Comments on: Are electric cars any good? Lomborg says no, but he's wrong.

By: Mike

Mike — Sun, 30 Jul 2017 21:07:08 +0000

Why not install trays of plants ontop of the roof of each car?
That way your C02 nonsense is taken care of.
Of course it dosnt cover the companies who buy the right to increase emissions, as long as you have money you can create as much emissions as you like according to UN mandates.
You could also mandate each high rise to perhaps also grow plants on and around each building, it would be kind of neat looking having a city covered in foliage..the Empire state building mast having a perhaps a Pittosporum instead..

By: Bjorn Lomborg’s Academic Credentials Examined – Greg Laden's Blog

Bjorn Lomborg’s Academic Credentials Examined – Greg Laden's Blog — Mon, 31 Aug 2015 12:54:42 +0000

[…] is currently a twitter argument happening, along with a bit of a blogging swarm, over a chimera of a remark made by John Stossle and Bjorn Lomborg. They made the claim that a million electric cars would have no benefit with resect to Carbon […]

By: Blair

Blair — Fri, 08 May 2015 16:56:53 +0000

A minor point but one I see a lot and want to correct. You write that “First, cars are not nearly the problem that buildings are. The vast majority of carbon released from fossil stores into the atmosphere (as CO2, mainly) has to do with buildings … heating them, cooling them, lighting them, and running the stuff we do in them”.

This is not correct. The transportation industry is responsible for approx. 30% of the energy use in the United States. Any efforts to reduce energy use in the transportation field will have a major effect on GHG emissions because at this time virtually all of the engines used in the transportation system are internal combustion so almost all that energy use is from fossil fuels..

By: The Lomborg bonanza (Or, how could Australia better spend $4 million?)

The Lomborg bonanza (Or, how could Australia better spend $4 million?) — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 18:51:55 +0000

[…] series of deceptive piece after piece after piece after piece after …, Lomborg and proponents have leveraged half-truths to support misleading […]

By: Bjorn Lomborg Is Wrong About Bangladesh And Sea Level Rise – Greg Laden's Blog

Thu, 12 Mar 2015 18:03:58 +0000

[…] is often wrong. I’ve noted this before (see: Are electric cars any good? Lomborg says no, but he’s wrong. and Bjørn Lomborg WSJ Op Ed Is Stunningly Wrong). Climate Hawks critiques Lomborg’s Bangladesh […]

By: Bjorn Lomborg WSJ Op Ed Is Stunningly Wrong – Greg Laden's Blog

Bjorn Lomborg WSJ Op Ed Is Stunningly Wrong – Greg Laden's Blog — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 08:57:25 +0000

[…] Bjorn Lomborg is the director of the conservative Copenhagen Consensus Center. He is author of two books that seem to recommend inaction in the face of climate change, Cool It, which appears to be both a book and a movie, and “The Skeptical Environmentalist.” He is well known as a climate contrarian, though I don’t subscribe to the subcategories that are often used to divide up the denialists. Let’s just say that if governments followed Lomborg’s suggestions for addressing climate change, civilization would not do well. If you think anthropogenic global warming is for real, important, and something we can address, then you won’t like Lomborg’s ideas much. Same with energy. He gets that wrong too. […]

By: Brainstorms

Brainstorms — Sun, 05 Oct 2014 22:45:22 +0000

A better argument, Wayne: Burning fossil fuels is setting a match to a VERY important raw material needed to make medicines, fertilizers, plastics, chemicals, etc.

We need THOSE things much, much more than we need hydrocarbons as a liquid fuel. (Actually, gasoline is nothing more than a chemical battery, and one that we cannot recharge…)

By: Wayne Michaud

Wayne Michaud — Sun, 05 Oct 2014 19:27:55 +0000

Just about no one — pro or con electric vehicles or pro or con climate change — ever brings into the conversation an enormously significant reason to transition away from fossil fuels: OUR HEALTH!! We’re talking zero tailpipe emissions that will reduce respiratory illness and cancer, and lower everyone’s healthcare costs. Amen!

By: Craig Thomas

Craig Thomas — Mon, 29 Sep 2014 00:53:37 +0000

Lomborg is neither economist nor scientist.

He is a media-seeking opinionator with a very sparse publication record and whose contributions are correspondingly of very low value.

By: John Carter

John Carter — Thu, 17 Jul 2014 08:13:37 +0000

Somehow forgot to put that link in (or it doesnt include it?)

http://theworldofairaboveus.blogspot.com/2014/07/why-poorly-named-climate-change-thing.html