Environmental Economics

Paul Chambers* will be reviewing my book**

Matt Kahn***:

Like the mailman, Ed Glaeser always delivers. In this review of my new book, he quickly reveals his "conflict of interest" (we were classmates, we are friends and co-authors) and then gets to work presenting the core thesis of my book and then offering some constructive criticism.

via greeneconomics.blogspot.com

Matt: you call those softballs criticisms? Ha!

*Classmate, friend, co-author.

**Have we mentioned a book?

***Check out the new category.

The conversion of Paul of Denmark

With the publication of his 2001 book, “The Skeptical Environmentalist,” Bjorn Lomborg, a Danish economics professor, became a leading contrarian voice on global warming and a leading opponent of carbon reduction efforts like the Kyoto Protocol.

Mr. Lomborg did not dispute that adding greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide to the atmosphere was warming the climate; rather, he argued that the vast expense of reining in emissions would far outweigh the benefit deferred by the resultant effect on global temperatures.

“We can help the developing world so much better by doing other things, like giving them clean drinking water and proper sanitation,” Mr. Lomborg said in a 2002 interview.

Yet Mr. Lomborg’s latest book, “Smart Solutions to Climate Change: Comparing Costs and Benefits,” is unlikely to bolster his popularity among those opposed to drastic immediate action to curb greenhouse gas emissions. In the book, to be published in September, he calls for $150 billion in new investment annually for clean energy development, climate engineering and climate change adaptations like building sea walls to protect low-lying areas from sea-level rise — with the money to be raised through a global tax on carbon dioxide emissions.

via green.blogs.nytimes.com

He saw a blinding light on the road to lucrative book sales?*

*Too cynical?

Hurricane Earl

It seems like a long time since we had a hurricane:

Locations along the Outer Banks will shut down to visitors in the wake of Hurricane Earl.

In press release, sent Tuesday by the National Park Services, beaches, camp grounds and visitor's centers will close ahead of the storm.

Here's the information released by the National Park Service:

The National Weather Service is predicting that the effects of Hurricane Earl will impact the Outer Banks Group units, Cape Hatteras National Seashore, Fort Raleigh National Historic Site and Wright Brothers National Memorial, by Thursday, September 2, 2010 with storm conditions continuing through Friday, September 3, 2010.

In anticipation of this weather event, on Wednesday, September 1, 2010, the Ocracoke Visitor Center will close at 12:00 noon and the Hatteras Island, Bodie Island, Wright Brothers and Fort Raleigh Visitor Centers will close 5:00 p.m. The Ocracoke, Frisco, Cape Point and Oregon Inlet Campgrounds will close at 12:00 noon.

The Ocracoke Campground reservation system has been temporarily suspended.

The last climb for the Cape Hatteras Lighthouse will be at 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday, September 1 and the Lighthouse will close at 3:00 p.m.

By Thursday, expected ocean overwash and rough surf conditions will create unsafe conditions on Seashore beaches and off-road vehicle use will be prohibited until safe conditions allow for this recreational activity.

via www.witn.com

Google thinks we're a conservative blog

In our Env-Econ 101 section, we describe Env-Econ thusly:

The Environmental Economics blog is dedicated to the dissemination of economists’ views on current environmental and natural resource issues. We hope this blog will help bring economists’ views on environmental issues further into the mainstream. The intended audience includes the general public and students. Posts are non-technical.

Just for s**ts and giggles I entered that text in Jon Brunner's demo version of a new Google service that attempts to classify text into categories based on the content (really just identifiable word patterns).  The result?

This page will categorize your input among 2 labels:

• Conservative
• Liberal

Google thinks that your submission is Conservative.

Joshua C. and W.E.H. can now get off our back.

An expanded version of the Google Category Decider is here.

Do reputation effects affect environmental outcomes?

After years of legal entanglements arising from environmental messes and increased scrutiny of banks that finance the dirtiest industries, several large commercial lenders are taking a stand on industry practices that they regard as risky to their reputations and bottom lines.

