|
|
|
|
Why not deliver smart aid?
In Wall Street Journal, Matt Ridley asks how rich countries can best help poor ones and identifies five goals with great bang for the buck based on the output from Post-2015 Consensus so far.
According to Lomborg many goals means no priorities, in international media he explains how the Post-2015 Consensus can help.
E.g. in Germany's national daily newspaper Die Welt, in Hungarian Napi Gazdaság, in Spanish Wall Street Journal and a 2-page interview in Danish Berlingske.
|
|
 Winds of Vanity
Copenhagen wants to be the world’s first CO2-neutral city by 2025. But this initiative, however wonderful it sounds, is little more than a costly vanity project.
After all, the whole accounting exercise works only if others are still using coal and gas that Copenhagen’s unpredictable wind power can replace. If the city's unrealistic assumptions fall short, the financial losses for its inhabitants will be substantial.
  
|
|
Better nutrition fosters economic development
An investment of $3bn annually in better nutrition could help 100 million children in developing countries to start their lives without stunted growth. And the benefits would be delivered an entire life-time.
The Pontifical Academy of Sciences brings forward the top-ranked intervention from the latest Copenhagen Consensus by devoting the entire introduction chapter for Bread and Brain, Education and Poverty to it.
|
|
Current climate action is more costly than inaction,
even if politicians were smart
Bjorn Lomborg recently gave testimony to the US Senate in regard to the economic and budgetary consequences of climate change (photo below from the New York Times).
The cost of climate action is likely to cost at least twice as much as climate inaction in this century. Lomborg presented how green energy research could show a way out of this dilemma.
Renowned climate scientist Prof. Judith Curry called the testimony "important, well worth reading and pondering." Read Lomborg's testimony or watch the full hearings on webcasts from the Senate Budget Committee or the Senate Committee on Environment.
|
|
Fight poverty, reduce pollution
China's impressive economic development has led to terrible outdoor air pollution. At the same time however, indoor air pollution has declined substantially, and fewer people now die from air pollution in China because of less poverty and access to modern energy.
Lomborg writes in China's biggest English-language publication China Daily (500k+ copies) that with increased wealth, China can afford to protect more nature and reduce pollution.
|
|
Intermediately green gas
Global warming is a significant, long-term problem. Unfortunately, we’re tackling it with very costly, and very ineffective, feel-good solutions.
Lomborg writes in The Australian that we should instead focus on cost-effective CO2 reductions like shale gas in the short term and green R&D in the long run.
|
|
|
Thank you for your continued interest and we hope you enjoy these occasional updates, if you do not wish to receive news about Bjørn Lomborg and the Copenhagen Consensus in the future, you can easily remove your email from our mailing list.
Best wishes,
Zsuzsa Horvath
Executive Assistant to Bjorn Lomborg
US online phone number: +1-347-903-0979
Office cell in Budapest: +36-306920720
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
