In an announcement, Cambridge University Press noted that “[t]his new partnership marks a rebranding of the journal in terms of both appearance and reach, reinforcing the journal’s position as an authority on analytical practice of benefit-cost analysis. For the first time the journal will benefit from online before print publication on FirstView and improved article functionality in terms of enhanced HTML and mobile optimization.”
Editors Glenn Blomquist and William Hoyt agree that this opens an exciting new chapter in the Journal’s development. Prior to the move, JBCA will be publishing two issues that will include several articles on retrospective analysis and on benefit-cost analysis and climate policy.
Three PhDs? What about the opportunity cost of time spent in school? Or did he get all three simultaneously?
Right off the bat, you can count out Robert B. Banner, otherwise known as the Hulk. While Mr. Banner has three Ph.D.’s from the California Institute of Technology, at some point he’s bound to go berserk and lay waste to half the Faculty Senate. That’s a PR disaster.
A PR disaster maybe, but definitely a tempting scenario. There's more here.
With that title we're trying to boost our traffic and maybe even get Typepad to crash:
In 2011 Steven Schlozman, an assistant professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, went on a late-night radio show and said he had recently discovered a paper about a mysterious disease, called Ataxic Neurodegenerative Satiety Deficiency syndrome, written by a doctor from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention who had died before having the chance to publish it.
According to the paper, "ANSD" destroyed the frontal lobe while leaving the amygdala intact, essentially transforming victims into lurching vessels of unchecked rage—or zombies, if you’d like.
The disease was made up, of course. Dr. Schlozman also writes fiction, and he had invented ANSD for a novel called The Zombie Autopsies: Secret Notebooks From the Apocalypse. ...
The radio host was in on the joke, he wrote, and they were just having fun discussing the zombie scourge in a faux-serious tone. (In his fake paper, Dr. Schlozman attributes zombies’ constant groaning to constipation.)
But some listeners didn’t get the joke. "Emails showed up in my in-box," wrote Dr. Schlozman, "and I got questions along the lines of: What’s the best medicine to stave off the zombie infection? How do I keep my house safe from the zombie onslaught?"
Later that year Ali S. Khan, director of the CDC’s Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response, cited Dr. Schlozman in a blog post he wrote about how people should prepare for a zombie epidemic. The post was titled "Preparedness 101: Zombie Apocalypse." The blog post was supposed to be a tongue-in-cheek way of getting readers to prepare for more-realistic threats, like hurricanes, by prodding the imagination. It was at least halfway successful: Traffic to the CDC blog increased sixtyfold, causing servers to crash.
It’s unclear how many of those visitors read the item with an appropriately large grain of salt, but many hailed the CDC’s experiment as a success.
And yet, for environmentalists, a sliver of hope exists in the shape of Chile, one of Latin America’s fastest-growing economies, which last month approved the first carbon tax in South America. The measure, due to take effect in 2018, was part of a broad overhaul of the tax system. ...
Chile’s tax, which targets large factories and the electricity sector, will cover about 55 percent of the nation’s carbon emissions, according to Juan-Pablo Montero, a professor of economics at the Pontifical Catholic University of Chile, who informally advised the government in favor of the tax. At $5 per metric ton of carbon dioxide emitted, Chile’s tax is lower than the $8-per-metric-ton carbon price in the European Union’s carbon-trading system, which has often been criticized as too lax. But it is higher than a carbon tax introduced in Mexico in January. ...
Chile’s approval of a carbon tax owes much to its positioning inside a broader tax package, experts said. At the same time that it passed the carbon tax, the Chilean government raised corporate taxes substantially, in a bid to increase revenues for education and other projects. As a result, the carbon tax raised less debate within Chile than it might have otherwise, though electricity companies have objected. ...
In addition to the tax on carbon, Chile is also adopting taxes on other air pollutants, including fine particles, nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide, as well as a tax on some light vehicles that generate diesel exhaust. Santiago, the Chilean capital, has long struggled with pollution, due partly to its location in a dry valley.
