Choosing Column A

Posted by: Adam Aston on November 4, 2007

A compellingly clear simplification of the choices we face in dealing with the risks of global warming. Check it out.

Reader Comments

Johnathan

November 9, 2007 6:41 PM

I did it myself, and found myself in Column B. For my worst case scenario of inaction, I assumed half of Antarctica and Greenland could melt in 100 years. For my worst case scenario of preventing global warming, I assumed that economic growth worldwide could slow from 4% to 2% annually.

In Column A, billions of people continue to starve to death because their incomes are 7 times less than what they should be. Storms and sea levels are just as they are today.

In Column B, we are either 7 times more wealthy than we are in Column A; or sea levels are 20 feet higher and hurricane zones are both wider and uninhabitable. Even if there is continuing worldwide devastation, as long as we can offset it with less than 50 trillion of today's dollars per year, we are better off--even in the worst case scenario.

Post a comment

 

About

BusinessWeek correspondents John Carey and Mark Scott, cover the green scene, keeping on top of the business aspects of energy, the environment and climate change, as well as the technologies, policies, markets and people that are shaping how the earth's resources will be used in the century ahead.

BW Mall - Sponsored Links

Buy a link now!