That's Nicholas Stern talking. I'm curious how my florescent green venture capitalist friends will react.
For the most part they were okey-dokey with Sir Nick when he was downplaying the costs of mitigation.*
From the Times of India via PressDisplay:
...Will western countries transfer clean technology free of cost? If you take CDs and books, for instance, if they are replicated cheaply in poorer countries, inventors lose money.
However, in areas like drugs to combat HIVAIDS, copying the technology to make available cheap drugs in Africa benefits not just Africa but the entire world. This is the humanity argument that we need to share for the sake of common good.
The arguments are even stronger in the case of climate change that is impacting lives and livelihoods the world over. Our challenge is to reach technology to lots of people. Policymakers should take action to enable rapid sharing of technology at reasonable cost.
What kind of a global deal on climate change would you recommend?
We have to have a global deal on climate change and India will play a key role in that. Science says that human activity has created a stock of green house gases that trap heat and change climate, changing our lives through several ways, primarily through the issue of water. The flow of GHGs building up lasts a long time, over hundreds of years. It’s a flow-stock problem of long-term nature. There is need for urgent action because delay means higher stock. London has direct taxation on polluters and Delhi has adopted CNG. There are many ways.
*The Wall Street Journal's Energy Roundup has two extended posts re: the Valencia talks going on right now. Much of the debate is over costs. I'll get to them shortly.
Hot Air in Spain
Wrangling Over UN Warming Language