Essay on The Environmental Truth

8/13/2019 Essay on The Environmental Truth

1/9


2/9

Contents

IIntroduction....................................................................................... 2

IIThe Exhaustion of Natural Resources.............................................. 2

IIIStarvation in Poor and Developing Countries................................. 4

Statistic of World Hunger ..................................................................... 4

IVBiodiversity Loss and Greenhouse Gases........................................ 5

Graphof Air Pollutants Used in "The Truth About the Environment"

Mauna Loa Observatory CO2 Graphical Evolution ............................... 6

Graph of CO2 Increase, Including the Industrial Revolution .................. 6VThe Kyoto Protocol........................................................................... 7

VIConclusion....................................................................................... 8

ANNEXBibliography............................................................................ 8


3/9

I Introduction

The Truth About The Environment is a treaty written by Bjorn Lomborg, a former green

activist. In this paper his goal is to shed a new light on subjects like the threat of biodiversity due to

deforestation, world hunger, air pollution, resource depletion and the effectiveness of the KyotoProtocol.

He begins by stating that there is no evidence to back up the sum of threats posed to

humanity, such as the ones listed above and the problem of our ever-growing population and the

increasing scarcity of food supplies, as well as air and water pollution, even though it has been

documented in several cases and there are real, observable pieces of evidence we can witness with our

own eyes (ex: changing climate, strange meteorological phenomena, etc)

Stating that the population is growing at a very fast pace and that food is becoming more and

more scarce is a mistruth, as pointed out by Mr. Lomborg. The truth is that the population growth has

stopped growing at such an alarming rate[1]and food is not becoming scarcer, mainly because of the

Green Revolution[2]which was a series of projects taking place between 1940 and 1960, with the aim

of improving the agricultural production, especially in developing countries. Sadly, there is a flipside to

this coinour current world population is extremely big, and there are still a lot of people starving or

suffering from malnourishment in poor countries, as we will explain later.

II The Exhaustion of Natural Resources

Mr. Lomborg states that energy and natural dont actually deplete, but they become more andmore abundant due to the lower costs of discovering and exploiting them, and that our planet still holds

enough resources as to not represent a big problem for a long time. While true to a certain degree

after all, before using a certain resource it has to be discovered, and our methods for exactly this

purpose have become increasingly sophisticated and cheaperit still is a logical fallacy. There is actually

an end to the amount of resources available, and there is also a point that represents the limit at which

we can find and extract. Lets take oil (petroleum) as an example it cannot physically and chemically

exist in an exploitable form after a certain depth (called an oil window) and it is also a non-

replenishable resource (technically it can replenish itself, but the conditions are both extreme and span

a very large period of time, until proper petroleum appears).

He goes on to say that our current resources will last us for another 150 years, at our current

economic growth, and that we shouldnt limit the economic growth if we wish to solve this problem,

instead we should accelerate it. This is yet another fallacy, because if we consider our economic growth

constant, as it was in 2013, the current reserves of Copper will only last us for another 38 years, Zinc will

last for 18 years, Oil for 40 years, Coal for 123 years and Gas for 61 years. And if the World economy

grows at the current rates, most of these resources will last even less, and in some extreme cases the
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_populationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_populationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_populationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population


4/9

reserves would drop dramaticallyAluminium will only last another 78 years, instead of ~1800 years at

the current consumption rates. This is what our resource reserves would look like over 100 years, with

both a constant growth as well as an accelerated growth:

(interactive graph, source:North Carolina State University)

Suffice to say, his arguments are completely off the mark since accelerating our current

economic growth is definitely not a solution to this problem. We are not arguing for slowing or

damaging the economy as a way to fix this situation, but perhaps a different, better production method

would be wise to adopt. He also tries to argue that alternative energy sources, such as solar power, have

become cheaperthis is true, but there are still problems and restrictions in applying them consistently

across the globe. For example: solar cells must be installed in proper locations (eg. deserts, regions

without clouds and with long days) as to generate the optimum amount of power, hydroelectric plants

must fulfill a number of criteria in order to be effective (on rivers with a certain depth and debit),
http://www4.ncsu.edu/~kpadia/CS895/HW5/http://www4.ncsu.edu/~kpadia/CS895/HW5/


5/9

geothermal plants can only be applied in a few locations, tidal power plants are still terribly ineffective

and with high costs, and the list goes on.