In the most recent example, the banking giant Wells Fargo noted last month what it called “considerable attention and controversy” surrounding mountaintop removal mining, and said that its involvement with companies engaged in it was “limited and declining.”

via www.nytimes.com

Interesting. One interpretation of what Wells Fargo is saying is, "If you want to engage in environmentally destructive behavior, you're going to have to go to a lender who doesn't care about the environment."

A cynical observer might say "They're just doing that to create the perception that they are environmentally friendly."

To which an objective observer might respond, "So what? If the outcome is a net gain in social welfare, does the motive really matter?"

Now I'll wait for the philosophical observers to respond...

Finally, a review Matt won't flip out about

Professor Glaeser likes Professor Kahn's book:

Professor Kahn’s book provides a helpful middle ground between the extreme climate Cassandras and those who snort at climate change. He believes that human ingenuity will out, but at least three things need go to right for his more optimistic prognosis to come to pass.

First, the impact of global warming has to take the form of gradual change rather than sudden catastrophic events — such as massive storms or droughts. It is much easier to adapt to a multidecade phenomenon than to an explosion that appears out of nowhere.

Second, the planet needs to accommodate major immigration. Americans live in a large nation with a wide range of climates and we can adapt by moving, but what about the residents of small countries near the equator, like Singapore or Burundi? Unless borders become more porous, they may well be trapped.

Third, areas with weak governments are going to need to get richer and develop more competent public sectors that can deal with the crisis.

via economix.blogs.nytimes.com

Note: I deleted all of fawning- over-Kahn passages (i.e., "Professor Kahn himself is responsible for some for the best research showing that rich countries deal with disasters better than poor countries.") Gag me with a spoon!

Picture of the day

Prof. Kahn:

At 4pm on August 7th 2010 in Malibu, California I had the deep honor of officiating at the wedding of Prof. Mary Evans and Prof. J.R. DeShazo.

via greeneconomics.blogspot.com

Huh? I knew about the couple (a pair of environmental economists for those who you non-environmental economists ... but Kahn officiating at the wedding?

Free market environmentalism?

We haven't had one of these examples of the Coase Theorem in a long time:

In the most recent example, the banking giant Wells Fargo noted last month what it called “considerable attention and controversy” surrounding mountaintop removal mining, and said that its involvement with companies engaged in it was “limited and declining.”

The bank was a small player in the sector, representing about $78 million in bonds and loan financing for such companies from 2008 to April of this year, according to data compiled by the Rainforest Action Network, an environmental group tracking the issue.

But the policy shift by Wells Fargo follows others over the last two years, including moves by Credit Suisse, Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and Citibank, to increase scrutiny of lending to companies involved in mountaintop removal — or to end the lending altogether.

via www.nytimes.com

It's not really the Coase Theorem, of course, but it is private action to correct a negative externality. If big mining companies can't get decent financing for their massive equipment then there will be fewer big mines.

Business and ethics?

BOONE—Topics from environmental ethics to religion and nature will be featured during the 2010 Business and Environmental Ethics Conference Sept. 17 at Appalachian State University. Other topics include environmental economics, strategy and nature, and university sustainability.

...

After a short coffee break at 10:15 a.m., the panel discussions resume at 10:30 a.m. with the topic “Environmental Economics.” Panelists are John Whitehead and Dave McEvoy from the Department of Economics, and John Pine, director of Appalachian’s Research Institute for Environment, Energy and Economics. They will address the future costs of climate change, and the need to change our systems and make different choices related to the environment and business.

via www.news.appstate.edu

I'll be talking about including passive use values in benefit-cost analysis.

I know it's not Friday, but sometimes you can't pass up beer news this good

I just found out I'm going to live longer than I thought!

The sample of those who were studied included individuals between ages 55 and 65 who had had any kind of outpatient care in the previous three years. The 1,824 participants were followed for 20 years...Just over 69% of the never-drinkers died during the 20 years, 60% of the heavy drinkers died and only 41% of moderate drinkers died.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2014332,00.html?hpt=T2#ixzz0y6x3aMIM