Note: When was the last time you saw Elizabeth City, NC in the funny papers? Monday, October 27, 2014 (if Cherry plans to work on her tan then she can also work on her skeeter bites ... "George Hamilton" put it this way "Nothing better than the Dismal Dank Dreary morbid hideous feted swamp for a good tan")?
My name is [redacted] and I am the SEO expert of a leading SEO service provider company. As per my analysis, your website is not performing well in the Google organic search. Also your traffic is poor from last couple of months due to some of the reasons.
Some of the aspects given below:
Due to poor Back links
Keywords are not in the first page of Google, Yahoo and Bing
Due to errors and issues present in website
Errors in the coding part of your website
Website content quality is not high standard.
Area of Improvement:
We will give you 1st page ranking on Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
Improve your sales and brand value.
100% satisfaction guarantee or your full money back.
Hummingbird recovers and secures your website from next Google updates.
Increase your traffic flow.
Target your local market to increase business.
Some comments on our areas of improvment:
When I google "environmental economics" it still comes up first. Is that still happening for others?
How could our sales be even better? And after the oil spill, our brand was so destroyed that not even a million dollar tourism campaign could improve it.
We have no local market (unless you count Pete Groothuis)
And would someone please help us with errors and content quality?
"People are just not very good at math and they find it particularly hard to make estimates about very large numbers or very small numbers," said Bobby Duffy, global director of the Ipsos Social Research Institute.
“The changes there are huge but almost certainly due to reporting changes,” said Harold Brooks, a scientist with the National Severe Storms Laboratory who studies tornadoes and other severe weather with hail or high winds.
Some areas are prone to the ferocious storms, but it’s impossible to know exactly when or where they will occur, making them difficult to count. If they pass quickly, do no damage, or occur in an area with few or no people, they may not be counted at all.
Even when they are spotted, the mechanism for reporting the storms is ad hoc.
Tornadoes recorded by the National Climatic Data Center are documented variously by trained spotters, newspaper accounts, utility workers, pilots, the general public, fire fighters, police and others.
Climatologists and meteorologists now benefit from tools such Doppler radar, but advances in technology may mean that weaker tornadoes are more likely to be reported.
Such circumstances make it difficult to say with any certainty whether the frequency of tornadoes has increased over time, or whether storm reporting has simply gotten better.
If people report tornados and population is increasing, then the number of tornadoes will increase just from population growth. I decided to try to estimate that relationship so I went to the NCDC, searched for tornado and clicked on Historical Records and Trends. Here is the first image I see:
Here is what the NCDC says about the lack of trend:
With increased National Doppler radar coverage, increasing population, and greater attention to tornado reporting, there has been an increase in the number of tornado reports over the past several decades. This can create a misleading appearance of an increasing trend in tornado frequency. To better understand the variability and trend in tornado frequency in the United States, the total number of EF-1 and stronger, as well as strong to violent tornadoes (EF-3 to EF-5 category on the Enhanced Fujita scale) can be analyzed. These tornadoes would have likely been reported even during the decades before Doppler radar use became widespread and practices resulted in increasing tornado reports. The bar charts below indicate there has been little trend in the frequency of the stronger tornadoes over the past 55 years.
The decline in Arctic sea ice has
doubled the chance of severe winters in Europe and Asia in the
past decade, according to researchers in Japan.
Sea-ice melt in the Arctic, Barents and Kara seas since
2004 has made more than twice as likely atmospheric circulations
that suck cold Arctic air to Europe and Asia, a group of
Japanese researchers led by the University of Tokyo’s Masato
Mori said in a study published yesterday in Nature Geoscience.
“This counterintuitive effect of the global warming that
led to the sea ice decline in the first place makes some people
think that global warming has stopped. It has not,” Colin
Summerhayes, emeritus associate of the Scott Polar Research
Institute, said in a statement provided by the journal Nature
Geoscience, where the study is published.
