Environmental Economics

Impressions from the Frontier

As most of you know, on Monday and Tuesday, I was in Washington, D.C. at the Resources for the Future Frontiers of Environmental Economics Conference.  I had planned to offer a running diary of the proceedings, but for a number of reasons (excuses) I didn't.  Instead, I'm going to give you my thoughts on the conference and the state of environmental economics in general.  Some of these will be boring, some may be offensive, others just honest but need to be said.  Anyway, here goes...

The devil's number

Today at 1:52 pm, our SiteMeter said we had 666 visitors.

I know, I know, this happens most every day at some point. But today it totally freaked me out!

Click on the thumbnail if you don't believe me.

Official Env-Econ Contest: Design Cap'n Trade

I know a lot of you don't read all of the comments after each post.  First, shame on you...Second, John has come up with the absoultely brilliant idea (John is really the one on the frontiers of env-econ) of a design contest for the new Env-Econ mascot: Cap'n Trade*.  Winner gets an official env-econ hat, if'n when we ever get around to designing and selling them**.  Submit your entries to John via the e-mail link to the left.

*For those who don't get the pun, Cap'n Crunch is a famous breakfast cereal icon--at least in the U.S.  Do they have the Cap'n in other countries?  That's him at the upper right.  Get it?  Cap'n Trade---Cap AND Trade?  Do you have a little Cap'n in you? 

**So far in our hypothetical env-econ store we're hypothetically selling www.env-econ.net t-shirts and hats and 'Drive Less!' bumper stickers.  As soon as our hypothetical business plan and hypothetical market analysis are complete, out hypothetical store might become a virtual store.

I'm back!

Ok, I'm a slacker.  I promised updates and failed miserably.  I will have a complete summary of the RFF (the environmental group) Frontiers Conference later in the week.  Trust me, it will be well worth the wait.  But first, some internet access frustration... 

Dollar bills

A fav snide econ remark has something to do with the free lunch; i.e., $5 bills lying on the ground waiting to be picked up. According to a report from Environment Colorado there are $1.9 billion dollar bills laying around:

Today, Governor Bill Ritter joined clean energy advocates to announce a new Environment Colorado Research and Policy Center report entitled “Energy for Colorado’s Economy.”

The report shows substantial increases in economic and environmental benefits if Colorado were to double its use of renewable energy, such as wind and solar power, to 20% by 2020.

“This report shows we can fulfill the Colorado Promise,” said Gov. Bill Ritter. “By doubling our use of renewable energy to 20 percent, Colorado’s gross domestic product will increase by $1.9 billion.”

Let's see, if we double our use of an inefficient energy (in terms of production costs), state GDP will increase by about .1%? Hmmm. I don't buy the logic. I can see the environmental benefits, sure. Read on ...

New on YouTube (if you like funny)

Where would environmental economics be without first principles? OK, so we're not off topic. Check out this video from YouTube from Yoram Bauman, Ph.D., The world's first and only stand-up economist who explains Mankiw's "ten principles of economics." The clip is a presentation at the American Association for the Advancement of Science's annual meeting.

Hat tip: Gernot Wagner.

Update: Actually, we're ON topic. Bauman was the economist on this study that made it into the news and on this blog on January 11.

WSJ calls RFF an "environmental group"

Ouch. At the very end of an article discussing energy trade groups shifting political focus towards manipulating greenhouse gas emissions limits:

Estimates of the cost the various [climate change] bills would impose on the nation's economy haven't been fully worked out. One environmental group, Resources for the Future, estimates that the Bingaman measure would increase electricity prices by 3.5% while the more-aggressive McCain bill could hike prices by as much as 35%.

"One environmental group, Resources for the Future." Ouch.

An energy tax at the county level

From the WaPo (Arlington Budget ...):

Arlington County is considering an energy tax on residents to help pay for its high-profile initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, officials said yesterday in proposing a $873.6 million spending plan for the coming year.

Arlington residents could pay as much as $26 more on electricity and natural gas bills next year if the County Board decides to include $1.5 million for the environmental initiative in its spending package, which the board will consider in April.

Townhall.com contributes this summary:

If you don't do anything for the climate, we'll just force you anyway.

Er, no. A tax does not force anyone to do anything. And ditto to environmentalists skeptical of incentives who say that polluters will continue to pollute and simply pay the tax (as if).

A tax allows people to consider the true costs and benefits of an activity and make a rational choice.

A Western Reggie

From the Daily Grist:

Citing a federal leadership void, the governors of five western U.S. states have formed a regional partnership to cut greenhouse gases and fight climate change. The Western Regional Climate Action Initiative, which includes Washington, Oregon, California, Arizona, and New Mexico, will create a regional target for cuts over the next six months and a market-based plan for meeting the goal within 18 months.

It wasn't so long ago that "market-based plan" would have brought cheers at this blog. Now? We yawn. ... We're winning!

Did they say they were going to build all those coal plants so someone would buy them out so they wouldn't do it?

That's what I'm wondering when I read this (In big buyout ...):

Under a proposed $45 billion buyout by a team of private equity firms, the TXU Corporation, a Texas utility that has long been the bane of environmental groups, will abandon plans to build 8 of 11 coal plants and commit to a broad menu of environmental measures, according to people involved in the negotiations.

The roster of commitments came through an unusual process in which the equity firms asked two prominent environmental groups what measures could be taken to win their support. The result is an about-face from the company’s earlier approach to climate-change issues, and includes a goal of returning the carbon-dioxide emissions by TXU to 1990 levels by 2020.