I always wonder how these studies come up with their numbers. How do they know it will be 100 million dead? Why not 50 million? Or 200 million?

Anyway, better hope you're not one of the statistics by 2030 because a new study says that 100 million of us will die as a result of climate change by that date.

Reuters:

More than 100 million people will die and global economic growth will be cut by 3.2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2030 if the world fails to tackle climate change, a report commissioned by 20 governments said on Wednesday.

As global average temperatures rise due to greenhouse gas emissions, the effects on the planet, such as melting ice caps, extreme weather, drought and rising sea levels, will threaten populations and livelihoods, said the report conducted by humanitarian organisation DARA.

It calculated that five million deaths occur each year from air pollution, hunger and disease as a result of climate change and carbon-intensive economies, and that toll would likely rise to six million a year by 2030 if current patterns of fossil fuel use continue.

More than 90 percent of those deaths will occur in developing countries, said the report that calculated the human and economic impact of climate change on 184 countries in 2010 and 2030. It was commissioned by the Climate Vulnerable Forum, a partnership of 20 developing countries threatened by climate change.

"A combined climate-carbon crisis is estimated to claim 100 million lives between now and the end of the next decade," the report said.

It said the effects of climate change had lowered global output by 1.6 percent of world GDP, or by about $1.2 trillion a year, and losses could double to 3.2 percent of global GDP by 2030 if global temperatures are allowed to rise, surpassing 10 percent before 2100.

It estimated the cost of moving the world to a low-carbon economy at about 0.5 percent of GDP this decade.

The problem, as has been pointed out before, is that these studies focus solely on the deleterious effects of any climate change, and not the benefits. Hence, the study is cooked to reflect the absolute worst that could happen. (A rise of 3 degrees in 50 years is preposterous. If that happens,we won't be around at the end of this century to worry about climate change - we'll be fried.).

The real question is who do they think they can convince with these hysterical studies? Chicken Little, perhaps?