Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Cost of global catastrophes still declines
New data out from Munich Re on the 2019 disaster costs, here updating @RogerPielkeJr excellent paper https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17477891.2018.1540343 …
Measured in % GDP as recommended by the UNpic.twitter.com/tu1XZV5U9Z
2019 disaster cost of $150bn from Munich Re https://www.munichre.com/topics-online/en/climate-change-and-natural-disasters/natural-disasters/natural-disasters-of-2019-in-figures-tropical-cyclones-cause-highest-losses.html …, Contrary to earlier years, the split between weather and non-weather is not there, but I asked them: the cost split 98% weather, 2% geophysicalpic.twitter.com/HPsGA2M8hp
2005= Katrina 2017= Harvey & Maria
12 years with no cat. 4 or 5 landfall on us coasts...
In combination with the stated fact that those costs DID increase in absolute numbers the conclusion is that the economic growth outpaces increasing damages.
Like to see a graph for costs of global fire disasters? How about lives?
Malcolm Malcolm, seriously you need to play with new friends. Lomborg has no qualifications in climate science, no peer reviewed papers and has been debunked. He is good in politics as getting funding. Maybe you should ask him for a donation....
Maccamaccakaka. So your position on his book "Cool It" written in 2008 was debunked? Lomborg is an economist and thank God gives us a clear message not to spend foolishly to have feel good events but to do good and spell it out clearly,more bang for buck with do good.
I have doubts if this straight line is the best way to adjust the data of this graph. I can see above all a fluctuation between 0.10% and 0.20%, but I don't see such a clear decline.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
