The new climate denial: climate economics
The new climate denial: climate economics
A conversation with economist Noah Kaufman
I always thought that the increasingly undeniable physical impacts of climate change would eventually lead climate deniers to accept the science. Of course, I was wrong. They’ll never do that because their objection was never actually the science — instead it is about the politics.
Rather than accept the science, deniers have adapted by coming up with an entire new set of objections. From Heatmap:
The climate denial movement has entered a new phase, suggests new research from the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH). The study analyzed transcripts of more than 12,000 climate-related YouTube videos posted since 2018 and found evidence that “old denial” narratives (Global warming isn’t real! Humans have nothing to do with it!) are becoming less common as the effects of climate change become undeniable.
I’ve talked about these new arguments before. For example, I wrote previously about how climate deniers now make a general argument that “there is no evidence that climate change is not an ‘emergency’”, a claim which confuses moral judgments with scientific analysis.
More generally, climate deniers now focus much more on economics and energy, rather than science:
In particular, economic arguments against action on climate change have become prominent. It is focused on economic models that predict that a few degrees of climate change will have a minimal impact on our economy, suggesting that climate change is not something we should worry our prettly little heads about.
But not all economists agree with this. I talked to one recently, Noah Kaufman, an economist at Columbia. Despite having a Ph.D. from the Univ. of Texas, Noah is one of my favorite economists on Twitter. He joins me to talk about a new paper he wrote with colleagues from Columbia on how economics can help us solve the climate problem. Watch the interview here:
Best line by Noah: "you can't rely on modelers to tell you when to not use their models..."
Part of the reason we are surprised (not sure surprised is the right word) by the recent data showing a non linear acceleration in heat energy as well as numerous predicted conditions arriving 10-30 years earlier than estimated, is in great part due to the over-reliance on models. I love hearing a scientist say all models are wrong but some are useful and then 20 minutes later cite some modeling result as being scientifically or foundationally true. But to their defense, they are just human, and all humans are sloppy, flawed and often incorrect... but some of those humans are useful. :)
Based on this talk given by Nordhaus, I would definitely say that he agrees that global warming is a serious problem and we urgently need to being doing more to reduce emissions.
Nobel laureate William Nordhaus: The economics of climate change
https://youtu.be/5DG5i8BGaXo