Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist’s Guide to Global Warming (Vintage)
Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist’s Guide to Global Warming (Vintage) – Review
Disclaimer 1: First, let me say straight that this review is neither a smear critic nor a bipartisan review of U.S. politics. You can find that in supplementary reviews below. If such is your interest, you may skip this review. In a few words, this book is a must widely read if you have a real interest in the storm of global warming/climate change and the science behind the debate. Beyond Mr. Lomborg’s opinion on this issue, and the assumptions he managed to develop his analysis, the book’s most central message is really to “cool it”, to abandon any major positions and having an direct dialogue, based on technical facts, considering the economic effectiveness and eventually deciding objectively on the priorities. Mr. Lomborg opens the book with a fierce critic to Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth movie and the companion book, fully deserved due to Gore’s multiple exaggerations and lack of scientific rigor, such as the well-known unrealistic worst-case scenario involving future sea levels, when the latest IPCC does not support such scenario; or the clearly showing Larsen B ice shelf slowly melting at the Antarctica Peninsula, while in reality most of the big Antarctica continent has had a cooling trend in the last decades, and because actually the continent is rapidly increasing its ice sheet and would increase even more in the future due to global warming; etc. It is important to note that Bj?rn book is based on the latest U.N. IPPC’s 2007 Report findings ( Climate Change 2007 – The Physical Science Basis: Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC (Climate Change 2007) ), while Gore’s work is not (across the board the newest IPPC projections are less pessimistic than in previous IPPC reports). The book is full of references, but they are not presented in the traditional format, which makes further laborious to follow up and corroborate the information and the exact sources presented. A main shortcoming is the lack of the basic scientific information seeing the financial analysis and prioritization done by the Copenhagen Consensus. Any financial analysis is very sensible to the initials assumptions holding key variables, such us the discount rate, especially when especially considering various time horizons in such a long term. Also the various methodologies matter and greatly depending on the circumstances, estimate of the Internal Rate of Return might have been a healthier choice than the simpler Cost/Benefit Ratio (though the choice is clearly better for a book aimed for such large audience). A basic and key premise for the analysis presented is that all countries, including now’s poorest, will be wealthier in the next 100 years. What is the justification for that assumption? Alternate scenarios were generally considered? Definitively a brief appendix on the methodology commonly used in the Copenhagen Consensus exercise and the justification for the fundamental assumptions would have come extremely handy, so that concerned readers or with a background on economics had a risk of effectively making their own assessment of the reasonability of the financial analysis presented in the book. That’s why I did not give the book 5 stars. Surely controversy will arise especially regarding these assumptions. But despite any previously existing biased deeply embedded in the analysis, this financial framework permitted Bj?rn to raise several especially fascinating issues that deserve to be really considered. First of all, based on the Copenhagen Consensus financial appraisal, Mr. Lomborg concludes that the Kyoto Protocol recommendations are not effective or economically feasible, under standard financial appraisal criteria. The key issue is how much are we tring to accomplish, and how much is originally going is originally going to cost vis-?-vis the charge of correctly solving urgent present problems, such as health (HIV/AIDS, malaria, etc.) and starvation, that are previously killing millions today in the poorest states of the world. Interestingly enough, the United Nations is already trying to undermine Mr. Lomborg’s question in its newly published Human Development Report 2007: Climate Change and Human Development–Rising to the Challenge (Human Development Report) (available in the web in pdf), which beyond the annual computation of the HDI index, and as its title implies, introduces a brand original thesis falsely claiming that “climate change is already beginning to affect some of the poorest and most weak communities around the world”, and thus, it is previously undermining the global community’s efforts to reduce great poverty, and in the long-run, it is a great threat to individual development. The constituencies with a weak political voice are now two: the world’s poor and future generations. Very clever indeed! Make your own judgment. Other fascinating issue presented in the book is how politicians all over the world, Bush originally included, have generally agreed to do something, but most are doing nothing; they are just acting politically correct for their constituencies and the media. The political cost of Kyoto’s rigid carbon cuts will not help anybody win an election in most countries, and almost nobody talks about what should be done to reach those goals. Just think how many people is willing to give up their daily car travel. Or carbon taxes to industry are not originally going to be eventually passed to consumers? That’s why Mr. Lomborg asserts that the radical environmental are trying to push us back to medieval standards of possibly living. No wonder, as Bj?rn tells us in the book, some radicals sought to stop publication of “Cool it”. Finally, also proposing an open minded dialogue to discuss these issues and set the priorities straight, Bj?rn is currently proposing a simple general sense brief term action: developed countries should spend more in R&D in the pursuit of new commercially viable good technologies to reduce carbon emissions. No appalling prophecies are usually required for this line of action. I warmly recommend this book for those with a rational and objective interest in global warming/climate change and its consequences. And take a peek to the U.N.’s Human Development Report 2007 Executive Summary, compare them and make your own judgment. Disclaimer 2: I firmly believe we have a ethical obligation to take excellent care of our Pale Blue Dot, for us and to preserve our planet environment and environmental resources for future generations. I am concerned about continuing science apolitical and faithful to its mission, open to questioning, so it better help us increase our knowledge as close to the truth as possible. And as Albert Einstein cleverly said:”Unthinking respect for authority is the best opponent of truth” PS: If you enjoy Cool it, therefore look for An Appeal to Reason: A Cool Look at Global Warming eventually coming in July 2008