Apparently he really does believe warming can be combated on the human level (as much as humans contribute to it), and recommends that higher taxes should pay for it:

Examining eight methods to reduce or stop global warming, Lomborg and his fellow economists recommend pouring money into researching and developing clean energy sources such as wind, wave, solar and nuclear power, and more work on climate engineering ideas such as “cloud whitening” to reflect the sun’s heat back into the outer atmosphere.

In a Guardian interview, he said he would finance investment through a tax on carbon emissions that would also raise $50bn to mitigate the effect of climate change, for example by building better sea defences, and $100bn for global healthcare.

His declaration about the importance of action on climate change comes at a crucial point in the debate, with international efforts to agree a global deal on emissions stalled amid a resurgence in scepticism caused by rows over the reliability of the scientific evidence for global warming.

The Guardian has been decent in its coverage of the scientific problems with the data proffered by the IACC and IPC. The fallout from the non-use of the scientific method has led to calls for “transparency.” Even Lomborg admits there is a trust problem given that peer review was not followed in its intended form.