May 27, 2022Liked by Henrik Nordborg

I have rubbed shoulders with some of these types at dinner parties of they hyper wealthy, the oil men whose only ambition in their later years is to maintain their income, and pay for pretty girls to come to such parties on their arm. They don't particularly care, and most are not particularly smart, but I met nobody who thinks they are killing civilization.

They have been told for decades that the economic consequences are tiny, not to worry. Over and over, they have been told this. So have politicians. At +4 to +6C, maybe 2% economic damages. No worries! (With a few CYA words buried deep in papers few actually read beyond the abstract.)

William Nordhaus is the person guilty of this crime. Nordhaus' farcical Nobel is a crime against humanity. Nordhaus' acolytes control climate economics today. For all practical purposes Nordhaus' acolytes ARE climate economics today. Their double-think, arrogance, and stupidity are astonishing to deal with.

Gernot Wagner, James Rising, and Simon Dietz are the most recent group to continue this crime against humanity. Their mendacity is on full display in their 2021 paper and their response to our criticism. Their PNAS "Economic impacts of tipping points in the climate system" is an appalling piece of garbage built on meaningless modeling that Nordhaus created. The criticism of these models is eviscerating. That it was passed through PNAS referees tells you everything you need to know about how completely farcical the 'climate economics' subfield is. All of it, every bit, is garbage, and they are why we continue to ignore this problem that will destroy global civilization.

Climate economists - every single one - are the people that you should be attacking with the intent to destroy their careers. These are the people that should shunned by sane society. They are the most guilty ones. All of them should be cast out of every university or "think tank" they work for, and tried for treason and crimes against humanity. This is no exaggeration.

But this also indicts every mainstream economist in the world. Those economists have allowed this monstrosity of corruption or profound incompetence and good-old boy clubbiness to be perpetrated on society. All of them just sit by and mouth platitudes and nonsense while proclaiming that NOBODY ELSE could POSSIBLY comprehend the tradeoffs.

Yes, you too, Paul Krugman. You too. You are ALL guilty of this atrocity.

Expand full comment
May 26, 2022Liked by Henrik Nordborg

Love the narrative.

Expand full comment

Metaphors and language matter. They shape how we perceive our reality.

Thanks for this encouraging writing.

The Global Carbon Compensation is a real and tangible climate solution that deserves to be discussed and widely promoted!

Expand full comment

Thank you - but I am slightly confused and would like to check my logic. If the price of a barrel of oil goes up massively, and the oil companies take their profits from the rich, as you suggest - and in parallel, you want there to be less oil (and other fossil fuels used) - you must be implying that the price would mean that the increased price would lead to one, less demand (from poorer people, right?) and in general (by everyone) an increased demand for the (now relatively cheaper) non-fossil solutions. Is that correct?

Thank you!

Expand full comment

Henrik, your words are like a punch in the mouth as you lay out this sad story. The big decisions have already been made BUT no one wants to accept it. The rage inside many of us wants to shut the whole vile system down but as you say, without a viable alternative the likely outcone would be chaos, death and suffering. We tried working with the elite but they just lie to our face. So what's left? Can we really distribute wealth more evenly? Wouldn't the elite fight back to protect their ill-gotten gains? At this point, I'm wondering...are there other ways to use the system against itself? Or is this the next and possibly the last chapter for Homo Sapiens.

Expand full comment

Stopping FF use is not the most important thing we need to do. This will take time, as you know, will create more warming, as you know, and meanwhile, Earth's rising temperatures will breach deadly levels ruining our ecosystem. The climate takes too long to process the gradual reduction in GHGs brought about by a slow phaseout of FFs, along with naturally occurring GHG emissions on top of the rising population and increasing energy demands on the FF that are being phased out, to avoid deadly heating. What we cannot fail to do is enact SRM as soon as possible to get ahold of temperatures before it's too late. None of the GHG management techniques (trees, DAC, etc.) can possibly have, even when combined, a meaningful impact on total GHG concentration to change this.

Expand full comment

Your metaphor is on point. Thank you.

What's the path to getting the proposed tax enacted?

Expand full comment
May 26, 2022·edited May 26, 2022

Excellent metafore, completely accurate. Particularly the two lucrative jobs, drilling new holes in the hull and keeping passengers in third class which will sink first.

Perhaps the author may add the most lucrative job and that is to gather all the lifeboats together so the first class passengers can use them first.

Expand full comment

Brilliant, I think that you are really honing in on the key factors. More and more of us are starting to wake up...

Expand full comment