video. I can't seem to embed it. Something about adblock.
There are 2 comments I have on his argument:
The costs of responding to global warming:
1) In many ways the costs associated with responding to global warming would probably actually save us money and make businesses more efficient. (Using less oil more efficiently?) So they may not actually end up being costs.
2) The other thing about the costs of responding to global warming is that the main effects, especially initially, would fall onto the big energy companies. ie people might use less fossil fuel. While big energy might not in the long run lose out, they would certainly have to change a lot of things about the way they do business and in the short term their profit might just fall. This is why they are so resistant to the idea of global warming/climate change.