Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Unbridled alarmism: No, our current trajectory is about 4°C, not 6°C No, 4°C is not the end-of-the-world, it is a problem, equivalent to reducing average income by about 3-4% in 2100 (when OECD will be 200-500% as rich as today and Africa 300-2,200% richer)https://twitter.com/ClimateBen/status/1151540563323305985 …
Here is the UN Climate Panel estimate of damages, updated by Nobel Laureate Nordhaus https://www.nber.org/reporter/2017number3/nordhaus.html …pic.twitter.com/1qnqyHp1DJ
Here is the UN Climate Panel estimates of incomes https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378016300681?via%3Dihub … OECD/Africa accessible here: https://tntcat.iiasa.ac.at/SspDb/dsd pic.twitter.com/biIVNitZwy
The new 1.5°C UN Climate Panel report quoted the cost of 1.5°C at 0.3% of GDP by 2100 2°C at 0.5% of GDP by 2100 3.6°C at 2.6% of GDP by 2100 Problem, not by ANY standards end-of-world p256, https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/chapter-3/ …pic.twitter.com/fYlND1Vk4g
Nordhaus is not the best example for damage calculations. There are significant problems with his choice of discount rate and the way that his damage function works. Plus it is very difficult to take in to account the complicated interactions in the climate system.
Plus, assuming that growth will continue as it is, it is also a dangerous assumption, considering the fact that we are spending beyond Earth's capacity.
What the hell are you talking about? Nordhaus is NOT a Nobel Laureate, he's an economist!
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
