Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Germany's government wants to spend €40bn over next 4 years to cut CO₂. This will cut global temps by 0.00018°C The same money spent on tuberculosis could save more than 10 million lives What is best? Time to talk about prioritieshttps://www.dw.com/en/germanys-ruling-coalition-plans-to-spend-40-billion-on-climate-protection/a-50436320 …
Background: not clear how the €40 billion would be spent. I assume that it — generously — could allow Germany to actually reach its 2020 40% below 1990-level emissions. It is right now estimated to reach 32%, so 8% of 1990 1251Mt CO₂e is 100Mt CO₂ehttps://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-climate-targets …
For 4 years, that is 400Mt CO₂e IPCC estimates that 3,667 Gt CO₂ can reduce temperatures by 0.8-2.5°C, with the most likely outcome at 0.45°C per 1,000 Gt CO₂. That translates the 0.4Gt CO₂e roughly into 0.4*0.45/1000=0.00018°C https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsta.2016.0457 …pic.twitter.com/7FMPAevnq1
Estimated we can eradicate tuberculosis if we ramp up spending to $13bn/yr, or $5.4bn more on average. That means Germany's $44.25bn could fund the entire necessary tb spend for the next (44.25/5.4=) 8.2 years, saving about 1.3m lives/yr, or 10.66m liveshttps://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-the-moral-and-economic-case-for-action-to-end-tuberculosis/ …
There is no crisis at all, we need more of CO2 for bigger crops to a growing population..pic.twitter.com/gVEpG8EM64
Are you being facetious?!
TB kills. Climate change doesn’t. People before climate hoax!
I think the truth is they would rather 1 billion people died on the pretext of saving the planet, I read everywhere that the human population is already too great to be sustained
Exactly,it’s not about saving people.
Brilliant question Bjørn Lomborg. Thank you. Presuming theory on 'law of social cycle' is correct, alarmism looks like the pinnacle of acquisition. Each age would run its course, with the social motivity going too far, causing much grief to the majority of people
Actually, the money spent will have absolutely NO influence on the global temperature at all, because CO2 is the least relevant variable in the chaotic cocktails of the variables affecting the earth's climate. It would the money spent on the political ideology, not climate.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
