DistantNews
Support us
Climate change is no longer disputed. The calculations are.
🇳🇴 Norway /Environment & Climate

Climate change is no longer disputed. The calculations are.

From Aftenposten · () Norwegian

Translated from Norwegian and summarized by DistantNews. Read the original for the full story.

At a glance

Opinion Named sources Context piece
  • Norway’s Progress Party has accepted the conclusions of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and now argues that climate change is serious but manageable.
  • The commentary challenges the party’s cost calculations, saying they often omit climate damage, air pollution, nature loss and costs borne by future generations.
  • It warns that Norway’s continued oil and gas activity could expose the country to economic risks as other nations tighten fossil-fuel policies.

The climate debate in Norway may finally be moving past the question of whether human activity is changing the climate. The harder argument now concerns the speed of the transition and how its costs should be calculated.

The Progress Party, or Frp, has accepted the conclusions of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Its position is that climate change is serious but manageable, and that cutting emissions quickly costs more than continuing as before. That may sound practical, but the numbers depend on what gets counted.

Climate change is serious but manageable, and the costs of cutting emissions quickly are higher than the costs of continuing as before.

— Fremskrittspartiet (Frp)The party’s stated position on climate policy and emissions cuts.

Frp and others want cost-benefit analyses and a numerical “calculator” for climate policy. Knowing what policies cost is necessary, the commentary says, but no calculation is better than the figures entered into it. It asks whether the analysis measures gains for one actor or for society as a whole, and who pays for environmental and social damage left outside the calculation.

A calculation is never better than the figures entered into it.

— Aftenposten commentaryThe commentary’s criticism of calls for a numerical climate-policy calculator.

Oil and gas provide one example. Cheap energy has helped raise living standards around the world, but a complete calculation must also include climate damage, health burdens from air pollution and the security consequences of a more unstable climate. Nature provides another. Intact ecosystems store carbon and protect against floods and landslides, yet natural resources are often assigned little or no value. Treating biodiversity, climate stability and future generations’ freedom of action as if they had no market price makes the calculation look neutral when it is not.

The commentary also warns against underestimating transition risk. In April, 57 countries, including Norway’s closest allies, formed a coalition to phase out fossil fuels. Norway meanwhile opened new areas for exploration in the Barents Sea, and debate has reopened over oil exploration in Lofoten, Vesterålen and Senja. Norway has higher greenhouse-gas emissions per person than many assume and is cutting them more slowly than its neighbors.

Sacrificing nature values to increase short-term economic gains is not pragmatic.

— Aftenposten commentaryThe argument that nature’s climate and flood-protection functions must be included in economic calculations.
About this summary

Originally published by Aftenposten in Norwegian. Translated, summarized, and contextualized automatically by DistantNews, with a note on how the source frames the story. Not individually reviewed before publishing. How this works.

More Stories

From Our Blog