'Some observers argue that the IPCC’s latest report shows that such a revolution in how we fuel the global economy would not actually cost that much. But it is not so clear. The group examined about 900 emissions mitigation scenarios and figured that the median estimated cost of meeting the 2-degree goal would total about 0.06 percentage points of global gross domestic product per year over the course of the century. That huge amount of money could represent the difference between abject poverty and decent conditions for people in developing countries, depending on who sacrifices to bring emissions down'
'There is nothing abnormal about the recent changes in climate—climate is always changing and those who would “stabilize” the climate are fools. They may as well try to stop the Sun from rising and setting.' - 'Today, climate modelers spend more time changing historical data to fit their models than in fixing the wonky things themselves. But take heart, things will eventually sort themselves out, because even the most self deluded scientist can not deny nature itself.'
Nature question: 'Is climate change going to be less extreme than you previously thought?'
Lovelock: The Revenge of Gaia was over the top, but we were all so taken in by the perfect correlation between temperature and CO2 in the ice-core analyses [from the ice-sheets of Greenland and Antarctica, studied since the 1980s]. You could draw a straight line relating temperature and CO2, and it was such a temptation for everyone to say, “Well, with CO2 rising we can say in such and such a year it will be this hot.” It was a mistake we all made.
We shouldn’t have forgotten that the system has a lot of inertia and we’re not going to shift it very quickly. The thing we’ve all forgotten is the heat storage of the ocean — it’s a thousand times greater than the atmosphere and the surface. You can’t change that very rapidly But being an independent scientist, it is much easier to say you made a mistake than if you are a government department or an employee or anything like that.
Nature: 'So what will the next 100 years look like?'
Lovelock: 'That’s impossible to answer. All I can say is that it will be nowhere as near as bad as the worst-case scenario.'
Dr. Lennart Bengtsson: 'We cannot yet separate well enough the greenhouse effect from other climate influences.' - 'Although the radiative forcing by greenhouse gases (including methane, nitrogen oxides and fluorocarbons) has increased by 2.5 watts per square meter since the mid-19th century, observations show only a moderate warming of 0.8 degrees Celsius...high values of climate sensitivity, however, are not supported by observations...Thus, the warming is significantly smaller than predicted by most climate models...since there is no way to validate them (models), the forecasts are more a matter of faith than a fact.'