If you regularly watch the mainstream media, you probably think climate change will cause Earth’s extinction — and SOON. But that’s not the case says Bjorn Lomborg, author of ‘False Alarm.’ He joins Glenn to share the FACTS on climate change — ones that will SHOCK your liberal friends. For example, did you know human fatalities related to the climate have drastically DROPPED? Plus, he details how climate policy currently being pushed by far-left elite could be DISASTROUS for our future. Listen to the full interview to find out more.
Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors
GLENN: Bjørn Lomborg is on with us. Good to talk to you, Bjørn. How are you?
BJORN: I'm good. And how are you?
GLENN: I'm very good. I'm very concerned. You know, I care about the environment. I think most people do. We all want clean air. We all want animals to live. We want to have forests that thrive, et cetera, et cetera. But we have to do it their way, or no way at all. I am completely off the grid. I have complete clean energy. I'm all on the power of the sun, wind. At my ranch. And I like it. I don't think it's feasible for everybody to do. But I like it. However, we're being forced into something called The Great Reset. And, honestly, Bjørn, I think this is -- I think this is going to turn out to be akin to Mao's five-year plan. I think if they continue to do the things they're doing, especially on farming and energy. We are going to lose a lot of people. Am I -- am I overthinking this, or worrying too much?
BJORN: Well, Glenn, you certainly have a right to worry. Given that Mao's five-year great leap forward was a phenomenal catastrophe of unprecedented disaster levels, I think we're probably not there. But it is certainly something that will leave us much less well off. And we'll actually not fix very much of climate. Which, of course, is the real tragedy in some way. So what's happening to a very large extent is that everyone is being inundated with these messages, that we're seeing ever more catastrophic impact to climate change, which is mostly just not true. And if you look at the data, we actually see, for instance, fewer people dying, from climate-related deaths over the last 100 years. It's dropped about 99 percent. Why? Because being rich means that you're much more resilient. We used to have a world where about half a million people died every year, for climate-related disasters. Like flood drops. And extreme temperatures. And storms. And today, that number -- so last year, it was less than 7,000 people dying -- of course, at the same time. Where many people more people on the planet. We're being told the story, that the world is coming to an end. Now, if you believe this. And many more people believe this. The rich countries in the world, showed that about 60 percent of all people now believe, that it's likely global warming, leads to the extinction of mankind. This is a concern, that's not at all what the climate panel is telling us. It's telling us, as you just mentioned, climate is a problem. But it is not the end of the world. That matters, because if you're scared witless. And you're being told, an existential crisis. It's the end of mankind. Of course, you're willingly to spend anything and everything on this issue. But the reality is, we're very likely to spend a huge truckload of money. And that's where your worry comes in. So, for instance --
GLENN: Hang on just a second.
GLENN: Hang on just a second. It's not just that, Bjørn . It is. And I know it killed maybe 20, 30 million people. It was an absolute disaster that is -- that is just not compared to anything else. Over in China. But when you couple in energy, just look at the starvation, that's going to happen, because Russia is blocking the ports. And we're having this fight over oil. Then on top of it, when you don't have the fertilizer, that fertilizer is responsible for crops that yield about 30 percent more. You just don't change everything overnight from transportation to the way you prepare the field. To the fertilizer. They're planning on changing everything. Their words, from fork to plate by 2030. That just sounds like something that globally, could cause millions of people to die.
BJORN: And you're probably right. If they actually got it the way they want it. But remember, they can't actually run the entire world. Although, I'm sure they would love to. So the reality is, that most countries are going to resist this very strongly. So one country, as you mentioned. As Sri Lanka, that actually went organic overnight, and essentially, got rid of all synthetic fertilizer. And, remember, synthetic fertilizer is what makes it possible for half the world's population, about 4 billion people to live. Half of all our molecules, inside us, have only been made possible, through synthetic fertilizer. Overnight, they said, let's get rid of all that. And, you know, it was not rocket science, to predict that this would actually lead to all the bad things that you can think about. So, fundamentally, food production collapsed, and you're seeing the outcomes. Huge protests. People have been afraid. The president's mansion. And he's flown out of the country. This is a -- but most countries are not dumb enough to do this. So fortunately, we're not going to see things going that bad. What we are likely to see, to see really poor policies. So just very, very briefly. McKinsey actually estimates if we go net zeros, Biden and many other Western leaders are proposing. So basically, if we cut our fossil fuel use dramatically, that could cost $5.6 trillion, every year in the world. For the average American, one model estimates, that by mid-century, this would cost the average American, more than $10,000, per person. Per year. But, of course, remember, you guys are going to -- you know, rebel against that, way before it gets to $10,000. You will not be willing to accept that. So, yes. They're proposing really, really poor and effective policies. But we're going to get against them, way before that. But it can still be a lot of money lost for very little benefit.
