... a report very quietly released by the US EPA (there's remarkably little mainstream coverage of it) has found that if emissions were cut by 56% by 2050, US GDP would grow by 80% between now and then, compared to 81% if emissions were allowed to increase on a business-as-usual basis.
Climate Policy in 2009!
- The case for cap-and-trade (or a carbon tax) in 2009
My feeling is that cap-and-trade legislation should be pursued in 2009, recession be darned. ... - Is the house burning while we debate what type of extinguisher to use?
Enough already. It's time to stop. And start. ... - Why I am essentially indifferent between a carbon tax and cap-and-trade
There are no first-order differences between the two incentive-based policy instruments ... - More climate change posts ...
Opinion Poll
The Answer Desk
GOT A QUESTION?
Got a question about environmental economics? Why do economists like benefit-cost analysis? Tradeable permits? Ask an environmental economist at the Answer Desk.
Recent Comments
- John Whitehead on What was it that I was supposed to do today?
- Ironman on What was it that I was supposed to do today?
- John Whitehead on Signs of economic efficiency
- Michael Roberts on Signs of economic efficiency
- Eric Belliard on Spam, spam, spam, spam
- Hydra on Question of the Day
- odograph on Spam, spam, spam, spam
- Jack on Signs of economic efficiency
- odograph on Signs of economic efficiency
- John Whitehead on Signs of economic efficiency
Categories
- Air Quality
- Answer Desk
- Benefit-cost analysis
- Book Reviews
- Books
- Cap-and-Trade Watch
- Climate Change
- Coastal management
- Contributors
- Current Affairs
- Ecological Economics
- Energy Resources
- Fishery Resources
- Food and Drink
- Forestry Resources
- Government Policy
- Guest Post
- Health Effects
- Humor
- Land Resources
- Macroeconomics
- Marine Resources
- Microeconomics
- Movies
- Music
- Natural Hazards
- Outdoor Recreation
- Policy Benefits
- Policy Costs
- Puerile Humor
- Recommended Reading
- Religion
- Research
- Science
- Solid Waste
- Sports
- Teaching
- Television
- The Energy Collective
- Transportation
- Travel
- Water Quality
- Water Quantity
- Weather
- Weblogs
- Wildlife Resources
July 2009
« Losing a giant | Main | While I was filling out my NCAA brackets Environmental Capital was discussing carbon prices »
March 17, 2008
Comments
The comments to this entry are closed.
Blogads are good for you.
Stats
Rankings
What they're saying
- If I could only read two blogs each day they would be Environmental Econ and Environmental Capital.
-- Rich Sweeney - Excellent post, and a rare one on your site without any snark, sarcasm or puerile humour.
-- The Olive Ridley Crawl - Checking your blog is the highlight of my morning (well, unless I missed The Daily Show the night before, then you run a close second behind catching the missed episode). So, who needs the public affirmation of high rankings when you've got hordes of loyal readers?
-- Meredith - Are you sure you guys have econ PhDs? Something doesn't fit.
-- Bob Murphy - I can't believe you're an economist. Fantastic.
-- B Madsen - John Whitehead = HILARIOUS!
-- Mark C R UK - ... explains the mechanics of things with numbers and reason and insight. Don't be intimidated by the economics angle. It's never abstruse or technical. Instead, the tone is straightforward and forthright, at times bracing or breezy.
-- The Suzuki Foundation Blog - 10 Interesting Economics Blogs
-- Milken Institute Review - These guys have the self-confidence to call their blog simply 'Environmental Economics', and rightly so.
-- Oikos - ... [a] surprisingly entertaining site about economics.
-- Bottleworld.net
Green economics blogs
- Economist's View: Environment
- Environmental Valuation & Cost-Benefit News
- Forest Policy - Forest Practice
- Environmental and Urban Economics
- Knowledge Problem
- Oikos
- Ecological Economics
- Globalization and the Environment
- The Jolly Green General
- Common Tragedies
- Ecological Economics
- Aguanomics
- Dump it in the Pump
- Marginal Damage
- An Economic View of the Environment
- Environmental Capital
- Weathervane
Other blogs we like
- aBetterEarth.Org
- BlogNetNews.com » Econ
- ClimateIntel
- ConservaChick
- Cool Green Science
- Coyote Blog
- Crooked Timber
- Econ Academics Blog
- Econbrowser
- Economics at About.Com
- Economics Roundtable
- EconomistMom.com
- Energy Collective
- Green Business
- Gristmill
- Market Power
- Newmark's Door
- Odograph
- Online Economics
- Political Calculations
- Randall Parker's Completely Serious/Sometimes Funny/Bash-Free Macroeconomics Blog
- Sustainable Prosperity
- The Oil Drum
- The Post-Normal Times
- The Temas Blog
Env-Links
- AERE: Association of Environmental and Resource Economists
- Brookings Institution: Environment and Energy
- EAERE: European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists
- Ecosystem Marketplace
- ENN: Environmental News Network
- Environmental & Recreational (Non-Market) Values
- Environmental Working Group
- EPA: National Center for Environmental Economics
- EPA: National Center for Environmental Research - Economics Grants
- FREE: Foundation for Research on Economics & the Environment
- Inside Green Business
- PERC: Property and Environment Research Center
- RFF: Resources for the Future
- USSEE: United States Society for Ecological Economics
- WRI: World Resources Institute
I can't find the statistic they reference. Actually it appears that GDP would be from 2.3 percent lower to nearly 7 percent lower than the base projections, or $1 trillion to $3 trillion below expected GDP (p. 62). There are a lot of numbers, so I could be missing it.
One indication that Grist's numbers are funky is this claim (which you have debunked before): "The 80 percent figure associated with a carbon cap doesn't even measure the important economic boom expected from the Climate Security Act's aggressive investment in clean energy jobs. "
Posted by: JT | March 19, 2008 at 01:48 AM