Monday, December 18, 2023
UK Governmental Agency Claims Climate Change Threatens Health In Report
In a new report released yesterday, the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) claimed that “the climate crisis is a health crisis,” suggesting that health goals should be intrinsically linked to decarbonization strategies.
The UKHSA replaced Public Health England in April 2021, assuming responsibility for England-wide public health protection and infectious disease capabilities. It functions as an executive agency under the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC).
The UKHSA’s Behavioral Science and Insights Unit seeks to engineer “win-win” behavioural shifts for health and decarbonization. Partnering with government, it translates its findings into policy, creating a nuanced dance between surveillance and influence. As the agency succinctly puts it, they aim to “improve understanding of the barriers and opportunities for ‘win-win’ behavioural shifts.”
The agency’s latest document, titled “Health Effects of Climate Change in the UK: State of the Evidence 2023,” is an update from a 2012 report on the topic and recommends a raft of new proactive measures, policy changes, and international collaboration to address perceived health impacts of climate change.
Within the latest report, the authors claim that the, “climate crisis is a health crisis, affecting health determinants directly, leading to increased risks, with vulnerable populations bearing the brunt.”
Climate Change Now One Of ‘Greatest’ Threats
The report also contends that a “changing climate” now poses “one of the greatest health security and societal challenges, impacting everything from the air we breathe to the quality and availability of our food and water.”
Its authors assert that climate change is no longer a theoretical future threat but an emerging reality. It points toward claims of an increasing frequency of extreme weather events globally, including flooding, wildfires, and record temperatures. Regardless of decarbonization progress, it asserts that temperatures are projected to rise, impacting health, society, and the NHS.
In response to the UKHSA’s assertion that ‘the climate crisis is a health crisis,’ researcher Ben Pile strongly contested the claim, stating, “There are no metrics of human welfare that support the UKHSA’s claims.”
Speaking to The Epoch Times, he claimed that globally, people live healthier, wealthier, and safer lives than any previous generation despite the era of climate change.
Mr. Pile, the founder of Climate Resistance, a website dedicated to challenging the green climate narrative, highlighted a significant reduction in deaths from weather-related causes, including storms, natural disasters, communicable diseases, malnutrition, and exposure to temperature extremes.
Another all-encompassing claim made within the report is that “climate change affects most health determinants directly or indirectly,” highlighting what the report suggests may be a very extensive reach of environmental shifts on well-being.
The report claims to evidence a heightened risk of infectious diseases in the UK due to climate sensitivity. Many diseases are identified as highly responsive to climatic variations, posing an imminent threat to worldwide public health: “Global health indicators are being undermined by climate change, impacting global health systems.”
Claims Are An ‘Outright Lie’
Mr. Pile, who has authored reports on the impact of clean air policies on health, characterised the UKHSA’s claims as “an outright lie” and argued that lives are safer today due to improved access to reliable and affordable energy. He expressed concern that limiting access to cheap energy could make lives more challenging, as essential items become more expensive, contributing to increased poverty.
Mr. Pile criticised the UKHSA for succumbing to “green” ideology, stating, “Like many agencies, it has put ‘saving the planet’ before human health, ultimately to the detriment of human health.”
While sounding the alarm on preventative measures, the report also points to opportunities for health benefits through climate change mitigation measures. Embedding health goals in decarbonization strategies, it claims, can generate positive impacts in air quality, food, housing, transport, mental health, and reduce health inequalities.
Among efforts that the report claims are intended to mitigate health concerns, is the creation of the Centre for Climate and Health Security.
Established by the UKHSA in Oct. 2022, this body now leads efforts to protect health in the context of a “changing climate,” collaborating with academic, public, and international partners.
The report emphasises that while its coverage spans the entire UK, driven by the recognition that the impacts of climate change on public health are expected to be largely uniform across England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. It also clarifies that the research and public health considerations presented in each chapter represent the views of the authors and do not constitute an official policy statement for the four nations.
This latest piece of guidance urges policymakers to be informed by evidence, preventing health impacts by considering global decarbonization, early interventions, and so-called health equity.
*****************************************************
The Not-So-Scary Truth About Climate Change
John Stossel
United States Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry says it will take trillions of dollars to “solve” climate change. Then he says, “There is not enough money in any country in the world to actually solve this problem.”
Kerry has little understanding of money or how it’s created. He’s a multimillionaire because he married a rich woman. Now he wants to take more of your money to pretend to affect climate change.
Bjorn Lomborg points out that there are better things society should spend money on.
Lomborg acknowledges that a warmer climate brings problems. “As temperatures get higher, seawater, like everything else, expands. So, we’re going to maybe see three feet of sea level rise. Then they say, ‘So everybody who lives within three feet of sea level, they’ll have to move!’ Well, no. If you actually look at what people do, they built dikes, and so they don’t have to move.”
People in Holland did that years ago. A third of the Netherlands is below sea level. In some areas, it’s 22 feet below. Yet the country thrives. That’s the way to deal with climate change: Adjust to it.
“Fewer people are going to get flooded every year, despite the fact that you have much higher sea level rise. The total cost for Holland over the last half-century is about $10 billion,” says Lomborg. “Not nothing, but very little for an advanced economy over 50 years.”
For saying things like that, Lomborg is labeled “the devil.”
“The problem here is unmitigated scaremongering,” he replies. “A new survey shows that 60% of all people in rich countries now believe it’s likely or very likely that unmitigated climate change will lead to the end of mankind. This is what you get when you have constant fearmongering in the media.”
Some people now say they will not have children because they’re convinced that climate change will destroy the world. Lomborg points out how counterproductive that would be: “We need your kids to make sure the future is better.”
He acknowledges that climate warming will kill people.
