What if Global Warming Is Good for You?

No, We Are Not All in It Together

Suppose there are two equally reasonable individuals, Alice and Bob. Alice is a professional whose occupation is not tied to a specific city or country. Bob lives and works in a region that he is unable to leave. Maybe he could, but at a huge cost: leaving family behind, forfeiting property, etc. Both Bob and Alice believe that the global temperature will rise in the next few decades, and that on average the world will be worse off for it.

One day, a group of scientists announces that they have worked out a plan to stop global warming. If the governments of the world implement it, the effects of carbon emissions will be neutralized and reversed. The oceans will not rise, global temperatures will be the same on average fifty years from now. However, some parts of the world will suffer. In particular, the area where Bob lives will be destabilized. Maybe it will still be fit for human habitation, but it will become a desert. Bob’s property will become almost worthless. This is all for the greater good though, and perhaps the government will help Bob out.

Needless to say, there is a conflict between what is best for Alice and Bob. Alice of course is very enthusiastic about this plan. Bob is not, because he will personally suffer. He does some calculations. He concludes that the scenario in which global warming just happens would be better for him than the Greater Good plan.

This is not a hypothetical. We know that some parts of the world, such as Canada or Russia, stand to benefit from global warming. Not only the effects of global warming will not be evenly distributed. Some people are capable of moving to the better parts of the world, and some are not. The richer of us are in an interesting position: we are the ones who need to sacrifice the least when it comes to fighting carbon emissions. We also do not need to worry about having to stay in a location that either disappears into the ocean or becomes uninhabitable.

The takeaway from this post: few people will admit that they desire global warming, because it is good for them. There are millions in that group. There is also a large minority for whom will not make a significant difference, at least not in their lifetimes. And of course, there is a majority who will suffer from it. It is virtuous to say that one opposes climate change, and it is also free. For that reason, there is a common perception that “we” are fighting global warming, when most of us will do nothing about it. Governments also will do the bare minimum about it, until the majority who will suffer from it demands it. By that time, it will be mostly about adjusting to the new climate and mitigating the effects. It will be too late to fit it.

Given a societal problem, it is almost never the case that “we are all in in together.” That slogan is a mind virus that I reject.