Quote:
Originally Posted by Surtt
First of all he is making the assumption that throwing money* at the problem will make it go away. There seams to be an assumption that the world's climate is stable, it might not be. If we have started global warming, we might be too late to stop it even if we cut our carbon output to zero.
Secondly he is assuming there is a known amount of money "X" that we need to spend to stop it. We have no idea how much we would need to do. What if we spend X dollars and we need to spend X+1 to fix it, we just waisted X dollars. What if we spend 10X, we just threw the would into a depression needlessly. The truth is: there is not 2 columns, but unknown trillions of columns. It is not a simple yes/no question.
|
These are all spurious arguments against his logic. Any of your scenarios could fit into one of the four columns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Surtt
We have no idea how much we would need to do.
|
Dozens of studies say anywhere from 0.3 to 3 percent of GDP.