GLENN: So tell me what's happening with the farmers over -- where is it? The Dutch farmers, I think. Yeah, in Holland. They're protesting. German farmers are starting to protest. Tell me the impact that they're having on this policy.
BJORN: So it's important to recognize. And this is a different kind of policy. So this is mostly a nature policy. So it's still an environmental policy. But the EU has the tendency, as many well-meaning organizations to say, oh, let's just go all out on green stuff. And when you just say it, it sounds nice. We should have living circumstances, that are equivalent to, if there were no human beings. Sounds nice, until you start realizing, oh, wait. There's actually huge cost. So Holland has realized, that they have actually signed up to something that sounded nice. And a lot of politicians said it. We should reduce our nitrogen deposits, so that biosystems, that are low in nitrogen, which are sort of slightly desert-like, they also survive. That's a nice thing to have. What they didn't think about was, this would basically abrupt a lot of the Dutch farmers. Remember, Holland exported a huge amount of food. By some estimates. Their second largest ag supporter of food in the world. So this really matters for the world. They're telling Dutch farmers. They can produce a lot less. Now, in normal policy, you would just have made all these nice-sounding promises. Then when you're evangelizing to pay for it. You're saying, oh, wait. Wait. I'm not actually going to do this. What happened. An environmental group sued the government and won, so the government's own Supreme Court is now telling the government, you have to do what you promised. And that's why this becomes so expensive. Because nobody really wants to do this. Except, of course, the environmental groups, and now the Dutch court. And the problem with this is, if you imagine what happens, if you actually sued politicians for everything they promised. We would have to spend enormous sums on if we go to much better schools. And fixing all the potholes. And get more military. And get tax relief. And all the things, you can imagine. Publicly, more than our entire national budget. You can't run an apology like that. You're basically setting yourself up for spending much more money than you have. You don't run policy through courts. You run it through -- I don't know. Democracy. That's how we work these things out. And that's where you find out, oh, wait. I actually promised stuff I can't keep. Unfortunately, that's not happening. And I fear that we're going to see more of this. So the Dutch actually had a similar case on climate. Where they promised us, couldn't actually afford to uphold it. But then they got sued in court. Now they have to do it. Although, it's incredibly costly. And, likewise, although the Paris agreement is not binding. The US has not ratified it. It's not implausible to imagine, that sooner or later, people will sue in American courts, and possibly win. Because Biden has said, we should do Paris. And then you suddenly have those ten thousand dollar per year, per American cost that nobody actually wants to support. And that is how revolutions are born.
GLENN: So, yeah. That's a frightening thing in and of itself. The -- Sri Lanka did what now the -- the world bank has a new strategy to open up finances. Meaning, money printing. They -- Sri Lanka did this. They actually embraced modern monetary theory. And that's how they're saying, they're going to pay for all this. As we saw in Sri Lanka. That collapsed. That doesn't work.
BJORN: No. You can't just print money. Then you get inflation. Unfortunately, that's one of the things -- so Bank of America is actually estimating that if you go down this route of net zero, it will add what they call 3 percent of inflation. So extra inflation every year for 20 years. But you don't want that. Nobody wants that. And nobody tells you, that that's what's going to happen, if you have a lot of governments printing money. It's not rocket science. Because you can't just print more money, it doesn't mean that there's more stuff to buy it. It means prices will go up. So the fundamental point here is to recognize, if you actually want to help people, one of the best ways to do that. Is to make them rich. Because if they're rich, they're also resilient. Look at these heat waves. You just talked about, you have 106 in Texas. Why does this not kill everyone in Texas? Oh, because you have air-conditioning. It's not like you have to figure out, how we avoid most of the problems with heat. Now, remember, heat waves are still dangerous. Absolutely -- you know, drink -- sorry. Cold water. And getting in air-conditioned rooms. And maybe buy those jobs that you were advertising earlier. But what you absolutely should not do is say, let's change the entire global economy's fundamental engine, in order to make it slightly less hot. That's not how you do this. Because, remember --
GLENN: Bjørn Lomborg, the author of False Alarm. I'm sorry. I've got to go. We have a network break. They're screaming at me in my ear. President of Copenhagen Consensus Center. Bjørn, thank you so much for all that you do, and being a voice of reason on this. On this topic. God bless. Thank you.
BJORN: Thank you