No doubt, climate change is a global issue. We need to protect the environment if sustainable development and intergenerational equity is anything to go by. I am thinking about Kyoto Protocol and why no country seems to be reaching the set targets. Is it because the benefits are not convincing enough or is it because public support for carbon taxing is not there?
The Costs of Kyoto protocol compliance in one year are sufficient to provide the world’s population with clean drinking water. Coming from a country where drinking water is literally life or death depending on quality, I see what Bjorn Lomberg is talking about.
According to Bjorn, postponement of climate change impacts by four years in over 100 years is what complying will get us. Is 4 years in a hundred years worth it? Using the current discount rate I would say no. I am thinking about access to water and improved sanitation for the slum populations in Africa, in Kenya, I am thinking about the fight against malaria, HIV/Aids, reproductive health and education. That is what is on top of my priority list.
Being an environmental economists is not easy. Even harder when you come from a developing country where getting through today is not guaranteed leave alone a 100 years.