Cartoon: the climate contrarian guide to managing risk A new cartoon created by John Cook illustrates the failure of climate contrarians to manage global warming risks A dealer arranges gambling chips on a baccarat table a few days before the Solaire casino-resortc opening in Pasay city, Metro Manila, the Philippines. The $1.2 billion Solaire casino-resort is the first of four projects to open before 2017, as the Philippines stries to lure gamblers and tourists to overtake Singapore and become the regions biggest casino destination. Climate contrarians want us to bet everything on the best case global warming scenario. Thats a failure of basic risk management. Photograph: Erik De Castro/Reuters Climate change is fundamentally a risk management problem. Whether or not you agree with the 97 percent expert consensus on human-caused global warming, there is an undeniable risk that the consensus is correct and that were causing dangerously rapid climate change. Frequently, climate contrarians argue against taking action to mitigate that risk by claiming the uncertainties are too large. One of the most visible figures to make this argument is climate scientist Judith Curry, who said in 2013, I cant say myself that [doing nothing] isnt the best solution. This argument represents a failure to grasp the principles of basic risk management, as illustrated in the following cartoon. The climate contrarian guide to managing risk. Created by John Cook The climate contrarian guide to managing risk. Created by John Cook When it comes to managing risk, uncertainty is not our friend. Uncertainty means its possible the outcome will be better than we expect, but its also possible it will be much worse than we expect. In fact, continuing with business-as-usual would only be a reasonable option in the absolute best case scenario. Doing nothing is betting the farm on a very low probability scenario. Its an incredibly high-risk path that fails to reduce the threats posed by the worst case or even most likely case scenarios. This is a concept Judith Curry understood in 2007, when she wrote, The rationale for reducing emissions of carbon dioxide is to reduce the risk of the possibility of catastrophic outcomes. Making the transition to cleaner fuels has the added benefit of reducing the impact on public health and ecosystems and improving energy security ... I have yet to see any option that is worse than ignoring the risk of global warming and doing nothing. Judith Curry of 2007 got it exactly right. Unfortunately she and her fellow climate contrarians no longer seem to grasp these fundamental principles of risk management. Failing to mitigate global warming by significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions is fundamentally equivalent to continuing to smoke cigarettes, driving without a seat belt, or refusing to buy homeowners insurance. Each situation represents the failure to take action to reduce the risks of a very dangerous outcome. Even if you personally have doubts about the 97 percent expert consensus on human-caused global warming and the threats it represents, theres a good chance youre wrong. You may also doubt the medical science consensus that smoking causes lung cancer, but acting on that doubt by continuing to smoke is a risky decision. The difference is that in the latter case, youre only risking the health of yourself and those in your proximity. In the case of global warming, youre risking the health of entire ecosystems and future generations. From a risk management perspective, mitigating the undeniable threat of catastrophic climate change is a no-brainer. So lets stop delaying and denying and get to it.
Posted on: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 07:24:49 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015