III Starvation in Poor and Developing Countries

Mr. Lomborg explains that the agricultural production in developing countries is better than in

the past, and that the kilocalories per capita are steadily increasingwhile this is true, the problem is far

from being solved. There is still an estimate of 33% of the worlds population considered to be starving,

and 98% of the people who do not receive enough food are located in underdeveloped countries.

(source:Statistic Brain)

While his statement (the proportion of people in developing countries who are starving has

dropped from 45% in 1949 to 18% today, and is expected to decline even further to 12% in 2010 and

just 6% in 2030) is true[3],the main problem nowadays is that most people in poor countries dont have

enough money to buy food, or enough land to grow it on. The agricultural production is not the right

issue to talk about, but poverty is. After all, hunger and poverty form a vicious circle: hunger is the cause

of poverty, and poverty is the cause of hunger because hunger causes poor health and low levels of

energy, and sometimes mental impairment, which in turn leads to greater poverty because it reduces

peoples ability to learn and work, thus leading to even greater hunger.

Another of his statements is that alimentary products are 90% cheaper today than in 1800. But

as an example, a Best dinner with pint of good beer or cider, 37.5 cents in West Jersey, 1806, adjustedto inflation for today would mean roughly $4.50[4].This does not reflect a decrease in price, but rather

an increase. Another example would be the evolution of corn flakes price in the USA, since 1907 until

2013[5]which adjusted to inflation shows a greater price today compared to 1907.
http://www.statisticbrain.com/world-hunger-statistics/http://www.statisticbrain.com/world-hunger-statistics/http://www.statisticbrain.com/world-hunger-statistics/http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htm#Does_the_world_produce_enough_food_to_feed_everyonehttp://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htm#Does_the_world_produce_enough_food_to_feed_everyonehttp://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htm#Does_the_world_produce_enough_food_to_feed_everyonehttp://www.foodtimeline.org/foodfaq5.html#tavernhttp://www.foodtimeline.org/foodfaq5.html#tavernhttp://www.foodtimeline.org/foodfaq5.html#tavernhttp://www.foodtimeline.org/foodfaq5.html#comparehttp://www.foodtimeline.org/foodfaq5.html#comparehttp://www.foodtimeline.org/foodfaq5.html#comparehttp://www.foodtimeline.org/foodfaq5.html#comparehttp://www.foodtimeline.org/foodfaq5.html#tavernhttp://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htm#Does_the_world_produce_enough_food_to_feed_everyonehttp://www.statisticbrain.com/world-hunger-statistics/


6/9

IV Biodiversity Loss and Greenhouse Gases

Mr. Lomborg also treats the subject of deforestation and the biodiversity losses it causes. He

gives an example of the Brazillian Atlantic rainforest, of which only about 10% remains, and states that

none of the species present could be declared extinct, even though 5 mammal species have beendeclared extinct throughout the region (Five large mammal species tapirs, giant anteaters, jaguar,

wooly spider monkeys and white-lipped peccaries are essentially extinct throughout the whole

region[6])and only 22% of the initial forest population has survived, compared to the predicted 47-83

percent[6].

This is just one of many examples, but it is clear that deforestation is an actual problem, and it

does result in extinction and reduction of forest & jungle animal population, contrary to the idea he

argues.

The next thing he discusses is air pollution, while making a very absurd claim (Today, the air is

cleaner than it has been since 1585). From the graph provided in his work, we can safely saythat the

atmosphere is lacking smoke and sulphur dioxide, which is true but mainly because the latter

posed a serious threat to human health, and steps have been taken to ensure the emissions are as low

as possible (removal from coal using limestone, usage of fuel additives before burning, etc[7].

(source: The Truth About the Environment)

The problem is this: the most important and damaging of the greenhouse gases is not

represented, which is CO2. Its effects are major and it is irreversible Carbon dioxide has unique long-

term effects on climate change that are largely "irreversible" for one thousand years after emissions

stop (zero further emissions)[8].
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/14/in-fragmented-brazilian-forest-few-species-survive/?_r=1http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/14/in-fragmented-brazilian-forest-few-species-survive/?_r=1http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/14/in-fragmented-brazilian-forest-few-species-survive/?_r=1http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/14/in-fragmented-brazilian-forest-few-species-survive/?_r=1http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/14/in-fragmented-brazilian-forest-few-species-survive/?_r=1http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/14/in-fragmented-brazilian-forest-few-species-survive/?_r=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_dioxide#As_an_air_pollutanthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_dioxide#As_an_air_pollutanthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_dioxide#As_an_air_pollutanthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth's_atmosphere#Irreversibility_and_uniqueness_of_carbon_dioxidehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth's_atmosphere#Irreversibility_and_uniqueness_of_carbon_dioxidehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth's_atmosphere#Irreversibility_and_uniqueness_of_carbon_dioxidehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth's_atmosphere#Irreversibility_and_uniqueness_of_carbon_dioxidehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_dioxide#As_an_air_pollutanthttp://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/14/in-fragmented-brazilian-forest-few-species-survive/?_r=1http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/14/in-fragmented-brazilian-forest-few-species-survive/?_r=1


