[ExI] Next Decade May See No Warming

[Stathis Papaioannou]

2008/5/2 Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com>:

>  I understood your point. Did you understand mine, namely
>  that there is *huge* uncertainty in these models?  Also, did
>  you understand that massive global expenditures by
>  governments are at this time premature?  (Now we see
>  that the American subsidies to ethanol production are
>  resulting in food riots around the world. It's obvious to
>  me that if there is a crisis, it's too much concerted government
>  action and government planning.)

Suppose it's true that global warming will happen and that it will be
a disaster, and suppose it's also true that there is something that
could be done now to prevent it. Even if this is understood by
everyone, the free market is unlikely to give rise to action to avert
disaster if such action results in loss of short and medium term
profits for individual enterprises. It's a variation on the Prisoner's
Dilemma: you would be foolish to restrict your energy use or switch to
more expensive "green" energy sources if you're going to lose money as
a result and, in any case, no-one benefits from your trouble unless a
majority of people voluntarily follow your example. The only way to
solve the problem seems to be if there is an opportunity to vote to
*force everyone* to adhere to a plan which, although profit-sapping,
will at least be disaster-averting.



-- 
Stathis Papaioannou