No problem... 'Malcolm' has 2 M's, 2 'L's', and no E's. It's right there at the top of all my posts.
Not at all. Let's assume Bloomberg and Ms. Lombrana are totally unbiased. Let's assume the researchers (Guo, et.al.) are totally unbiased. Let's take the news report at it's oh-so-clickable-headline and story's face value: 5 million people die annually due to climate-change-related extreme weather. ...The majority of which have recently been due to 'cold'.
There is zero reference to any pre-industrial, pre-climate-change extreme weather deaths. Were there no deaths in this era? Were the no extreme weather events in this era? I think we all know the answer to this. So, as heinous as it may be to call this era's human deaths "base-line", I'd think the researchers should have included this base-line data. Maybe Ms. Lombrana or her editor should have pushed for a more complete story. And just maybe some of that 5M is base-line. YMMV
First, thank you for at least validating the ASME study's existence. I DO recall it's conclusions, as I was shocked at the potential for my professional participation in this 'fix'. And so the emphatic answer is, "Yes! I am aware of a study that claims fighting climate change is or will be the cause of any deaths."
If we assume a 2- or 3-ish decade old human population of 5B, and the ASME study was right (within the UCS's timeline), but at the 'low end' (1/3), then we loose 1.65B human lives.
But let's assume that our decades-old ASME with their chosen minions were really dumb, or my memory is really bad, and the original ASME study was wrong by a massive and incompetent 50% (:: only 1/6 of the population lost). That ls a mere 825M human lives. That's equal to 165 years of Prof. Guo's estimated losses - - just for comparison.
In your professional career, I'm guessing you a quite familiar with the process hazards that exist at the extreme ends of a control curve. In the case of climate change, doing nothing is one end. Doing too much, too fast is the other. I try to stay in the middle and I am notorious with my peers for always asking, 'How can this go wrong?' My (in)actions may cost lives, but not all of them. I trust you can say the same.
My company now has an entire business division dedicated to commercialization of carbon capture and sequestration. Another group sits down the hall from me, actively looking for methane leaks within our BU - down to fugitive emissions from compressor shaft packing - using tech that would amaze you. As mentioned elsewhere, elimination of routine flaring is a focus, and about 5years ahead of company plan for our BU. (We do still have some emergency flaring, but it is simply to prevent catastrophic failure.)
It took humans way more than 100 years to get 'here' CO2-wise. Common sense says we won't get back in 10.
...Stick figure pounding of keys thus endeth. Enjoy.