User Overview

Followers and Following

Followers
Following
Trendsmap

History

Total Followers - Last Year
Daily Follower Change - Last Year
Daily Tweets - Last Year

Tweet Stats

Analysed 10,228 tweets, tweets from the last 348 weeks.
Tweets Day of Week (UTC)
Tweets Hour of Day (UTC)
Key:
Tweets
Retweets
Quotes
Replies
Tweets Day and Hour Heatmap (UTC)

Tweets

Last 50 tweets from @BjornLomborg
In reply to @JWh1t3h0us3
The "fact check" material goes to 2020, before the sharply increased cover in the graph. So why include? Not sure of his intent here.
In reply to @JWh1t3h0us3
The latest reef-wide stats is from 2017: aims.gov.au/reef-monitorin… But in 2020, AIMS submitted stats 1986-2020 to AAP linked to "these figures" docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d… I link to the data, not the fact-check which is old and for a claim in 2020, not now pic.twitter.com/kmzn1bpoYf
 
In reply to @JWh1t3h0us3
The latest reef-wide stats is from 2017: aims.gov.au/reef-monitorin… But in 2020, AIMS submitted stats 1986-2020 to AAP linked to "these figures" docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d… I link to the data, not the fact-check which is old and for a claim in 2020, not now pic.twitter.com/kmzn1bpoYf
 
In reply to @BjornLomborg
I clicked on your 'data' hyperlinks, the first two didn't work and the third found says your claim is "mostly false" ..... was this supposed to be a joke or am i missing something? pic.twitter.com/XGn31blpzW
Replying to @JWh1t3h0us3
The latest reef-wide stats is from 2017: aims.gov.au/reef-monitorin… But in 2020, AIMS submitted stats 1986-2020 to AAP linked to "these figures" docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d… I link to the data, not the fact-check which is old and for a claim in 2020, not now
 
The US climate bill: no measurable effect

— reduce temps just 0.0009°F to 0.028°F by end-of-century

My results in today's Wall St Journal editorial

"the climate provisions in this ballyhooed legislation will have no notable impact on the climate"

archive.ph/iQ3fG pic.twitter.com/xJstouV00H
Replying to @BjornLomborg
No, the new US climate legislation won't save the planet It will reduce global temperature somewhere between 0.0009°F and 0.028°F in 2100 (0.0005°C to 0.016°C) archive.ph/iQ3fG wsj.com/articles/tilti…
In reply to @BjornLomborg
Why is media not demanding to see the actual climate impact of spending $369 billion The UN's own climate model shows that the impact will be impossible to detect by mid-century and still unnoticeable even in the best case by the year 2100 Shouldn't we hear that? refs in 🧵 pic.twitter.com/B90wFUrqv6
 
The US climate bill: no measurable effect

— reduce temps just 0.0009°F to 0.028°F by end-of-century

My results in today's Wall St Journal editorial

"the climate provisions in this ballyhooed legislation will have no notable impact on the climate"

archive.ph/iQ3fG
Impact of new climate legislation

Unnoticeable: 0.0009°F to 0.028°F in 2100

Why is no media describing just 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲 your $369 billion will achieve?

Instead, we're being told:

"the most significant legislation in history to tackle the climate crisis" (Biden)

🧵 pic.twitter.com/FgpJBtrIE8
 
In reply to @paulkrugman
Impact of new climate legislation: Unnoticeable: -0.0009°F to -0.028°F in 2100 Why no media describing just 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲 your $369 billion will achieve? Instead, we're told: "the most significant legislation in history to tackle the climate crisis" (Biden)-@BjornLomborg
Impact of new climate legislation

Unnoticeable: 0.0009°F to 0.028°F in 2100

Why is no media describing just 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲 your $369 billion will achieve?

Instead, we're being told:

"the most significant legislation in history to tackle the climate crisis" (Biden)

🧵 pic.twitter.com/FgpJBtrIE8
 
Bjorn Lomborg Retweeted ·  
Nearly all 1.5°C scenarios have a radical reduction in coal use, with slower reductions in oil & gas.

