Now your beginning to think like an economist (a compliment in my circles, believe if or not) A great way to make it easy for people to take into account the costs and benefits of alternatives (including externalities) is with Pigouvian taxes:https://taxfoundation.org/tax-basics/pigouvian-tax/ …
-
The uncertainty I’m referring to is about how much warming we can expect. There are scenarios where the warming or other bad outcomes are amplified and others where they dampened. For instance, even a small tail risk of a runaway greenhouse effect would be catastrophic.
There are tail risks in both directions, and there are tail risks if we attempt to decarbonize the economy. A slightly increased chance of a runaway greenhouse effect is not enough to make the expected cost of CO2 convex instead of concave.
-
-
What are the ecological tail risks in trying to decarbonize?
-
They're not ecological, they're economic (and they're pretty serious). And then there's all the ones we don't know, because we haven't deployed renewables on a large scale yet.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
It's hard for me to think of tail risks from keeping co2 levels from growing rapidly. Here's a good analysis of why we should consider tail risks fo catastrophic climate change in pricing carbon:https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.104.5.544 …
-
There are serious tail risks for the economy (and society) in forced, accelerated decarbonization. Surely you know that. (But why is all the attention on the imagined climate catastrophes? Which you've illustrated well in this discussion.)
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.