In a Huffington Post article titled Chill Out: An Economic Triage for Global Climate Change (27 September 2009) Michael Shermer argues that Climate Change should not be at the top of the worlds priority list as greater focus is required for other global issues such as world hunger, disease, malaria, and water pollution. Furthermore, fighting climate change is not imperative and will simply cost too much.
Shermer seems to be under the assumption that climate change works like an on and off switch and that it can be dealt with at a later date and time. Unfortunately that is not the case. Even if all greenhouse gas emissions where to stop today global temperature will continue to rise and the effects of climate change will persist. There is a tipping point and it is approaching fast. Some scientists estimate that the tipping point is as early as 2025 and others say that we have already passed it. Nonetheless immediate action is necessary considering how much work is required in cutting green house gas emissions to appropriate levels. We have a small window of opportunity to deal with this unprecedented problem and as time goes on this window is gradually decreasing.
Another point Shermer makes is that fighting climate change will cost too much and is not worth the benefits. As Shermer referenced in his article the IPCC (United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) states that if the all countries that signed to the Kyoto Protocol met their standards it would cost $180 million annually. Another estimate done by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) states that rising global temperatures will have an impact of 3.8 trillion dollars by 2100 on the united states economy alone. It is obvious that the price of doing nothing is so much greater then taking immediate action. Alex Bowen, an economist at the Grantham Research Institute On Climate Change at the London School of Economics stated in an interview “if well designed policies are put in place, we can still do it [tackle climate change] remarkably cheaply. And there is still no doubt that strong action now is much cheaper than no action.” Thus, the costs of cutting green house emissions will be very high however in comparison to the costs of doing nothing, it is relatively cheaper.
Shermer believes that there are other more pressing issues that need funding other then climate change. He speaks of the Copenhagen Consensus and other UN lists of world issues ranked in priority. Some that are ranking higher in priority than climate change are hunger, disease, HIV/AIDS, malaria, and water pollution. The complication is that the Copenhagen Consensus listed these issues considering that they had a hypothetical annual budget of $50 billion dollars a year to fight them. Many of these global problems listed can be simply dealt with by buying mosquito nets, micronutrients, condoms, and common medication. An issue that cannot be dealt with by simply throwing money at it is climate change, which is the reason it was ranked so low. Fighting climate change needs new advances in technology, riding the world of their addiction to fossil fuels, changing the way people consume, live, and think. Also many of the issues listed above will get worse with climate change especially water pollution and malaria due to rising sea levels and warmer temperatures. Shermer is undermining the importance of climate change with the fact that it cannot be easily fixed with simple funding and that is exactly why it is such a pressing issue.
Climate change needs to be dealt with now considering that temperatures will continue to rise even if the appropriate cuts to green house gases are made on a global scale. The effects of climate change will have huge cost implication on the world’s economy however acting now will be financially cheaper then when it is too late. There are many important global issues that do need attention but unlike climate change they may be dealt with by funding. Shermer recognizes and agrees that climate change is a problem but what he does not understand is the severity and the implications of climate change and how it will continue to get worse if nothing is done.
References
Carrington, Damian. "Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change chief says benefits of tackling climate change will balance cost of action | Environment | guardian.co.uk." Latest news, comment and reviews from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk. 20 July 2009. 30 Sept. 2009
Johnston, Ian. "Global warming: Is it too late to save our planet? - Scotsman.com News." Scotsman.com News - Scottish news direct from Scotland. 17 Jan. 2006. 30 Sept. 2009
"NRDC: Press Release - New Report Finds Doing Nothing on Global Warming Comes with a Huge Price Tag." NRDC: Natural Resources Defense Council - The Earth's Best Defense. 22 May 2008. 30 Sept. 2009
Patz, Jonathan A., and Sarah H. Oslon. "Malaria risk and temperature: Influences from global climate change and local land use practices." PubMed Central Homepage. 11 Apr. 2006. 30 Sept. 2009
Pearce, Fred. "Climate myths: We can't do anything about climate change - environment - 16 May 2007 - New Scientist." Science news and science jobs from New Scientist - New Scientist. 16 May 2007. 30 Sept. 2009
Shermer, Michael. "Michael Shermer: Chill Out: An Economic Triage for Global Climate Change." Breaking News and Opinion on The Huffington Post. 27 Sept. 2009. 30 Sept. 2009
Filip,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your review of Michael Shermer's article. I share your view that Shermer is wrong in asserting that we need to "chill out" over climate change, and that it is not currently a pressing issue. I was especially impressed with the number variety of sources you used, and the way in which you applied them. For example, your use of figures from the IPCC and NRDC handily refute Shermer's claim that combating climate change will be too expensive.
I would however like to comment on a statement you make in your fourth paragraph. You claim that climate change should take priority over many of the world's major issues, such as poverty and hunger, and that such problems can easily be dealt with by throwing money at them. I disagree with this view. While climate change is undoubtedly a terrible problem with potentially tremendous consequences, I don't think it should necessarily take precedence over other issues such as the world food crisis or the AIDS epidemic. These issues, like climate change, and extremely complex, and I do not believe that they can be solved as simply as you imply.
But overall, I find your post to be very compelling. People have to stop procrastinating over climate change, and try to do something about it before it is too late. The only question is how to do that.
As previously mentioned by Jeff, I believe that you present valid reasons that show that Shermer is incorrect.
ReplyDeleteI do, however, have an issue with the following statement: "Many of these global problems listed can be simply dealt with by buying mosquito nets, micronutrients, condoms, and common medication". The way this sentence is worded makes it seem like the world's most important issue have a simple solution, but I believe that it is slightly more complicated. For instance, buying mosquito nets will not completely stop the spread of malaria.
Along with that, climate change should be an issue that attracts a lot of focus, but that doens't necessarily mean that HIV/AIDS and hunger should be put aside. They should all receive adequete attention.
Overall, you deliver a substantial argument with valid evidence. I believe that there should be more focus on climate change before it is too late to change anything.
Filip,
ReplyDeleteWell done. I agree with you and the fact that climate change is not ignorable. I believe Shermer's view of climate change as an on off switch to be ludicrous, and completely agree that the cost of doing nothing is higher than the cost of trying to fix things. I don't necessarily agree with your view that many of the worlds issues can be dealt with as simply as you suggest. The AIDS epidemic has many more complications that cannot be avoided or eliminated simply with condoms, nor can malaria be dealt with by mosquito nets. I do see an underlying point in all of your arguments though that climate change is a more abstract epidemic not noticeable by the general public and I agree with you when you say that leaving climate change alone has severe implications.
Really good job Filip, I enjoyed reading your post.
-Connor
Filip,
ReplyDeletei thought your article was very well done and shows a great deal of research. i especially like how you pointed out one of our society's great flaws, that everyone seems to put off dealing with climate change rather than dealing with it now, head on. however, i have to disagree with your point that climate change takes president over so many of the problems humanity faces. A major reason that we want to prevent climate change is (as selfish as it may sound) for self-preservation and to keep a comfortable way of life. Keeping this in mind, we must make sure we dont allow ourselves to be so centre-focused solely on the needs of the earth to the point that we forget about the needs of the people living on it.
Again, i really enjoyed this article, i found it really thought-provoking, keep it up!