Nearly all coal use (~80%) is in non-OECD countries.

If more scenarios considered equity, would coal go down slower, & oil & gas faster?

1/
 
The rich world’s fossil fuel hypocrisy is on full display in its response to the global energy crisis triggered by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Read my new op-ed: The rich world’s message to the poor: Fossil fuels for me but not for thee

financialpost.com/opinion/bjorn-…
Bjorn Lomborg: The rich worlds message to the poor: Fossil fuels for me but not for thee
financialpost.com
 
Bjorn Lomborg Retweeted ·  
What is the implied decarbonization of US electricity under the provisions of the IRA?
Pretty aggressive

TL;DR below
Details--> rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/how-plausibl…
 
In reply to @BjornLomborg
Here is the 2012 article telling us about the terrible state of the Great Barrier Reef and about how it will almost halve again by 2022 to 5-10% pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pn… pic.twitter.com/w5574fjzDb
Replying to @BjornLomborg
And here are the three media articles (of very many) reporting on the Great reef catastrophe smh.com.au/environment/co… bbc.com/news/science-e… cbsnews.com/news/half-of-g…
 
Replying to @BjornLomborg
Here is the 2012 article telling us about the terrible state of the Great Barrier Reef and about how it will almost halve again by 2022 to 5-10% pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pn…
 
Today, the Great Barrier Reef is better than ever

But ten years ago, we were told about the "Great Reef Catastrophe"

and how the reef would be almost gone today

Moral of the story:

Don't always believe the scare stories

Refs in 🧵 pic.twitter.com/4cSmliNkyr
Replying to @BjornLomborg
Doesn't fit the narrative, but

Great Barrier Reef: Better than ever

Two-thirds of all reefs hit all-time high in 2022

aims.gov.au/monitoring-gre… pic.twitter.com/fklGXkf57p
 
Today, the Great Barrier Reef is better than ever

But ten years ago, we were told about the "Great Reef Catastrophe"

and how the reef would be almost gone today

Moral of the story:

Don't always believe the scare stories

Refs in 🧵
 
Climate alarmism leads to bad policies that cost trillions  and helps little.

We can do better and in my book I describe 5 crucial policies.

The second, we need to innovate to make green energy cheaper than fossil fuels.

Read about the other 4:
basicbooks.com/titles/bjorn-l…
 
Bjorn Lomborg Retweeted ·  
Doesn't fit the narrative, but

Great Barrier Reef: Better than ever

Two-thirds of all reefs hit all-time high in 2022

aims.gov.au/monitoring-gre…
 
In reply to @BjornLomborg
you seem to be at loggerheads with the numbers produced by three different studies, as published here: theatlantic.com/newsletters/we…
No, I'm using one of these three groups, the Rhodium's estimates of reduction, see tweet chain The point is, that the *temperature* impact is not very large
In reply to @BjornLomborg
The CO₂e reduction estimate comes from the Rhodium group's new reduction estimate My analysis use the average difference between their current policy and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). This goes from zero in 2022 to 511Mt CO₂e in 2030. rhg.com/research/infla… pic.twitter.com/DIRqOiZ3Wt
 
In reply to @BjornLomborg
Official reef-wide average widely published as the Great Barrier Reef got worse But when it got better, official average stopped in 2020 Here is the optimal average (least-square) based on their published averages for North, Central and South sectors aims.gov.au/reef-monitorin… pic.twitter.com/FRO2BtSkgE
Replying to @BjornLomborg
Dr Ridd, former professor of marine physics at James Cook University, has posted his estimate of the reef-wide average here with examples of how the average was used to say things getting worse but now, as things are better, doesn't get updated thegwpf.org/content/upload…
 
