The climate change body count
I am impressed by the arguments in this article for the need for more attention to be paid to the numbers of people killed as a direct result of global climate change.
I find it difficult to find fault with its conclusion:
“Such an understanding is essential for two quite different reasons. First, it is a basic issue of justice. The dead should be remembered and their families and friends should understand the factors involved in their deaths. Second, it seems likely that the numbers of people killed by climate change has been significantly underestimated. This means that, in addition to issues of the morality of equating human lives with the time spent waiting in airport queues, such cost-benefit analyses used to shape government policy with major climatic impacts, such as building a new runway at Heathrow, are likely to be biased by underestimating the cost in human lives of such decisions.”
This content was originally posted on my old Process Guy blog.
3 Comments
·
We should also look at those whose lives are saved.
For example by not dying of cold in winter (far more than die from heat in the summer).
And also, those whose lives are saved and improved by the processes which are thought to lead to climate change – those who are being lifted out of poverty through industry and trade.
Whenever you look at something, you must look for the unseen as well as the seen. The benefits are unseen.
Not that I make any claim that the benefits outweigh the costs – its not a calculation I want to do, I actually think it is not possible on the large scale – which is why we must harness the market to tackle climate change (through carbon trading or green taxation usually)
·
Thanks tristan for the comment, although I am not entirely sure what point you are making. 🙂
I do have to point out that, while mild winters may save some lives, the summer heatwaves we will get as a result of climate change will lead to others losing theirs. The elderly and the vulnerable are at risk from heat stroke. We have already seen such cases.
I do agree though that we should harness the market to tackle climate change. But you will appreciate that information is a requirement for the proper operation of the market mechanism. A clear understanding of the costs, and yes I will admit the benefits, is just as critical for making the right decisions when active within a market as it is in public policy decision-making.
·
Well, the number of lives saved by milder winters is estimated to outweigh the numbers lost in heat waves (and they tend to come from the same groups of people too – not much comfort for those affected…)
Basically, I’m just trying to point out that there’s more information than just the seen negatives (and benefits).
To get a better picture you need to look at the seen (the deaths in summer) and the unseen (the lives saved in winter).
So yes, we need as much information as we get get (and handle… information overload is also a danger…)