Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Climate real problem, but won't be solved by high-cost climate policies Instead, dramatically ramp up investment in green R&D from $20 to $100bn/yr Such innovation can drive price of low-CO₂ energy down below fossil fuels and help everyone switchhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162520304157 …
For the comments suggesting that these costs are just investments to make us all much richer — no The $11K/person cost is not price tags on solar panels etc It is GDP loss: US GDP will be 11.9% lower in 2050 compared to no net-zero policy Income trajectory permanently lower
Does this factor in adaptability?
It’s never been about fixing the environment.
Bjorn, you may be a gallows economist but you know nothing about the climate sciences, which you demonstrate in this rant.
#ClimateBrawl #ClimateEmergency #ClimateCrisis
Economists were invented to make astrologers look good.
A partial equilibrium model (GCAM model in the study) does not compute GDP loss but only technical costs. The study says nothing about GDP impacts which depend more on climate policy (e.g. how carbon revenues are recycled) and level of investment crowding-out than techn. costs..
I think it would be better to describe the cost in terms of real resources. Real resources are what is truly limited. Money is just a numeraire. If the real resources are readily available, then that is what matters
Doing nothing reduces US GDP by nearly 100%. If your model doesn’t show that, then what good is it?
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