Doesn't fit the narrative, but

Great Barrier Reef: Better than ever

Two-thirds of all reefs hit all-time high in 2022

aims.gov.au/monitoring-gre… pic.twitter.com/fklGXkf57p
Replying to @BjornLomborg
Official reef-wide average widely published as the Great Barrier Reef got worse But when it got better, official average stopped in 2020 Here is the optimal average (least-square) based on their published averages for North, Central and South sectors aims.gov.au/reef-monitorin…
 
Doesn't fit the narrative, but

Great Barrier Reef: Better than ever

Two-thirds of all reefs hit all-time high in 2022

aims.gov.au/monitoring-gre…
 
It seems dubious whether renewables will dominate the 21st century.
When measuring renewables in percent of global energy, almost all energy was renewable in 1800

Read my peer-reviewed article:

sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
 
Your friendly reminder, that the new US climate package (Inflation Reduction Act):

almost no climate benefits (temp reduction of 0.0009°F to 0.028°F in 2100)

for $369 billion
Replying to @BjornLomborg
One group has documented their findings of reductions If anything it makes impact less plausible It unbelievably assumes that all new cars will be electric already in 2029 + assumes absurd amounts of green deployment from @RogerPielkeJr rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/pielkes-week…
 
Your friendly reminder, that the new US climate package (Inflation Reduction Act):

almost no climate benefits (temp reduction of 0.0009°F to 0.028°F in 2100)

for $369 billion
Impact of new climate legislation

Unnoticeable: 0.0009°F to 0.028°F in 2100

Why is no media describing just 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲 your $369 billion will achieve?

Instead, we're being told:

"the most significant legislation in history to tackle the climate crisis" (Biden)

🧵 pic.twitter.com/FgpJBtrIE8
 
Bjorn Lomborg Retweeted ·  
In reply to @Knutti_ETH
3/ Climate change is a huge challenge. But IMO there is little evidence that climate change is worse than we thought, nor that assessments are downplaying the risks, nor that we are doomed. These viewpoints do not reflect mainstream thinking in climate. pnas.org/doi/full/10.10…
 
 
Bjorn Lomborg Retweeted ·  
The French nuclear crisis has turned a major power exporter into an importer.
 
 
Bjorn Lomborg Retweeted ·  
The new US climate bill will do almost nothing to reduce global temperature

a reduction of 0.0009°F-0.028°F in 2100
(0.0005°C to 0.016°C)

Here, the NY Sun's story
archive.ph/z0Hhs
nysun.com/article/democr…
 
The new US climate bill will do almost nothing to reduce global temperature

a reduction of 0.0009°F-0.028°F in 2100
(0.0005°C to 0.016°C)

Here, the NY Sun's story
archive.ph/z0Hhs
nysun.com/article/democr…
Impact of new climate legislation

Unnoticeable: 0.0009°F to 0.028°F in 2100

Why is no media describing just 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲 your $369 billion will achieve?

Instead, we're being told:

"the most significant legislation in history to tackle the climate crisis" (Biden)

🧵 pic.twitter.com/FgpJBtrIE8
 
omg

Columnist arguing war is good for climate because it reduces the economy

1) Ukraine war good because it curtails power consumption

2) a Taiwan war could disrupt global trade and "might make us stop consuming our way to climate disaster"

scmp.com/comment/opinio…
Could a Pelosi visit to Taiwan help the fight against climate change?
scmp.com
 
In reply to @BjornLomborg
Impact of new climate legislation (°C) Unnoticeable: 0.0005°C to 0.016°C in 2100 Why is no media describing just 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲 $369 billion will achieve? Instead, we're being told: "the most significant legislation in history to tackle the climate crisis" (Biden) 🧵 pic.twitter.com/1Fn2JpDdjS
Replying to @BjornLomborg
Notice, as Roger Pielke points out, that so far the groups analyzing the legislation have all said it will reduce emissions, but not actually showed *how* this will happen... problematic
The @nytimes just out➡️"How the New Climate Bill Would Reduce Emissions"
but it fails to deliver
nytimes.com/interactive/20…

It tells us that three groups have created spreadsheet models that indicate BAU= -~25% & IRA= ~-40%

What are the assumptions & mechanisms?

