If money matters more than lives (even if it's your own or a lot of people you might care enough), then he might be right.
If it doesn't, then he is wrong. Never cross a river that in average is 4 feet deep, nor suppose that an increase of the global yearly average of temperature of 2 degrees excludes the possibility of 55-60 ºC on very populated cities on some particular day in a near future. That probably will kill a lot of people, and cause a lot of health troubles to a lot more. And to make it worse, it won't be an isolated event, it will keep happening and getting worse, and not affecting just people.
If you see what he proposes as "it will be less expensive to kill a lot of people", he might be technically right. And very wrong.
If it doesn't, then he is wrong. Never cross a river that in average is 4 feet deep, nor suppose that an increase of the global yearly average of temperature of 2 degrees excludes the possibility of 55-60 ºC on very populated cities on some particular day in a near future. That probably will kill a lot of people, and cause a lot of health troubles to a lot more. And to make it worse, it won't be an isolated event, it will keep happening and getting worse, and not affecting just people.
If you see what he proposes as "it will be less expensive to kill a lot of people", he might be technically right. And very wrong.