For most people knowing a bit about the global warming discussion the name Bjørn Lomborg should be common. He is a Danish political scientist and writes a lot about (the economics of) climate change. He calls himself a “skeptical environmentalist” (he once was a member of Greenpeace) and is a highly controversial author – while admitting that there is a man-made global warming, he long claimed that mitigation of it wouldn’t be worth the trouble. Instead we should concentrate on adaptation and solving other problems like poverty.
According to the Guardian, in his new book Lomborg seems to make a U-turn. Although there remain issues on which I personally still wouldn’t agree (e.g. nuclear power), the main message is, allegedly, fairly different from what he wrote and said so far. Newest research is supposed to be the reason for him changing his mind.
What does this mean for the global warming debate? I am afraid, not that much. For the time being, the main problem seem to be people denying the global warming or at least it being anthropogenic – both issues never being up for debate in Lomborg’s writings. Nevertheless, it is welcome news that he has changed his mind (I already see somebody accusing him of being bought by the bad Warmists).
P.S. After having read his new article I wouldn’t say that Lomborg has made “a U-turn”. In this article there is nothing really new. His formulations are perhaps a little bit more cautious and open minded, but by and large he remains Bjørn Lomborg as we know him.