Key passage⬇️ pic.twitter.com/MQ1shcbnQV
 
Colbert: new Senate deal will

lower health care costs and
reduce deficit

nice

But then:

"most importantly" combat climate change

It will do no such thing

It will reduce temps bw 0.0009°F-0.028°F by end of century

@StephenAtHome, maybe rephrase:

"least importantly..."? pic.twitter.com/4PlWBJQNoW
 
Colbert: new Senate deal will

lower health care costs and
reduce deficit

nice

But then:

"most importantly" combat climate change

It will do no such thing

It will reduce temps bw 0.0009°F-0.028°F by end of century

@StephenAtHome, maybe rephrase:

"least importantly..."?
Impact of new climate legislation

Unnoticeable: 0.0009°F to 0.028°F in 2100

Why is no media describing just 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲 your $369 billion will achieve?

Instead, we're being told:

"the most significant legislation in history to tackle the climate crisis" (Biden)

🧵 pic.twitter.com/FgpJBtrIE8
 
Bjorn Lomborg Retweeted ·  
Judge upholds rejection of huge MT solar project. Key line:
Lawyers for $250M project argued board was "unduly influenced by strong public opposition to the proposal and by the project’s potential impact to neighbors."
h/t @MeredithAngwin @LinowesLisa

mtstandard.com/news/local/jud…
 
Bjorn Lomborg Retweeted ·  
Weather is defined as those times when no weather occurs

Climate is defined as those times when weather occurs

😉
 
Defining characteristics of ambitious climate policy is the ability to make it through Congress and attract sustained political support

Here the better standard bearer for climate ambition is not Extinction Rebellion but Joe Manchin

thebreakthrough.org/blog/joe-manch…
Joe Manchin: Climate Hawk
thebreakthrough.org
 
Climate alarmism leads to bad policies that cost trillions and helps little
We can do better and in my book I describe 5 crucial policies.
The first, a moderate and global carbon tax can help, but only a little
Read about the other 4
basicbooks.com/titles/bjorn-l… (free first 25 pages)
 
In reply to @BjornLomborg
Source of this calculations?
Replying to @25_cycle
see the bottom of the graph, or the following tweets, laying where the data comes from
 
Bjorn Lomborg Retweeted ·  
Impact of new climate legislation

Unnoticeable: 0.0009°F to 0.028°F in 2100

Why is no media describing just 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲 your $369 billion will achieve?

Instead, we're being told:

"the most significant legislation in history to tackle the climate crisis" (Biden)

🧵
 
In reply to @BjornLomborg
Why is media not demanding to see the actual climate impact of spending $369 billion The UN's own climate model shows that the impact will be impossible to detect by mid-century and still unnoticeable even in the best case by the year 2100 Shouldn't we hear that? refs in 🧵 pic.twitter.com/B90wFUrqv6
Replying to @BjornLomborg
Impact of new climate legislation (°C) Unnoticeable: 0.0005°C to 0.016°C in 2100 Why is no media describing just 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲 $369 billion will achieve? Instead, we're being told: "the most significant legislation in history to tackle the climate crisis" (Biden) 🧵
 
In reply to @BjornLomborg
Baseline is RCP4.5, as used e.g. by UNFCCC here unfccc.int/news/cop26-upd… Biden quote "the most significant legislation in history to tackle the climate crisis" whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/… UN Climate model, live.magicc.org pic.twitter.com/sSPRkWtpqg
Replying to @BjornLomborg
Why is media not demanding to see the actual climate impact of spending $369 billion The UN's own climate model shows that the impact will be impossible to detect by mid-century and still unnoticeable even in the best case by the year 2100 Shouldn't we hear that? refs in 🧵
 
