Lennart Bengtsson has recently in different media expressed a change of standpoint from CO2 alarmism to skepticism of CO2 alarmism. This change demands a revision of the standpoint of the Royal Swedish Academy followed by a revision of Swedish climate politics away from CO2 alarmism with far-reaching consequences concerning state support of so called green energy with little emission of CO2.
In an article transmitted by the skeptic Die Klimazwiebel Lennart Bengtsson states:
- ... there is an increasing tendency .... to even question basic aspects of the physics of climate change.
- The global warming has been taken out of the hands of the meteorologists and traditional climatologists and is now run by professional media experts and different well-recognized members (political or otherwise) of the general public that have found the present climate hype to be a suitable way to remain or be obtain a place in the media limelight.
- The real genuine interest in climate and climate processes is fading away as the interest is confined to the concept of climate typical of the general public or rather I shall say the predominant or politically correct concept of climate.
- Irrespective of all worrisome media report on the drama of climate change, climate is in fact warming much slower than anticipated.
- During the period 1979-2012 for which we have reliable observations, the warming of the lower tropical troposphere, 20°S – 20°N, has only got about a third of the warming compared to what is predicted by present climate models.
- During the next 50 years the global primary energy must at least be increased by a factor of two that means that both fossil energy and nuclear energy will have to increase. The renewable energy is insufficient although not in theory but in practise.
- We do not yet know how to best solve the Earth’s energy problems but many thing may happen in the next 100 years. A modest climate sensitivity that is supported by observations combined with a transition from coal to natural gas will provide the world with a waiting time of half a century or so but not very much longer. This will make it possible to avoid unnecessary and highly expensive panic-type subsidized investments driven by political whims and the expectations of quickly earned money and instead invest available means in a well thought through long- term energy research programs.
PS1 My repeated question to the Royal Swedish Academy about when the revision will be presented, is answered by cold silence. But the pressure on the Academy (from Lennart Bengtsson in particular) to change the message, is increasing every day the present global cooling continues.
PS2 What would happen if the Academy listened to CNBC, instead of Swedish State Television propagating the climate statement made by the same Academy?