Nord House, Nobel Prize, Oren Nord discussed on The Ben Shapiro Show
Okay. So as I say, a lot of folks, I'm very excited about William Nord house actually winning a Nobel prize in economics for his work on the economics of climate change. There's only. One problem with this Nord house actually argues that we should only intervene economically. We should only shift our economy when the cost of not intervening outweigh the cost of intervening, which makes a lot of sense, right. So if you're not going to intervene and the cost of climate change are really high, then you should intervene this how you make all your decisions in life. You make every decision life. The cost of me acting is better or worse than the cost of not acting. So what Nord house basically says is we have to determine whether the cost of action is more expensive than the cost of inaction. What point does that become a reality? At what point do we actually have to act according to Mr. Nord house? The actual number is the the optimal temperature increase where we have to act is when there is a climate change of four point, one degrees, which is about two point, three degrees celsius caso higher than anything. The IPC is talking about. In fact, his model is called dice and there is a twenty thirteen model version that he posted in an excel table. The key. Data here is that he estimated a cost in the year twenty one hundred four percents of global GDP which is the equivalent of reducing annual growth over the century from about two point, two, seven percent to two point two, two percents, or pro postponing the prosperity of twenty one hundred until twenty one zero three. So if the worst case scenarios heads, he is talking about a cost in the year twenty one hundred four percents of GDP which is not all that high. We can cope with it. It's something that we can deal with in August. He actually published in updated discussion of this model. I talked to the orange cast this morning who's an expert on this stuff over Manhattan institute is wonderful. Work like me. I think he's what you call lukewarm, meaning that he believes the global warming is happening, but he's skeptical of a lot of the answers that are being given for how to curb it according to Oren Nord house published a discussion of his latest model in the American economic journal in which he argued that holding warming below two point, five degrees celsius is implausible and not cost effective. In other words, you've already hit one point five. Three celsius probably already two degree celsius. There's nothing we can do there. He says, the optimal trajectory would be mitigation that reduces warming from four point, two degrees celsius to three point, five degrees celsius by twenty one hundred. Here's what he says. He says the international target for climate change with a limit of two degrees celsius appears to be infeasible with reasonably accessible technologies even with very ambitious abatement strategies. So in other words, the person that the left is now celebrating for winning the Nobel prize in economics because it's a slap at Trump doesn't agree with them and doesn't agree with the IPC on sort of action that is necessary in order to avoid catastrophe sets pretty. It's pretty important thing to know you would think, but the media is not covering any of that stuff. Instead, they're just going with the fully alarmist idea that we are on the brink of disaster, and we're all going to die..