Bjorn Lomborg tells Dennis Prager that the UN predicts global warming will cost only 0.2-2% of GDP in the 2070s, while global wealth grows 363%. He argues the U.S. spending $500 billion annually on climate would barely move the temperature needle and wastes money better spent elsewhere.
But he sounds the alarm. That's why his book is called False Alarm, with regard to what it would take, for example, to become— what is the Joe Biden anticipation by 2050?
That will be net zero, that you will basically not be using any fossil fuels or emit any greenhouse gases, and the few ones that you will be emitting, you will be compensating by sucking them out of the atmosphere as well.
So tell us what is wrong with that ambition.
So Dennis, there's two things wrong. One is that it's being presented as this end of the world. This is what scares our kids and what makes everyone believe that this could literally be the end of humanity, that global warming is really that dangerous. It is not. And the UN climate panel, the gold standard of climate research, tells us so. They tell us that the impact of global warming will be negative, yes. But, you know, say in the 2070s, the cost of global warming will be equivalent of somewhere between 0.2 and 2% of GDP. So that means each one of us will feel 0.2 to 2% less well off than we otherwise would have. But remember, by then we'll be 363% as rich as we are today. So instead of being 363%, we'll only be 356%. As rich as we are today. Yes, that's a problem. No, it's not the end of the world. That matters because if we understand this is not the end of the world, it's a problem, one of many problems we have to fix. We also understand we shouldn't throw everything in the kitchen sink at this problem. We should be careful not to actually waste more resources than what we're— the problem that we're trying to fix. And unfortunately, Biden has decided, or he said that he wants to, let's see if that actually happens. He wants to spend $500 billion every year for the next 4 years on tackling climate change. That's 13% of the federal revenue. That's a lot of money. And the net impact will be pretty much zero in terms of impact on global warming. And that's why I'm raising the alarm, simply saying, look, We've got to be careful with our resources. It's not like we're flush with money. If we don't spend this money well, it means that we leave the future less well off than it otherwise could have been.
When you present the data, it's just angering. I— what I have not— and I've read a lot of what you've written, and I may have missed it, or you may simply not have addressed it. So I'll ask you, what is the propelling— what propels people like Joe Biden and others to this suicidal mission of a society that is completely fossil fuel free within 30 years? Bjorn Lomborg, welcome. Is my guest. I'll get his response as soon as we return. $500 billion a year for the next 3— we are just, my friends, we are bequeathing to the next generation dollar bills that are monopoly money.
Life, Legacy, and a Dangerous Mission in the Soviet Union | Sunday Fireside Chat
