Cool It 1st Edition, Kindle Edition

Author Bjorn Lomborg is an adjunct professor at the Copenhagen Business School as well as President of the Copenhagen Consensus Center. He is the former director of the Danish government's Environmental Assessment Institute (EAI) in Copenhagen who became internationally known for his best-selling and controversial book, “The Skeptical Environmentalist” (2001). He was named a “Top 100 Global Thinker” by “Foreign Policy” in 2011 and 2013 and as one of the 100 most influential people in the world by “Time Magazine” in 2004. “Cool It” (2010) was written as a response to environmental activists who propagandize, exaggerate and use fear to create panic over climate risk. Lomborg exposes the fear-mongering for what it is and suggests a middle ground for dialogue (between extremism on both sides of the issue). He shows how many of the approaches being touted today will make future generations worse off and outlines the “coolest options” which will do the most good throughout the century. We need to move from “the feel good to the do good” solutions.Lomborg punctures “the progressive agenda” by providing us with a more complete picture:o Cherry-picked data is being used to support the advocacy of alarmists.o The difficulty of determining the average global temperature which depends on what temperature readings is being used and who is “adjusting” the data.o Al Gore who in 2016 said we only had a decade left to “save the planet from global warming” or we “will reach the point of no return.”o The phony war against CO2.o The lack of subjecting climate research to meaningful due diligence.o As many as half of global warming alarmist research papers might be wrong.o Predictions that climate change would cause catastrophic weather damage have not panned out.o “Climategate” in which a large number of emails were leaked or hacked from the climate research unit at the University of East Anglia 2009. “In them, the world’s most influential climatologists argued, brainstorm and plotted together to enforce what amounts to a party line on climate change. Data that did not support their assumptions were fudged. Peer-reviewed journals that dared to publish contrary articles were threatened with boycotts. When dissenting scientists made a freedom of information request, the relevant emails were deleted, and worse, original data was likely to be deleted.”o Vastly exaggerated emotional claims about the polar bear that are simply not supported by datao Large and very expensive CO2 cuts made now will have only a small and insignificant impact in the future.o The highly publicized Wilkins Glacier which makes up less than 0.01% of Antarctica gets the headlines while we do not hear the inconvenient fact that Antarctica is experiencing record sea ice coverage.o The use policy of cutting CO2 emissions by 20% by 2020 would merely postpone global warming by two years at the end of the century.o Denmark’s $300 billion approach decision will postpone global warming by the end of the century by five days while the money spent could double the number of hospitals in Denmark.o Money politicians want to allocate to global warming could be used to reduce malaria for 3 million people saving 850 million lives each year, provide clean drinking water, sanitation, education, and health care to every single human being on the planet, while increasing R&D to reduce CO2 by 10 times.Lomborg is not a “climate change denier.” He believes that global warming is real and that humans are contributing to it. But he also believes that strong, ominous and immediate consequences of global warming are often widely exaggerated and will not result in good policy. In “Cool It” he argues for simpler, smarter and more efficient solutions for global warming and the human condition, rather than pursuing drastic climate policies costing trillions of dollars which will have minimal impact.Lomborg argues that we need to regain our perspective. There are many other issues which are much more important than global warming - hunger, poverty and disease. He asks, “Isn’t it our ultimate goal to improve quality of life in the environment with solutions that can help more people, at a lower cost, and with a much higher chance of success?”In “On Care for Our Common Home” (Laudato Si'), Pope Francis appealed to "every person living on this planet" for an inclusive DIALOGUE about how we are shaping the future of our planet. Pope Francis called on the Church and the world to acknowledge all environmental challenges and to embark with hope and humility on a new path ensuring a common future for all.Lomborg with "Cool It" makes a valued contribution in the spirit of the dialogue proposed by Pope Francis.

I have been reading the academic papers on global warming for years and with an open mind. With my background as a geologist and actually having traveled to the Arctic many times it - as for anyone who has - a opportunity to view the material in a unique perspective - especially when it comes to those books and other publications that are choosing to omit material that reduces the efficacy of their arguments. "Cool It" takes on both sides, the author himself has the academics (unlike Al Gore) and C.V. to have published the book at the higher academic end yet chose to provide the. information in a very readable form and format; and the author embraces climate is changing quickly and man has caused most of it; he is not from this country so he has no affiliations to the political processes here which are divided. That anyone can read this book and deny there are some real problems with the policies which are being offered to solve global climate change is beyond me; likely the the 3 and 2 and 1 star reviews are from the die hards who refuse to acknowledge that here are better ways of skinning the preverbal cat: for example (and he quotes WHO, IPCC, Kyoto Protocols, NATO, CDC profusely - using THEIR data and that of think tanks) Kyoto Protocals indicates that if all countries did what they are supposed to under the Kyoto agreement (which they have not), then the price that we will pay TO SAVE ONE HUMAN LIFE in the future when their death is caused by global warming will be ONE HUNDRED million dollars per human being. Then he compares what one hundred million dollars will buy TODAY to either save thousands of lives via just buying food for third world countries or what one hundred million dollars will do to save those from HIV or prevention of HIV, or what that sort of money amount can do for 3rd world farmer can do to revamp their way of doing things, etc., because giving the current strategies offered by Kyoto, it will be the worlds poor which will perish as the financial hardship created by the drastic and immediate changes will reduce their standard of living and there will also be less available - from healthcare monies to revamping assistance - as it has been used in a program that will only give the earth a 3-year reprieve and about a 3/10 of a degree F. by year 2080- 2100 when there would be no money left - or an economy to speak of - to generate the cash need - to protect coastal cites from sea level rise, or from the possible flooding of our great rivers inland. All of this offered as he seriously suggests reducing emissions at the same time. In short, and as an example (paraphrased), "...one dollar spent today the Kyoto way will give one CENT benefit by year 2100 while one dollar spent on HIV TODAY in direct help via education and medical help will give forty dollars return by 2100." And he offered many examples of the fallacy of destroy the world economy for little if not benefit except a 3 year reprieve from a 3/10 degree F. change. Buy it an you will never regret it - it will be the best one you have on your shelf.

Bjorn write from the point of view of a mathematician and economist that truly evaluates the costs of proposed solutions. He then talks about the other things we could spend money on to save human lives, like mosquito nets in Africa, potable water, vaccines, micronutrients and shows how many more millions of lives we would save by using our money more wisely than say subsidies for inefficient solar panels. He is a big adovcate of fundamental research so we get a quantum leap in technology that can really make a difference - like Solar panels that are much more efficient (so that poor people in China and India can afford them), or car batteries that can go 5x as far for the same weight and size.Both sides need to read this with an open mind.

This presented the most clear cut and rational approach to dealing with global warming that I have ever read. He points out many relatively ways to deal with the problems are reasonable cost. He points out that the methods pushed by government and the UN are by far the most expensive ways and the least effective way of dealing with global warming by a factor of 50-100 times. He does an excellent job of pointing out the many lies and falsehoods presented to the public and press by the very vocal advocates of global warming. I would recommend this book to anyone wanting a rational and clear cut evaluation of the problems of global warming and the many rational, relatively inexpensive ways of dealing with the issue.