The ‘sceptical environmentalist’ used cost-benefit analysis to argue against emissions cuts. Now he has turned his attention to overseas aid
 

Climate hyperbole abounds. We are being misled about the looming "climate apocalypse," and we’re also misled that a coming green transition will make energy cheaper, societies safer and everyone richer.

We need better information on how to tackle climate change smartly, while ensuring that we have resources to respond to all the other challenges and to invest in growth and development.

Bjorn Lomborg gave a 16-minute keynote presentation to more than 4000 attendents from more than 90 countries at the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship (ARC) Forum in London. Other speakers besides Lomborg included US Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, Energy Secretary Chris Wright, investor Peter Thiel, Canadian psychologist Dr. Jordan Peterson, and former Australian prime ministers Tony Abbott and Scott Morrison.

In an effort to minimise the effects of climate change, countries in the developed world are chasing net-zero at all costs, causing high energy prices and reduced energy consumption. The problem? In this video, Bjorn Lomborg explains how, across the world, it is countries with the highest energy consumption that create the most wealth, and it is those with the most wealth that are most able to care for the environment. By enacting policies that reduce energy availability and increase cost, the 'net-zero' agenda is preventing the very thing it aims to achieve.

Copenhagen Consensus Centre President Bjorn Lomborg says countries are spending an “enormous amount of money” on the climate issue and doing “almost nothing”.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has signalled Australia will not follow the US in leaving the Paris climate agreement if they win the election.

“We should fix climate smartly, but right now we are just fixing it stupidly,” Mr Lomborg told Sky News host Peta Credlin.

“It is increasingly becoming obvious to voters and to politicians that this is not the right way to go about it.”

Danish political scientist and author, Bjorn Lomborg, has examined Labour's net zero drive through analysing the cost to regular Brits through renewable and non-renewable energy.

The Trump administration has proclaimed the goal of achieving “energy dominance”. This should mean that the US not only shares its vast energy reserves with the world and leads in production, but that it also sets a path of innovation that will shape the future.

The myth that the green energy transition is inevitable and will make cheap electricity for everyone is one of the most dangerous self-delusions of the global elite. Despite two decades of policy attempts, fossil fuels in 2022 still meet 81 per cent of global energy needs, down from 81.2 per cent in 2000. On the most optimistic trend, fossil fuels will still supply two-thirds of all energy in 2100.

Across the world, public finances are stretched dangerously thin. Per person growth continues dropping while costs are climbing for pensions, education, healthcare, and defense. These urgent priorities could easily require an additional 3-6 percent of GDP. Yet green campaigners are loudly calling for governments to spend up to 25 percent of our GDP choking growth in the name of climate change.

Two major new scientific meta-studies on the total global cost of climate change show why political demands of de-growth in the name of climate change are such a misguided idea.

Across the world, public finances are stretched dangerously thin. Per-person growth continues dropping while costs are climbing for pensions, education, health care and defense.

These urgent priorities could easily require an additional 3%-6% of GDP. Yet green campaigners are loudly calling for governments to spend up to 25% of our GDP, choking growth in the name of climate change.