The report reveals key professional gaps in the thesis. Why not withdrawn?
The Sindef research institute says that Norwegian consumption is leading to an ever greater encroachment on nature. But the report they produced only reveals the large professional gaps of the researchers.
Researchers at Sindef have made valuable contributions to Norway, but Sindef sometimes makes mistakes. Totally wrong.
Most people agree that human consumption involves encroachment on nature. But how is growth? Does Norwegian consumption contribute to even larger interventions? Syndef tried to quantify that in a report they released on April 27. Client Nature Conservancy.
A key finding in the report is that since 1995 Norwegian private consumption has tripled its encroachment on nature. At the same time, Sinteff believed that consumption in many European countries was contributing to an ever-increasing encroachment on nature. It was amazing.
Many errors
A close reading of the report However, it revealed several errors, including several trivial percentage calculation errors.
It is particularly extreme that Syndef has consistently used electricity instead of fixed prices when assessing Norwegian consumption growth over the years. Thus, price rise will directly affect over consumption and encroachment on nature. Few like inflation, but not because it results in less biodiversity.
Researchers at Sindef have made valuable contributions to Norway, but Sindef sometimes makes mistakes. Totally wrong.
A Updated version In the report published on June 13, some errors were corrected. But Sindef still says that the choice of current or fixed prices will play no part in the decision to triple Norwegian natural interventions.
It is difficult to understand that reasoning is appropriate. That is why I expected to present the Sindef report at one o’clock Breakfast meeting An opportunity to ask questions, sponsored by the University of Oslo and the Nature Conservancy on June 15.
At short notice, Sindef withdrew from the presentation. Instead, research leader Vibeke Nørstebø participated in a “conversation” via groups.
When I asked her how the conclusion was unaffected by whether the consumption data was measured at constant or current prices, she unfortunately could not answer the question.
However she made a short post that didn’t answer the question. A representative of the Nature Conservancy assured that it was based on “recognized scientific methods”.
May be. But the report says many more strange things.
Can be expensive
Among other things, Norwegian consumption of “housing, light and fuel” – the largest consumption group – is said to have decreased by 90 percent from 2019 to 2020.
It says Norwegian households generate 1 million kg of clothing waste each year, after a 95 percent decrease from 2011 to 2012. Waste equals 200 grams per inhabitant in 2021. It states that total clothing consumption in Norway in 1995 was under NOK 300 million. This and more is nonsense.
Syndef enjoys a high level of confidence based on previous qualifications in fields such as metal smelting and ship hull design. Previous customers were more concerned with whether Syndef solved practical problems.
Biodiversity has recently become something new investment area For Sintef. Here, success is primarily measured by whether the client receives notice in the press. Norwegian Nature Conservancy got to know No wonder they were satisfied – the conclusion in the report was exactly what the union wanted.
Maybe that’s why Sindef didn’t retract the statement? In this case, Sindef is selling trust built up over decades. It can be expensive.
“Music geek. Coffee lover. Devoted food scholar. Web buff. Passionate internet guru.”
