Why is the World Economic Forum taking climate advice from a 16 year old climate campaigner instead of the world’s only Nobel climate economist?pic.twitter.com/44FQmDb1dd
Näytä tämä ketju
-
Tämä twiitti ei ole saatavilla.
Not me, Nordhaus: you can read his article here: https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.20170046 … Summary: Do nothing costs $134tr Do smart tax: costs $20tr, reduce climate damages $50tr = $30tr benefit Do more (most campaigners): climate costs decline, policy costs increase much more, net loss $40tr+pic.twitter.com/CbgZTeWLRj
-
-
Integrated assessment models produce neat tables but I have sadly (as an owner of the first edition of Global Crises, Global Solutions) been convinced that they are not very useful for deciding how much to do about climate.
-
Damage functions are woefully inadequate (so many risks or forms of damage aren’t or can’t be included). Discounting and valuation issues are huge. Innovation is poorly handled and mitigation costs tend to be way overestimated (at least so far). The tool is not fit for the task.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.