In reply to @BjornLomborg
The $369 billion only goes to 2030 (still unclear, but not further) Low estimate assumes IRA only causes reductions for 2022-30 (underestimate) High estimate assumes IRA continues 511MtCO₂e reductions every year from 2031-2100 (big overestimate) democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/… pic.twitter.com/kIKTPMDW71
Replying to @BjornLomborg
Baseline is RCP4.5, as used e.g. by UNFCCC here unfccc.int/news/cop26-upd… Biden quote "the most significant legislation in history to tackle the climate crisis" whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/… UN Climate model, live.magicc.org
 
In reply to @BjornLomborg
The CO₂e reduction estimate comes from the Rhodium group's new reduction estimate My analysis use the average difference between their current policy and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). This goes from zero in 2022 to 511Mt CO₂e in 2030. rhg.com/research/infla… pic.twitter.com/DIRqOiZ3Wt
Replying to @BjornLomborg
The $369 billion only goes to 2030 (still unclear, but not further) Low estimate assumes IRA only causes reductions for 2022-30 (underestimate) High estimate assumes IRA continues 511MtCO₂e reductions every year from 2031-2100 (big overestimate) democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/…
 
Impact of new climate legislation

Unnoticeable: 0.0009°F to 0.028°F in 2100

Why is no media describing just 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲 your $369 billion will achieve?

Instead, we're being told:

"the most significant legislation in history to tackle the climate crisis" (Biden)

🧵 pic.twitter.com/FgpJBtrIE8
Replying to @BjornLomborg
The CO₂e reduction estimate comes from the Rhodium group's new reduction estimate My analysis use the average difference between their current policy and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). This goes from zero in 2022 to 511Mt CO₂e in 2030. rhg.com/research/infla…
 
Impact of new climate legislation

Unnoticeable: 0.0009°F to 0.028°F in 2100

Why is no media describing just 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲 your $369 billion will achieve?

Instead, we're being told:

"the most significant legislation in history to tackle the climate crisis" (Biden)

🧵
 
A Reasonable Alternative to COP26 and Preaching Climate Doom

Reasonable conversations about climate change are rare, but they’d be more common if political elites dropped their apocalyptic language.

wsj.com/amp/articles/r…

archive.md/Py959#selectio…
 
Bjorn Lomborg Retweeted ·  
BREAKING: Germany 1-year forward baseload electricity surges >€400 per MWh for the first time ever.

We are truly into crunching territory for the country's energy-intensive manufacturing industry.

The current price is ~1,000% higher than the €41.1 per MWh 2010-2020 average.
 
Bjorn Lomborg Retweeted ·  
African nations expected to make case for big rise in fossil fuel output.
theguardian.com/world/2022/aug…

via @GoogleNews
 
Bjorn Lomborg Retweeted ·  
Doomerism and the apocalyptic fear of climate change have become mainstream w/media feedback cycle incentives.

But, what research shows human extinction or catastrophic outcomes?

Turns out not much.

bbc.com/news/science-e…
 
Bjorn Lomborg Retweeted ·  
In reply to @RogerPielkeJr
Here is the challenge for climate hawks "I simply do not see how the IRA actually reduces emissions. I invite climate hawks to present the case in terms of specific policy mechanics and resulting causality for how the legislation will reduce carbon dioxide emissions."
 
Bjorn Lomborg Retweeted ·  
Next week The Guardian will probably publish another article about levels of climate anxiety.

Taking no responsibility for the fact that their (false) headlines are making this much worse.

Experts do not think that climate meltdown can't be stopped.
 
 
Free access is provided to the 8 hour timeframe for this page.

A Trendsmap Explore subscription provides full access to all available timeframes

Find out more

This account is already logged in to Trendsmap.
Your subscription allows access for one user. If you require access for more users, you can create additional subscriptions.
Please Contact us if you are interested in discussing discounts for 3+ users for your organisation, or have any other queries.