Environmental Economics

See you in Music City?

I'm in Nashville for a silly college football game that has no bearing on any sort of championship series. Yet, I'm exhilirated.

I received two degrees in economics from the University of Kentucky (i.e., the public Harvard of the intersection of the south and midwest) but I really attended school for the free sports tickets and health care benefits (also, I didn't want to move too far away from my college, er, sweetheart and, er, that didn't work out the way one of us would have liked).

Look for me at the tailgater. I'm the extremely good-lucking guy, some would say "pretty boy," wearing the series of layered blue/gray shirts, 6', (er) 195 lbs, holding a can of beer (repeatedly).

Today: I live!

Tomorrow, or the day after: I blog on a series of important topics in environmental economics (maybe, after a Tylenol/Advil stack)!

Note: I'm torn between two lovers. I'm missing Possum Jenkins at Canyons (how did I miss the 12/7 show in W-S?), but the possum will play again and this may be UK's last bowl game for another 20 years.

Field research

I'm in Atlanta, GA--hometown of the smarter of the two env-econ co-founders--doing some New Year's field research.  Really I'm not quite in Atlanta, but one of the northern suburbs (Cumming).  I'm told this is still part of 'Atlanta,' but for some reason it's going to take me an hour to get downtown tomorrow.

Anyway, I had the chance today to take a look at Lake Lanier.  As some of you might recall, the southeast U.S. is in the midst of a severe drought.  Back in October, I became an accidental expert on the drought when I was interviewed for the Atlanta Constitution Journal.  Lake Lanier is at the center of a political and court battle between the State of Georgia and the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers.  Having never been to the lake I figured this was a good chance to at least see it so I can know what I'm talking about next time a reporter calls.  I took a bunch of pictures that I'll post when I get back home--but I'll just say that the extent of the drought is impressive--oh, and it rained while I was taking the pictures.

Happy New Year.

Env-econ readers were right in 2007

How likely do you think it will be that at least one branch of Congress will pass meaningful global warming legislation next year? Here are the results.

For the record, I clicked "I wouldn't put money on it." I'm still hopeful for Lieberman-Warner in 2008 but "I wouldn't put money on it." After all, a carbon tax is at least 12% more efficient.

Did you offset your carbon in 2007? Here are the results.

For the record, I offset mine, 2 family members and my accountant's (if DriveNeutral ever delivered).

A new poll is coming soon in 2008 ...

My own top 10 albums of 2007

A lot of env-econ readers ask me*, what sort of music should I be listening to? In a way of an answer here are my top 10 albums of 2007.

Q: Where's Tim?

A: Not on Inhofe's list of climate skeptics.

Check out GatE's review of 8 economists on the top 400 climate skeptic's list.

Post holiday beer post

The holiday is over.  Family's still in town.  Just sitting here doing some background literature review for a couple of projects I'm working on when I come across this: "Environmental analysis of beer production." 

The concept of sustainable development is focused on the improvement of the quality of life, avoiding the unbalanced utilisation of natural resources. Several concepts have recently been developed to evaluate the use of resources and the environmental management from an individual to a global scope. One of them, Life Cycle Assessment, has been considered for the environmental analysis of a product of consumption: beer. The results of this study show that whereas beer production itself has been found to be accountable for a small portion of the environmental performance of the life cycle of beer, production and the manufacture of the packaging elements as well as the harvesting and transport of cereals are responsible for the largest percentage. Consequently, improvements have to be made regarding these aspects to achieve more respectful behaviour towards the environment.

I've been doing some reading on life cycle assessment over the past year.  Here's my question when I read something like this "Consequently, improvements have to be made..."  Why?  I'm not saying there isn't a reason, it's just that far too often, people get too close to the subject and think that documentation of levels of environmental impact is a reason for action.  That's one reason I like economics, it at least gives us benchmarks (efficiency?) to shoot for when making calls to action.

OK, back to the post holiday beer.

I'm in Kentucky, somewhere between Louisville and Cincinnati off I-71 (env-econophiles: don't try to find me)

Today is my kid's grandmother's birthday and the day before the Christians celebrate the birth of their lord (i.e., try to enjoy your pagan festival).

Happy Birthday Mom!

I'll post something original and, natch, fascinating, as time permits this week. Happy Holidays!

Merry Christmas!

Say it ain't so

Bush Acknowledges Existence Of Carbon Dioxide

"We can no longer ignore the facts – carbon dioxide is real," Bush said.

Hat tip: Lynne L.

An egregious misuse of public funds

H.R. 3454 [CBO's cost estimate (PDF)]:

H.R. 3454 would require the Secretary of Agriculture to convey a small parcel of Forest Service land to the Central Advent Christian Church in Alleghany County, Virginia. The land that would be conveyed contains a cemetery used by the church as well as an adjoining tract of land. CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 3454 would have no significant impact on the federal budget. The church would pay for all costs of the conveyance. Enacting H.R. 3454 would not affect direct spending or revenues.

Free-market, non-secular forestry?