A Reply To My Critics

Abstract

A response to three comments on my Climate Matters. In responding to Elizabeth Cripps, I argue that each individual's emissions do harm because the harm done by cumulative emissions is roughly proportional to their quantity. Each rich person's emissions are therefore an injustice. In responding to Holly Lawford-Smith, I point out that the harm done by each tonne of a person's emissions is very much greater than the cost to the person of avoiding that emission, so very few among the rich have any excuse for making emissions. In response to Paul Bou-Habib, I argue that the morality of climate change has no need for a 'person-affecting' notion of improvement, and that notion is in any case defective because it can be cyclical.