Wharton does Hansen’s climate tipping point scare

If we don’t do something now, we get 20 meters sea level rise.  From Knowledge@Wharton, The Climate Change ‘Tipping Point’: How Should Businesses React?

Dr. Erwann Michel-Kerjan recycles Hansen’s study (peer reviewed, mind you) study saying that the major ice shelf melt is going faster than expected.  We end up with

What Hansen is doing now is [to point out that] we don’t have much time. We’re talking about 2050 — so literally, [that is] almost tomorrow. And we’re not talking about an increase in sea level by only a few feet; we’re talking about a large number Twitter  — five, 10, 20 meters — basically two, three, four, five floors. So if that’s true, that’s a radical change in the way we think about the impact of climate change.

Didn’t Hansen predict catastrophic sea level rise and increased hurricanes within 20 years in 1988?  Doesn’t anyone look at his record of prediction?  Pushing the scare seems to be the thing.

Ten feet by 2050 is a sea level rise of 87 mm/year, or about 30 times the current rate, assuming that it starts in 2015.  They never seem to put out a chart showing what they expect by year.  Nice to make uncheckable, far off predictions.


One response to “Wharton does Hansen’s climate tipping point scare

  1. Ok, economics 101 time-

    What is a city? A city is a stock of capital- people, buildings, roads, machines, etc.

    Capital is created as a result of investment, and destroyed as a result of wear and damage and whatnot.

    So, capital flowing in, capital flowing out and the point where in equals out is our status quo.

    Supposes you want to move a city some distance. If your time frame is a day, or a week, or a month it would be impossible. A year, ten years, it would be possible but only in a very technical, ‘sure. if we devote the entire US gdp to the task…’.

    Capital flowing in, capital flowing out…

    Supposes your time frame is several decades and you think like an economist?

    In several decades, most of the capital will be new investment that doesn’t exist now. The current capital will have been depreciated away.

    How do you move a city? Decree “All new building will be there rather than here!” And wait. Over the decades the capital here will depreciate away. And the new capital stock that now constitutes the city will be there. Voila. A city moved, FOR FREE. The new investment would have been made regardless, and it costs nothing to do it on a different plot of land.

    Do we see this in the real world? Yes. We HAVE seen it in operation. In the first world. In living memory. And it was such a catastrophe that… No one noticed it in operation nor remembers it today. Unless you’re an economist.

    Between roughly 1950 and 1980 the city of Chicago lost about a million people (to emigration). At the same time the city of Los Angeles gained a million people. So, over 30 years a ‘city’ of a million people, with all their homes, businesses, stores, offices, factories, entertainments, roads, utilities, etc, was moved 2000 miles.


    So, so much for rising sea level hysteria…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s