Ok, I admit this is tooting the UNH horn,
but since I did not build the cogen plant I don’t think it is too much
self promotion.
I thought I would post it to the list because
it is about energy and, as we have discussed, we do not always have good
examples of some good news to assign to ou
Willett-- Great comment! Right on.
I found this paper absolutely fascinating.
The reason is that it clearly articulates the kind of thinking that
actually drove US policy.It was and is politically salient, while being
scientifically and economically narrow and outdated to the point of s
I did write to Willett off-list and thank him for his comment. But just so
everyone understands, here's what I said:
"Thanks for the comments. But don't misunderstand. I circulated the
article because I thought it would be interesting and, yes, even
provocative, not because I thought its analys
Well, some parts of this aren't even based on "outdated" assumptions; for
example, even the IPCC First Assessment Report didn't characterize a 2.5C
increase in temperature as "moderate," (not even the Toronto conferees in
1988 said that) and only in the world of economists e.g. Sunstein can we
cond
Dear Colleagues,
I have attached an ad for a new position in environmental policy at
NYU, joint between the Wagner School and the new university-wide
program in Environmental Studies. I want to emphasize that we are
looking for someone who is excited about working in an environmental
studies
Wil,
Thanks for prompting this stream. One of my concerns about the paper is
that the treatment of costs and benefits does not take into account the
whole range of factors that so many subsequent analyses have considered.
(see, for example, the work about California by Alex Farrell and Michael
Han
Just a quick piggy-backing onto Wil's comment: This is a
great piece for demonstrating the limited utility of the "nation
state" as the unit of analysis ("the U.S. does
this" or "wants that," Sunstein often writes). In
this case, such an approach hides more than it reveals, both by ignoring
the
Dear All:
Happy Wednesday. Thank you to Geoffrey for circulating the article and starting
this thread.
On first brush I have the same reaction as the others, especially its
repetition of harmfully simplistic conceptions of cost-benefit analysis related
to climate change. It largely overstate
Thanks, Michael, for translating what a
law person was trying to say into coherent political science/IR nomenclature J Cas would probably at
least be pleased to know, as we all hope, that someone’s at least reading
our stuff.
And happy beginning of the semester to
everyone in academia!
Two places to look initially would be Stanford climatologist and crypto
policy wonk Stephen Schneider's climate CBA work with ___ Aznar (?) (if
anyone is really jonesing to see this, let me know and I'll send you the
articles), which finds that even a goal of reducing CO2 concentrations to
350 ppm
All,
A most interesting discussion about Sunstein's essay on Montreal and
Kyoto protocols. One remark of David Downie's caught my eye: "there
is an emerging consensus regarding a very real possibility that one
or more tipping points exist in the global climate system. Going
beyond these
I took the liberty of passing on the postings to Cass. His two replies
are below.
regards, jim
p.s. In case you want to email Cass directly, his address is copied
above.
<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>
Professor Jim Salzman
Duke Law School
Nicholas School of Environ
There's very well developed methods for incorporating risk assessment into
CBA, assuming one really wants to do so (if you look at Nordhaus's work in
this context he, curiously (tee hee) appears to know how to do so for
looking at the costs of climate compliance, and not in the case of potential
lo
Thanks for the good wishes Wil, but I would like to point out that for those of
us teaching in the antipodes, spring is just rolling in, and the second
semester started way back in the middle of winter: early July!
Cheers,
Bill
Bill Hipwell
Development Studies
Victoria University of Wellingt
Quite true. We Californians think the world revolves around our schedule!
wil
Dr. Wil Burns
Senior Fellow, International Environmental Law
Santa Clara University Law School
500 El Camino Real, Loyola 101
Santa Clara, CA 95053 USA
Phone: 408.551.3000 x6139
Mobile: 650.281.9126
Fax: 408.554.2745
15 matches
Mail list logo
