 65+ increased 50+%

But don’t tell you that the number of 65+ has increased almost as much

Oops

bmj.com/content/374/bm…, bmj.com/content/374/bm…, thelancet.com/journals/lance…
The world’s top medical editors argue for climate action

With amateur mistake: they forget to adjust for more old people

They should correct their paper (but of course, it would also neuter it)

bmj.com/content/374/bm…, bmj.com/content/374/bm…, thelancet.com/journals/lance…
The world’s top medical editors for climate action

Vastly overstating heat deaths
And entirely ignoring dramatic reduction in cold deaths

How are we well informed by this?

bmj.com/content/374/bm…, bmj.com/content/374/bm…, thelancet.com/journals/lance… ihmeuw.org/5k7m
Read 6 tweets
1 Sep
You're being lied to:

Report claims disasters 5x over past 50 years

But because of better reporting

How do we know?

Take well-measured US tornados:

WMO thinks they've 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝟭𝟯𝘅
In reality, 𝗵𝗮𝗹𝘃𝗲𝗱
library.wmo.int/doc_num.php?ex…
bbc.com/news/science-e…
Incompetent WMO report tells you that disasters 5x over past 50 years

But because of better reporting

How do we know?

Take well-measured US hurricanes:

WMO thinks they've 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝟰𝘅
They haven't increased at all

library.wmo.int/doc_num.php?ex…
bbc.com/news/science-e…
You're being lied to:

Report claims disasters 5x over past 50 years

But because of better reporting

How do we know?

Take well-measured US tornados:

WMO thinks they've 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝟭𝟯𝘅
In reality, 𝗵𝗮𝗹𝘃𝗲𝗱
library.wmo.int/doc_num.php?ex…
bbc.com/news/science-e…
Read 8 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!

:(