U.S. energy-related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions increased in 2013 by 129 million metric tons (2.5%), the largest increase since 2010 and the fourth-largest increase since 1990. Emissions trends reflect a combination of economic factors (population multiplied by per capita output [GDP/population]), energy intensity (energy use per dollar of GDP), and carbon intensity (carbon emissions per unit of energy consumed).
In the decade prior to 2013, energy intensity decreased on average by 2.0% per year; given that it increased by 0.5% in 2013, this meant there was a 2.5% swing compared to trend. Energy intensity changes can reflect weather variations that directly affect energy use for heating and cooling as well as changes in the composition of economic activity. Heating degree days, a measure of heating requirements, increased about 19% between 2012 and 2013. As compared to the 2003-12 trend, the increase in energy intensity added about 134 million metric tons.
Carbon intensity declined by 0.3% in 2013, but as this decline was less than the previous decade, it led to an increase of about 29 million metric tons of emissions as compared to trend. One factor driving carbon intensity lower has been the changing fuel mix in the electric power sector. The share of electricity generated from natural gas and renewables generally increased while the share from coal decreased through 2012, when natural gas prices fell to their lowest level in more than a decade following a mild winter. With higher natural gas prices in 2013, coal's generation share rose from 39% in 2012 to 40% in 2013, slowing the rate of carbon intensity reduction.
Growth in per capita output in 2013 contributed 38 million metric tons over trend as it was greater than the average rate over the previous decade. Slower population growth (0.7%) put slight downward pressure on emissions growth as compared to the previous decade. Without slower population growth, 2013 emissions would have been about 8 million metric tons higher.
SUMMARY: When cold weather looms across the U.S., natural-gas prices usually rise. This year they are falling, after a record production boom nearly replenished stockpiles left at their lowest since 2003 by last winter's freeze.
CLASSROOM APPLICATION: Students can use supply and demand to examine the effects of shifts in both demand and supply on the equilibrium price of natural gas. Also, they can compare factors, such as weather, that have differing effects on the prices of two major energy sources: natural gas and oil. Lastly, they can examine how bottlenecks in supply chains affect prices.
QUESTIONS: 1. (Advanced) How do weather forecasts affect the price of natural gas? Why does the weather have a greater effect on the price of natural gas than it does on the price of oil?
2. (Advanced) During periods of high demand for natural gas, how do bottlenecks in the natural gas supply chain affect the price of natural gas?
3. (Introductory) Why did prices for prices for natural gas last week reach to their lowest point of 2014?
At the risk of biting a hand that fed me a tiny morsel, here's an interesting take on the Amazon/Hachette book fight. To me, the interesting piece here is the question of value-added. What value does the publisher add to the publishing process?
In the traditional book purchasing paradigm, when a reader bought a book at the store there were two separate layers of middlemen taking a cut of the cash before money reached the author: a retailer and a publisher. The publisher, in this paradigm, was doing very real work as part of the value-chain. A typed and printed book manuscript looks nothing like a book. Transforming the manuscript into a book and then arranging for it to be shipped in appropriate quantities to physical stores around the country is a non-trivial task. What's more, neither bookstore owners nor authors have any expertise in this field.
Short story: When I wrote my first book in 2002 (actually wrote it from 1995-2001--you can still purchase a copy here) I was surprised to learn that: 1) We had to submit a camera ready copy of our book, and 2) we had almost no control over the price that would be charged. On 1), the publisher added no value--no content, no editing, no nothing. On 2), we digned what we were told at teh time was the standard contract, with 5% royalties. I have no idea if that was standard; we might have been really bad negotiators. The book originally sold for $100. Somehow, buyers were paying an extra $95 for...what? A nice cover? A little marketing? For a first book, the marketing was probably pretty valuable. But, for the next book I write (whenever that might be), I'm thinking I am just going to post the .pdf to a password secured website and sell passwords for $10. Sure, I risk piracy, but is that risk really going to be $90 per book? At $10 per book, everyone is better off--except the publisher.
Back to the story--which kinda makes my point.
