I keep banging on about the need to invest in climate change adaptation rather than mitigation since our chances of keeping climate change under control are minuscule at best by now.
Economists applying a ton of models to create a new model that models (into the past and future no less) basic human behaviour: experience, learn, adapt. But for these noble scholars that appears to be entirely new:
'that communities with experience with violent weather adapt'...'The reason is that these countries are being hit more frequently by disasters and hence lack of adaptation gets penalized more'.
Devastating truthbombs, you economist you. But will they next model the cold turn of the 60s and 70s?
‘Bad news elevates extreme weather risk, which leads households and firms to learn and adapt, thereby lowering damages for each subsequent disaster arrival'.
Well look at that: more common sense. And apparently media hot heads are unwittingly promoting climate adaption...
'We define a country as being hit by heatwaves if the mean summer temperature
is, relative to historical summer norms, above 1 C'
That is not how heatwaves generally are measured / defined. The Netherlands are 2C warmer since 2000, are we in a continuous 'heatwave'? (And then there is the fact that globally warming is typically caused by nights being warmer / less cool, not by days getting warmer - Is thát bad or good? Should one adapt for that?).
Finally, no climate-related study can do without Satan's Scenario:
'for modelling into the future ‘we take this base growth rate from the SSP5’.
Of course they do. Since that's the reïncarnation of RCP8.5.
Do you understand what this study actually does? It applies RCP8.5, the doomster's preferred but technically and physically absolutely impossible model, to project into the future the....benefits of adaptation.
RCP8.5, since 2018 used in at least 34.000 'climate studies' (Google scholar, climate study can mean anything: gender & climate, Taylor Swift albums under SSP5 etc etc), and which has absolutely dominated generic media, now officially is good for anything. From predicting doom to...GDP growth from climate adaptation.
But...wait before you base your investment strategy on SSP5.
The IPCC projects SSP2 (the former RCP4.5) for 2100, Half the C of SSP5/RCP8.5.
And thus half the GDP growth? Let's wait for a model to model that...Modellers be modelling.
'I think climate change adaptation is increasingly becoming big business, and the investment opportunities associated with that trend will be significant.'
Now thát is true.
Big biz with the EU creating climate- and digital 'resilience' (sic) funds, whose B end up somewhere entirely else. Conveniently creating EU debt as a fait accompli. (Oh, and Jens Stoltenberg wanted electric battle tanks for NATO. Chairman Rutte's opinion on e-tanks is still like every Rutte-opinion: unshaped and fluid like Barbapapa).
And big biz with annually hundreds of gov B floating around looking for purpose like a western middle class secular citizen (they’re going to miss Gaza…). And with p funds and insurance companies 'guided' towards certain 'investments'. To invest in EU debt for instance.
So indeed, PE and other outfits looking after high-wealth individuals' interests (quite literally i guess) have been gorging themselves on risk-free 'investments'. And with windparks and solar projects largely halted because the real price has shown up, investing in 'adaptation' could indeed be the next, gov-supported, boon. Pardon, boom.
Since the climate for a, let's say very secure form of capitalism, for a wealthy minority, which apparently lies awake over the fate of the Planet (or are they just showing Good Taste?), keeps getting better. It seems SSP5/RCP8.5 is now directly and unashamedly used to fuel capitalism itself with gov B. Sme might call it nudging, others nicking.
Economists applying a ton of models to create a new model that models (into the past and future no less) basic human behaviour: experience, learn, adapt. But for these noble scholars that appears to be entirely new:
'that communities with experience with violent weather adapt'...'The reason is that these countries are being hit more frequently by disasters and hence lack of adaptation gets penalized more'.
Devastating truthbombs, you economist you. But will they next model the cold turn of the 60s and 70s?
‘Bad news elevates extreme weather risk, which leads households and firms to learn and adapt, thereby lowering damages for each subsequent disaster arrival'.
Well look at that: more common sense. And apparently media hot heads are unwittingly promoting climate adaption...
'We define a country as being hit by heatwaves if the mean summer temperature
is, relative to historical summer norms, above 1 C'
That is not how heatwaves generally are measured / defined. The Netherlands are 2C warmer since 2000, are we in a continuous 'heatwave'? (And then there is the fact that globally warming is typically caused by nights being warmer / less cool, not by days getting warmer - Is thát bad or good? Should one adapt for that?).
Finally, no climate-related study can do without Satan's Scenario:
'for modelling into the future ‘we take this base growth rate from the SSP5’.
Of course they do. Since that's the reïncarnation of RCP8.5.
Do you understand what this study actually does? It applies RCP8.5, the doomster's preferred but technically and physically absolutely impossible model, to project into the future the....benefits of adaptation.
RCP8.5, since 2018 used in at least 34.000 'climate studies' (Google scholar, climate study can mean anything: gender & climate, Taylor Swift albums under SSP5 etc etc), and which has absolutely dominated generic media, now officially is good for anything. From predicting doom to...GDP growth from climate adaptation.
But...wait before you base your investment strategy on SSP5.
The IPCC projects SSP2 (the former RCP4.5) for 2100, Half the C of SSP5/RCP8.5.
And thus half the GDP growth? Let's wait for a model to model that...Modellers be modelling.
'I think climate change adaptation is increasingly becoming big business, and the investment opportunities associated with that trend will be significant.'
Now thát is true.
Big biz with the EU creating climate- and digital 'resilience' (sic) funds, whose B end up somewhere entirely else. Conveniently creating EU debt as a fait accompli. (Oh, and Jens Stoltenberg wanted electric battle tanks for NATO. Chairman Rutte's opinion on e-tanks is still like every Rutte-opinion: unshaped and fluid like Barbapapa).
And big biz with annually hundreds of gov B floating around looking for purpose like a western middle class secular citizen (they’re going to miss Gaza…). And with p funds and insurance companies 'guided' towards certain 'investments'. To invest in EU debt for instance.
So indeed, PE and other outfits looking after high-wealth individuals' interests (quite literally i guess) have been gorging themselves on risk-free 'investments'. And with windparks and solar projects largely halted because the real price has shown up, investing in 'adaptation' could indeed be the next, gov-supported, boon. Pardon, boom.
Since the climate for a, let's say very secure form of capitalism, for a wealthy minority, which apparently lies awake over the fate of the Planet (or are they just showing Good Taste?), keeps getting better. It seems SSP5/RCP8.5 is now directly and unashamedly used to fuel capitalism itself with gov B. Sme might call it nudging, others nicking.