Essay

Bjørn Lomborg is an ardent environmentalist who believes that Al Gore’s approach to global warming will not solve the problem, in fact it will make matters worse. Mr. Lomborg believes that global warming is real and manmade, as does Mr. Gore. However, he presents solid economic data, combined with powerful and sensible arguments, to demonstrate a wiser and humane approach to solving enormous high-priority problems while researching alternative energy in a way that, he says, would lead to a high-wealth low-CO₂ future. Mr. Gore’s approach of greatly increasing the cost of fossil fuels, he argues, would have the opposite effect.

The debate over the environment is contentious and politically charged. Pundits, both the left and the right, place their political agenda ahead of science. Scientists are not immune from the pressure that their political benefactors may place on them. Sincerity and accuracy are rare among high-profile environmentalists. (Pardon my skepticism.) The right may be protecting their industrial supporters, but a for-profit environmental complex has arisen on the left. Nobody is giving away solar cells or Prius automobiles.

Mr. Gore and his teammates argue that vast cuts in CO₂ emissions would (1) stem global warming and (2) help a vast array of other problems indirectly. Mr. Lomborg argues that Mr. Gore’s plan would reduce global warming by only 0.3 degrees over the next ninety years at a cost of $800 billion and that the other problems facing humanity are better addressed directly at a vastly reduced cost.

Mr. Lomborg, a sincere environmentalist, is also a humanitarian. He along with the Copenhagen Consensus have applied sound economics to prioritize the major problems facing mankind today and he believes that we should expect, yes encourage poor countries to develop higher standards of living through the temporary increase of fossil fuel consumption. He sites the work of Nobel prize-winning economist, Simon Kuznets, who theorized that when poor countries pursue policies to raise their citizens living standards, very little priority is given to environmental concerns and thus pollution rises. But once a country achieves that higher standard of living, providing education and health care to most, their focus begins to shift toward the environment, and pollution starts to fall. Bjørn Lomborg emphasizes that one of the pivotal things we can do to help the environment is to help poor countries get richer.

The problem I have with Al Gore and many others who make appearances on behalf of the environment is their hypocrisy. Mr. Gore flies around in a private jet. That is a lot of Co₂ for one man to be spewing. He claims that he buys carbon offsets, an elitist program to excuse the richest among us from sharing the sacrifices with regular folks. The rich class puts on a pretense of caring about the environment while lobbying elected officials to enact policies that will drastically drive up the cost of living, widening the gap between themselves and the working class.

If they cared about the environment and believed that CO₂ had to be cut — if they believed that these cuts were so urgently needed that the negative economic impact was inconsequential — wouldn’t they park their private jets and fly commercial. Consider: If you were in the hospital with severe respiratory disease and one of your children smoked during visits. He explains that he has offset the damage to your health by placing a plant on your nightstand. Wouldn’t you doubt his love or think he didn’t believe the diagnosis.

-Thomas