Digital publishing is not like that. Transforming a writer's words into a readable e-book product can be done with a combination of software and a minimal amount of training. Book publishers do not have any substantial expertise in software development, but Amazon and its key competitors (Apple, Google, and the B&B/Microsoft partnership) do.
Publishers would like writers to believe that the pressure they are feeling from Amazon will trickle down and hurt authors as well. But there is a big difference. Even in the brave new world of e-publishing, authors are still making a crucial contribution to the industry by writing the books. Publishers are getting squeezed out because they don't contribute anything of value.
One thing missing from this argument is that publisher do add value in terms of editing, screening and signaling to readers. Getting a book published requires passing some threshold of quality. Publishers can judge whether a book will sell. This gives readers a signal that someone thinks the book is worth reading. Unfortuantely, because publishers/editors are not typically subject matter experts, these signals are very noisy. What a publisher thinks will sell is not necessarily a valuable contribution from teh readers' perspective. Once a book is published, the cleaner signal is word-of-mouth--do readers value the contribution of the book?
I've been a fan of Mike Rowe since his early days on the Discovery Channel's 'Dirty Jobs.' I don't always agree with his political views, but he's entertaining. He has a new show on CNN called 'Somebody's Gotta Do it,' where he highlights what seem to many like odd jobs. Apparently in a recent show, he spotlighted efforts to save the Whooping Crane. A viewer took exception. In his response, Mr. Rowe sounds a bit like an environmental economist...at least he's asking economic-like questions:
"You did a disservice to Operation Migration and the whooping crane project on "Somebody's Gotta Do It." You came across as bored and disdainful. You say you work for the people who watch you and not the people who pay you -- OK. You're on probation."
Fair enough. I've been on probation my whole career, and I'll be grateful to remain there as long as you can tolerate me. But for what it's worth, you're mistaken. I was neither bored nor disdainful of anything I saw at the whooping crane facility. In fact, I was genuinely impressed with Dr. French and his team, and glad to give their program some national exposure. Now it's true - I didn't swoon in their presence, or behave as though I agreed with every single thing I heard. Dr. French was very clear about why he does what he does - he believes the whooping crane has as much right to exist as we do. I doubt that everyone shares that view. Should they?
There's a version of this in econometrics, i.e. you know the model is correct, you are just having trouble finding evidence for it. It goes as follows. You are testing a theory you came up with, but the data are uncooperative and say you are wrong. But instead of accepting that, you tell yourself "My theory is right, I just haven't found the right econometric specification yet. I need to add variables, remove variables, take a log, add an interaction, square a term, do a different correction for misspecification, try a different sample period, etc., etc., etc." Then, after finally digging out that one specification of the econometric model that confirms your hypothesis, you declare victory, write it up, and send it off (somehow never mentioning the intense specification mining that produced the result).
Too much econometric work proceeds along these lines. Not quite this blatantly, but that is, in effect, what happens in too many cases. I think it is often best to think of econometric results as the best case the researcher could make for a particular theory rather than a true test of the model.
I also contacted Penny Goldberg, a professor of economics at Yale University and editor of the American Economic Review, to ask if she could think of any joke, any tiny moment of amusement, one solitary witticism that has passed across her desk. Anything, even if it was rejected.
Ms. Goldberg, confirming the reputation of the dismal science in six sad words, wrote back: "I’m afraid nothing comes to mind."
"This blog aims to look at more of the microeconomic ideas that can be used toward environmental ends. Bringing to bear a large quantity of external sources and articles, this blog presents a clear vision of what economic environmentalism can be."
Don't believe what they're saying
And allow me a quick moment to gush: ... The env-econ.net blog was more or less a lifeline in that period of my life, as it was one of the few ways I stayed plugged into the env. econ scene. -- Anonymous
... the Environmental Economics blog ... is now the default homepage on my browser (but then again, I guess I am a wonk -- a word I learned on the E.E. blog). That is a very nice service to the profession. -- Anonymous
"... I try and read the blog everyday and have pointed it out to other faculty who have their students read it for class. It is truly one of the best things in the blogosphere." -- Anonymous