Those who seek the truth about global warming/climate change should welcome this latest publication from the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC). Excerpts from the Coauthors’ introduction in italics with my bolds. H/T Lubos Motl
Climate Change Reconsidered II: Fossil Fuels assesses the costs and benefits of the use of fossil fuels (principally coal, oil, and natural gas) by reviewing scientific and economic literature on organic chemistry, climate science, public health, economic history, human security, and theoretical studies based on integrated assessment models (IAMs). It is the fifth volume in the Climate Change Reconsidered series and, like the preceding volumes, it focuses on research overlooked or ignored by the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
NIPCC was created by Dr. S. Fred Singer in 2003 to provide an independent peer review of the reports of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Unlike the…
View original post 500 more words
Climate Collections 
This publication is biased and incomplete in that it focuses on cost and benefit to humans and does not consider the cost of fossil use to the natural world.
There is much greater environmental impact of fossil fuel use than reduced air quality: oil spills, habitat destruction, species displacement and extinction, water quality, soil quality, etc. affect the biosphere that includes all life, not just humans.
This unwillingness to consider humans as a functioning part of global ecosystems has resulted in extensive degradation of the biosphere worldwide. This cost is never figured into cost/benefit ratios for human economies.
LikeLike