Posted on 12/04/2014 2:03:34 PM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
The term Social Cost of Carbon is a figure that puts a dollar value on the climate damages per ton of CO2 released, and is used by, among others, policymakers to help determine the costs and benefits of climate policies. In the latest issue of the journal Science, a group of economists and lawyers urge several improvements to the government’s figure that would impose a regular, transparent and peer-reviewed process to ensure it is reliable and well-supported.
“By providing an estimate of the damages from an extra ton of CO2 emissions, the Social Cost of Carbon tells us how much money we should devote to mitigating emissions. It separates the efficient policies from the wasteful ones, and for this reason is an incredibly useful tool in devising climate policy,” said Prof. Michael Greenstone, one of the authors of the analysis and the director of the Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago.
The authors give an example of why such a consistent, collaborative and well-supported value is important. When the Social Cost of Carbon value used today, which was developed with a vigorous approach, is applied to the EPA’s recent Clean Power Plan that limits emissions from existing power plants, the benefits of the rule vastly outweigh the damages. However, when applying a past value used by a single agency, the plan’s benefits do not exceed the costs.
Additionally, Greenstone noted that the figure is not just a tool for policymakers. The courts, businesses and others use this figure to make important decisions on the impacts associated with climate change.
“The U.S. Social Cost of Carbon is becoming a focal estimate of the likely climate damages globally,” Greenstone said. “It’s critical that that we get this number right, because it will influence policy around the world.”
(Excerpt) Read more at news.uchicago.edu ...
Those Progressive National and International Socialists need to evaluate Society’s benefit from of all of the CO2 emissions of their EBT slaves.
Wow, economists cannot even fathom the rather simple math of their profession and they think they can make sense of the awfulness coming out of “climate research”?
Perhaps economists might want to start figuring out how we pay out that $17+ trillion debt.
“Wow, economists cannot even fathom the rather simple math of their profession ....”
Econometrics (as opposed to theory-based economics) uses complex computer models, with several hundred variables. Econometric models are similar, in several respects, to climate models.
Even their wildest fantasies and made up statistics won’t approach the actual economic costs and dislocations incurred by the policies they advocate. Real people will actually lose their jobs, starve, and freeze to death.
What we really need is a regular report on how much this climate change lunacy is costing the nation and each taxpayer.
Also the impact and damage done to our economy, productivity, national security and individual freedom by laws, regulations and restrictions forced on us by the government and supposedly put in place to counter man-made global warming.
The biggest economic impacts are occurring because of climate science. Government spending on research and nonsense like wind and solar energy should stop.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.