7/9

Also, its concentration in the atmosphere grows at an alarming rate, as measured by the Mauna

Loa Observatory:

(source: Mauna Loa Observatory)

(source:American Chemical Society)
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/obop/mlo/http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/obop/mlo/http://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/climatescience/greenhousegases/industrialrevolution.htmlhttp://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/climatescience/greenhousegases/industrialrevolution.htmlhttp://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/obop/mlo/


8/9

The second graph shows how the levels of CO2, CH4 and N2O have risen along the time, and also

the spike just after the end of the Industrial Revolution, clearly showing that the more advanced our

society becomes, the more it causes almost irreversible damage to the planet, in this case the

atmosphere. This goes to show how wrong Mr. Lomborg is in his affirmations, since they are skewing

reality through his selective omission of several facts, which have an important role in the structure of

his arguments.

V The Kyoto Protocol

The Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate

Change(UNFCCC) is an international treaty that sets binding obligations on industrialized countries to

reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.[9]There are 192 parties involved in the convention: all the UN

member-states except Andorra, Canada, South Sudan and the United States, which withdrew in 2011.

The protocol was adopted in 1997 and it was forced upon the signing states in 2005. Its generalobjective is lowering and regulating the noxious emissions as to prevent global warming exceeding 1.5

2 degrees Celsius.

In his paper, Bjorn Lomborg argues that implementing the Kyoto Protocol would cost close to 1

trillion US dollars, which is an exaggerated amount. Using the Nominal GWP (Gross World Product =

$71,830 billion) of 2012 and the costs of the Kyoto Protocol (flexible mechanisms, with US part of the

agreement = 0.11.1% of GDP; flexible mechanisms, without US part of the agreement = 0.05% GDP)

we can calculate an estimative cost, which is in the first case (including US participation) equal to $71.83

718.3 billion (US dollar as of 2012), and in the second case (excluding US participation) equal to

$35.915 billion (US dollar as of 2012). In the first case, if the US were still part of the treaty, the costs

would still not be close to his estimates, because if we adjust it to 2001s inflation rate the maximum

cost of the Kyoto Protocol would be almost half of his predictions, which is $557 billion, and without the

US, close to $28 billion.

He also goes on to say that the money would best be invested in other domains, such as

distributing clean water to developing countries, but in our opinion its like comparing apples and

oranges. Those are two very different priorities, each with their own importance and way of solving.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol


9/9

VI Conclusion

In the end, we feel that Bjorn Lomborg is trying to convey a false message using distorted

information, using clearly made up data in several instances (costs of Kyoto Protocol, the decline of

alimentary prices, number of species and animals extinct and/or dead due to deforestation, thereservoir of resources) and misleading use of graphical representations (including only some elements,

that do not mean anything on their own). We also think that the subjects approached by him are quite

important and more extensiveone is unable to cover and explain them all in passing, in a few

paragraphs or even in a whole book.

ANNEX Bibliography

[1] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population

[2]- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution

Graph of Resources - http://www4.ncsu.edu/~kpadia/CS895/HW5/

Table with Hunger Statistics - http://www.statisticbrain.com/world-hunger-statistics/

[3]-

http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htm#Does_the_world_

produce_enough_food_to_feed_everyone

[4] - http://www.foodtimeline.org/foodfaq5.html#tavern

[5] - http://www.foodtimeline.org/foodfaq5.html#compare

[6] - http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/14/in-fragmented-brazilian-forest-few-species-

survive/?_r=1

[7] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_dioxide#As_an_air_pollutant

[8]-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth's_atmosphere#Irreversibility_and_uniqueness_o

f_carbon_dioxide

CO2 Graph - http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/obop/mlo/

CO2 Graph with Industrial Revolution-

http://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/climatescience/greenhousegases/industrialrevolution.html

[9] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol

Essay on The Environmental Truth

Documents

Transcript of Essay on The Environmental Truth