Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Climate change is the enviro problem that is *escalating rapidly*, hence 'pressing', and gets worse as people get richer, whereas air pollution deaths - a global scandal - are rising due to an aging and growing population population, not rising exposure. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(17)30505-6/fulltext?dgcid=linkedin_social_lancet&sf69668966=1 …
Yes But even by 2050, air pollution bigger cost (4% GDP, unmitigated warming reach 4% by early 22nd century, https://www.copenhagenconsensus.com/scorecard-humanity …) Air pollution damage much cheaper to fix, thus better deal (and likely CO₂ Kuznets will hold before end of century)
You got stridently criticised for your Copenhagen Consensus work on climate by the participants: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/aug/22/climatechange.carbonemissions …. Since then, some of Richard Tol's modelling/conclusions, which you often rely on, has been retracted: https://retractionwatch.com/2015/07/22/second-correction-for-controversial-paper-on-economic-gains-of-climate-change/ … Others find much higher costs.
Tempers flare, when you prioritize, but Yohe, whom you cite, and I, actually wrote an oped just a couple of weeks later: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/sep/01/climatechange.scienceofclimatechange1 … And the 4% cost is from IPCC, updated by Nordhaus in 2017 here: http://www.nber.org/papers/w23646 pic.twitter.com/JVNQKkqkmb
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
