What, Exactly

Andrew Stuttaford:

For a good example of not approaching this issue with humility, take the UK’s massive investment in wind energy, discussed here by Bjorn Lomborg (a believer, I should stress, in AGW), the ‘Skeptical Environmentalist’ himself:

The UK Carbon Trust estimates that the cost of expanding wind turbines to 40 gigawatts, in order to provide 31% of electricity by 2020, could run as high as £75 billion ($120 billion). And the benefits, in terms of tackling global warming, would be measly: a reduction of just 86 megatons of CO2 per year for two decades. In terms of averted rise in temperature, this would be completely insignificant. Using a standard climate model, by 2100, the UK’s huge outlay will have postponed global warming by just over ten days.

And yet David Cameron presses on, scarring what’s left of the landscape of his crowded island and forcing up energy costs for, well, what exactly?

I too wonder what the benefit of harnessing a cheap source of power co— hang on, the plasma TV's fallen into the blender again.