1. Matt Kahn asks a good question at Environmental and Urban Economics:
When our best models yield such loose bounds on the likely consequences, are we useful people for the politicians?
Sometimes I wonder why techniques that improve econometric efficiency are rewarded so highly. I shouldn't.
2. Rich Sweeney answers his own question (Assuming we cap carbon emissions ...):
So my question is, simply, why do we want an RPS if we know we need to price carbon anyways?
Short answer: we don't.
3. Another one from Matt ... considering the green jobs study from Duke sociologists (a previous env-econ post here):
I agree with [study author] Gary that these industries offer the prospects of some job creation but other jobs will be destroyed by carbon taxes. To answer what is the net effect requires some knowledge of the shape of demand curves for various products. If aggregate demand for energy intensive goods is highly price sensititve (elastic demand), then a carbon tax will "destroy" many jobs for this industry as its long run cost function shifts up.
