Deaths from climate-related disasters have been falling in absolute numbers even as the world population grows. In fact, in the 50 years from 1970 to 2019, humanity more than doubled in number while climate-related deaths decreased threefold. This is due to the increasing ability of people in developing countries to better harness and control their natural environment enabled by industrialization driven by fossil fuels.
All of human progress has been about higher per capita energy expenditure. To stop that now is to condemn the global poor to remain in poverty. We'll know for sure in another fifty to a hundred years, but my bet is that the bigger threat to humanity's collective survival will be from the increasing centralization of power at the hands of the few that things like "fighting climate change" require.
its funny how the "global poor" enter a discussion about whether or not to allow short-haul flights (and private jets) in the developed world, largely discretionary consumption choices that have workable and less-polluting substitutes
measuring the impact of the fossil-fuel induced climate change as some direct death count is incredibly short-sighted if not amoral. large parts of the world already show significant impact from desertification. people in severely stressed areas will move, peacefully or forcefully. the result will be (civil) wars and mass migration and we already see this in the middle east. the entire modern political system of countries and borders is predicated on stable climate conditions.
> centralization of power at the hands of the few
that's a red herring if there ever was one. why should the sustainability transition be performed via centralized tyranny? If people stop spreading misinformation at the behest of vested interests and we develop reliable measures of environmental impacts a democratic society is perfectly capable to make the rational choices
> largely discretionary consumption choices that have workable and less-polluting substitutes
You don't get to decide what is discretionary consumption. No hall monitor will ever be elevated to such a role over this planet.
Do you actually want workable less-polluting solutions? Then be against this ban and for electric airplanes which will solve this problem very soon.
> large parts of the world already show significant impact from desertification.
If you got rid of all flights globally, this would not be changing as a result. There are also massive reforestation projects undergoing worldwide and those will continue to gain traction as more land frees up for reclamation by nature and park preserves.
> why should the sustainability transition be performed via centralized tyranny? If people stop spreading misinformation at the behest of vested interests and we develop reliable measures of environmental impacts a democratic society is perfectly capable to make the rational choices
They exaggerate the extent of climate woes in order to cement their own power and luxury. That's most of what it is. The real efforts against climate corruption are in renewables and clean transport. Progress is already at breakneck speed and still climbing on these fronts.
It's the same group of people who were insisting that we need to lockdown and drastically change every aspect of society because of the pandemic. Now mountains of evidence are emerging that not only were the lockdowns mostly unnecessary, they may have been actively harmful more than good.
A democratic society making these changes on its own without over-centralization is as simple a matter as people adhering to the United States Constitution and working together at the community level to build more solar, clean up roads, install EV charging stations, etc. That's already happening. So why is it necessary for France to top-down ban short-haul flights in the name of emissions when that action will hurt quality of life without moving the needle? It's because their motives are impure. Some of them are tyrants-in-waiting.
Deaths from climate-related disasters have been falling in absolute numbers even as the world population grows. In fact, in the 50 years from 1970 to 2019, humanity more than doubled in number while climate-related deaths decreased threefold. This is due to the increasing ability of people in developing countries to better harness and control their natural environment enabled by industrialization driven by fossil fuels.
All of human progress has been about higher per capita energy expenditure. To stop that now is to condemn the global poor to remain in poverty. We'll know for sure in another fifty to a hundred years, but my bet is that the bigger threat to humanity's collective survival will be from the increasing centralization of power at the hands of the few that things like "fighting climate change" require.
[0]: https://library.wmo.int/doc_num.php?explnum_id=10989