Essay by Eric Worrall
Swedish economist John Gustavsson explains his vision of Conservative climate action, though he dodges the obvious question.
A cautious approach to climate change
There are realistic alternatives to forcing people to give up their lifestyle.
John Gustavsson…
Instead, climate change needs prudent solutions. Modern environmentalism is all too willing to put aside traditions, habits, and way of life for the “greater good”.
…
Fortunately, there are options – backed by science and already used in some places – that allow us to fight climate change without requiring anyone to eat bugs, go vegan or stop flying. .
First, it’s geoengineering. The term refers to a set of technologies that artificially alter the environment, such as lowering temperatures or generating rain. One of the most famous examples is cloud seeding, a technology that creates artificial rain clouds and prevents drought. That is ready being used in the United Arab Emirates.
…
Solar radiation management is another type of geoengineering technology aimed at reducing global temperatures directly. The most well-known and most erroneous method is the use of stratospheric aerosols. These aerosols cool the earth in a similar way to a volcanic eruption:…
…
Second, there is carbon capture, which is technically a subset of geoengineering. Carbon capture takes many forms, including planting more trees to bind more carbon, but planting trees is clearly not enough, especially since we absolutely must. Cuts more trees in the future to replace many building materials and fuel sources that are harmful to the environment. …
…
Third, we have genetically modified organisms (GMOs). This is another technology that is defamed for no good reason. Nuclear power, stratospheric aerosols, carbon capture, and GMOs: None of them have been proven to be dangerous, they all have huge potential (and in the case of nuclear and GMOs, have proven) to prevent or mitigate the effects of climate change, etc.
…
Ultimately, we need a harm reduction approach. If we’re going to ask people to change their lifestyle, it’s better to steer them away from the worst choices towards less bad choices — rather than chasing unattainable perfection.
…
Read more: https://thedispatch.com/p/a-conservative-approach-to-climate
John Gustavsson describes himself as someone who is never Trump conservative about twitter profile. The anti-Trump stance is not surprising, most “conservatives” in Europe would be considered moderate Democrats in the United States, if such people persisted.
The obvious question that Gustavsson doesn’t ask is, is this necessary? There is no evidence of harmful CO2 increases.
Having said that, I’m not entirely against all forms of “climate action” – as long as I don’t lose anything. For example, I would be perfectly fine with planting trees that are using nuclear power, providing my electricity and tax bills don’t increase. I can imagine driving an EV one day, the range of the offering goes up, and the cost, recharge time, and risk of spontaneous fire go down.
Gustavsson needed to research some of his other ideas.
Related
