Mr. Lomborg now advocates in line with the gang-green bandwagon/gravy train that the public should be defrauded of money to fight climate change AKA AGW/CAGW/MMGW/MMCC. I wonder if his about face was financed? After being a most reasonable sceptic advocating spending on higher priority issues, he now advocates taxing to finance counterproductive boondoggles such as wind energy and solar.
Via CCNet newsletter (http://www.thegwpf.org)
$100bn a Year needed to fight Climate Change
The world's most high-profile climate change sceptic is to declare that global warming is "undoubtedly one of the chief concerns facing the world today" and "a challenge humanity must confront", in an apparent U-turn that will give a huge boost to the embattled environmental lobby.
Bjørn Lomborg, the self-styled "sceptical environmentalist" once compared to Adolf Hitler by the UN's climate chief, is famous for attacking climate scientists, campaigners, the media and others for exaggerating the rate of global warming and its effects on humans, and the costly waste of policies to stop the problem.
But in a new book to be published next month, Lomborg will call for tens of billions of dollars a year to be invested in tackling climate change. "Investing $100bn annually would mean that we could essentially resolve the climate change problem by the end of this century," the book concludes.
Examining eight methods to reduce or stop global warming, Lomborg and his fellow economists recommend pouring money into researching and developing clean energy sources such as wind, wave, solar and nuclear power, and more work on climate engineering ideas such as "cloud whitening" to reflect the sun's heat back into the outer atmosphere.
In a Guardian interview, he said he would finance investment through a tax on carbon emissions that would also raise $50bn to mitigate the effect of climate change, for example by building better sea defences, and $100bn for global healthcare.
His declaration about the importance of action on climate change comes at a crucial point in the debate, with international efforts to agree a global deal on emissions stalled amid a resurgence in scepticism caused by rows over the reliability of the scientific evidence for global warming. /continues**************************
What an ass orifice. The climate and oceans have been "insignificantly" cooling since 2003 and the cooling is very likely to accelerate due to ocean oscillations harmonising in negative phase, the Arctic Oscillation amplifying the winter cool down in its high pressure phase, Arctic sea ice recovering, Antarctic sea ice extending, and solar activity reducing for god knows how long.
Will Wind Energy Cut Nation's Fuel Emissions?