Over at his blog, Tim Worstall tackles the latest bit of alarmism from George Moonbiot:

It would seem that George Monbiot doesn’t understand that some actions will cause more problems than they might solve:
This is a cut in total emissions, not in emissions per head. If the population were to rise from 6 billion to 9 billion between now and then, we would need an 87% cut in global emissions per person. If carbon emissions are to be distributed equally, the greater cut must be made by the biggest polluters: rich nations like us. The UK’s emissions per capita would need to fall by 91%.
But our governments appear quietly to have abandoned their aim of preventing dangerous climate change. If so, they condemn millions to death. What the IPCC report shows is that we have to stop treating climate change as an urgent issue.Assume that he’s right in his predictions (which I don’t think that he is but that’s another matter) and that failure to cut carbon emissions by 91% in the rich world does indeed mean that millions will die from the effects of climate change.
OK, how many would die from the attempt to cut carbon emissions by 91%? Is it a greater or smaller number than would die from the cimate change? If we don’t know that number then we can’t make a rational decision. Not shouldn’t make a decision, but literally cannot.

There’s more.