“As temperatures go up, we’re likely to see more people die from heat. That’s absolutely true. You hear this all the time. But what is underreported is the fact that nine times as many people die from cold. … As temperatures go up, you’re going to see fewer people die from cold. Over the last 20 years, because of temperature rises, we have seen about 116,000 more people die from heat. But 283,000 fewer people die from cold.”
That’s rarely reported in the news.
When the media doesn’t fret over deaths from heat, they grab at other possible threats.
CNN claims, “Climate Change Is Fueling Extremism.”
The BBC says, “A Shifting Climate Is Catalysing Infectious Disease.”
U.S. News and World Report says, “Climate Change Will Harm Children’s Mental Health.”
Lomborg replies, “It’s very, very easy to make this argument that everything is caused by climate change if you don’t have the full picture.”
He points out that we rarely hear about positive effects of climate change, like global greening.
“That’s good! We get more green stuff on the planet. My argument is not that climate change is great or overall positive. It’s simply that, just like every other thing, it has pluses and minuses. … Only reporting on the minuses, and only emphasizing worst-case outcomes, is not a good way to inform people.”
***************************************************
Paris Accord Policy Costs Greatly Exceed Any Net Benefit From Averted Warming
A new comprehensive analysis (Tol, 2023) weighs the cost-benefit of meeting Paris Accord emission policy targets to keep global warming in check, or under 2°C.
The analysis reveals that even in the best-case scenarios (that assume emission reduction policies fully meet their avoided-warming targets), as well as in the worst-case scenarios (that assume “constant vulnerability” to global-warming-induced climate disasters and widespread economic austerity), the tens of trillions of USD costs associated with moving away from fossil fuel consumption to reach net-zero emissions by 2050 (4.8% of GDP) still outweigh the net benefit losses (3.0% of GDP) in 2100.
“The central estimate of the costs of climate policy, unrealistically assuming least-cost implementation, is 3.8–5.6% of GDP in 2100. The central estimate of the benefits of climate policy, unrealistically assuming high no-policy emissions and constant vulnerability, is 2.8–3.2% of GDP.”
There is a nearly 10 times worse cost versus benefit if we only consider the net impact of best- and worst-case scenario emissions reduction policies through 2050, which is the year it is assumed the world economy will have reached net-zero targets if all goes according to plan.
“In 2050, the year of net-zero, the best estimate of the benefits of the 1.5∘C target [is] about 0.5% of GDP while the costs are almost 5%.”
Of course, if the more realistic outcomes about achieving emissions reduction targets eventuate, and if the global warming on tap for failing to achieve these targets is not as exaggeratedly hot as models assume (e.g., 5°C warming by 2100), the net costs of climate “action” exceed the benefits of avoided warming two-, three- and even four-fold.
Simply put, the “Paris targets do not pass the cost-benefit test.”
**********************************************
Australia: New Leftist Premier guarantees future of Queensland coal mining, gas production
Steven Miles has guaranteed that new coalmines and natural gas wells will be allowed in Queensland, even though his recast Labor government aims to slash emissions by 75 per cent.
Mr Miles told The Australian new resource projects would continue to be assessed on a case-by-case basis and could be approved under the tightened climate settings.
In one of his first acts as Premier, he announced the government would legislate a revised emissions target of 75 per cent below 2005 levels by 2035.
“It means it’s unlikely we would have new coal-fired generators,” he said of the state’s ageing, publicly owned power-producing sector.
“But it doesn’t have an impact on the approvals process for extraction projects … each project will be judged on the individual merits. There was no blanket ban … required as part of 75 per cent.”
Under predecessor Annastacia Palaszczuk, hefty coal royalty hikes angered big miners and triggered an advertising campaign by the Queensland Resources Council against the Labor government.
But the controversial tax regime is forecast to pump $9.2bn into the state coffers, up $3.8bn in the 2023-24 budget update.
Mr Miles said fugitive emissions from coal and gas mining would be captured under the revised climate action target.
He said the scheme was an example of how he would bring together city and country in the nation’s most decentralised state.
“We will continue to export coal – particularly coking coal will have a longer future – and we will continue to use gas into the 2030s, and clearly we will continue to export gas as well,” he said. “This is based on modelling that says 75 per cent is achievable. This is really bringing what I’ve been doing in state development into the wider government.
“My focus has been the new industry development strategy, which is all about converting heavy industry to renewable energy … it’s a strong example of how I can bring together the regions and the city. People in the city are concerned about climate change, people in the regions are also concerned about climate change, but they want blue-collar jobs protected and new industries attracted.
“That’s what I want to do here, and legislating the 75 by 2035 target is an important signal.”
Mr Miles said the cabinet line-up he was finalising late on Sunday would demonstrate “renewal” of the government under his leadership, with five new ministers coming in. Controversy-plagued Transport Minister Mark Bailey and Sport and Tourism Minister Stirling Hinchliffe – blamed by some caucus colleagues for the recent RNA stadium debacle – are among those set to bow out.
Asked how the government would hit the formidable target of a 75 per cent emissions reduction over the coming decade, Mr Miles said state laws to limit land clearance outside the cities, and the federal government’s safeguard mechanism to reduce industrial emissions, would be important.
Anticipated technological advancements would also play a role, alongside the transition to renewable energy mandated at both federal and state levels. Queensland has committed to deliver 50 per cent renewable energy by 2030, 70 per cent by 2032 and 80 per cent by 2035, backed by a $500m Low Emissions Investment Partnerships Program and $200m investment in the state’s Regional Economic Futures Fund.
***************************************
My other blogs. Main ones below
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM )
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
*****************************************
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Jim Hansen and his twin
No comments:
Post a Comment