Cool It

November 7, 2010 at 11:14 pm (By Randy)

Take a moment to watch, read and reflect.


  1. amba12 said,

    Oh, my foundation friend in St. Louis had me reading Björn Lomborg and the COpenhagen Consensus a few years ago. Cool, counterintuitive guy.

  2. Icepick said,

    As the Breakthrough Institute has pointed out, we didn’t promote the digital revolution by taxing slide rules or restricting the supply of typewriters. We did it by investing massively in R&D. We could—and should—do the same with green energy technology. As we point out in “Cool It,” devoting roughly $100 billion a year to green energy R&D would likely produce the kind of game-changing breakthroughs needed to fuel a carbon-free future. Not only would this be a much less expensive fix than trying to cut carbon emissions directly, it would also reduce global warming far more quickly.

    There is one potential problem with this scenario – what if “green” energy sources can’t be made much more efficient than current state of the art? Simply devoting to research doesn’t mean that a solution can be found. How much has been spent on the war on cancer? A lot. And although weve had considerable gains in treatment we still haven’t really solved the problem of cancer. There’s no reason that research into “green” energy efficieny will be any more productive.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: