Category Archives: economics

Plausible scenarios

New Scientist has a recent article about [t]he worst-case climate scenarios are no longer plausible today. This is a topic that has been covered here before, and is partly motivated by a paper discussed in this post. The basic premise … Continue reading

Posted in Climate change, ClimateBall, ClimateBall Bingo, economics, Scientists, The scientific method | Tagged , , , , | 242 Comments

Limits to Growth?

Tom Murphy, who is a physics professor at UC San Diego, runs a blog called Do the Math. Just over 10 years ago, he had a popular blog post asking can economic growth can last?, which I discussed in one … Continue reading

Posted in economics, GRRRRROWTH, Philosophy for Bloggers, physicists, Scientists | Tagged , , , | 199 Comments

Ignoring the Economists?

Andrew Dessler had an article in Rolling Stone suggesting that [t]he first step to saving the planet is ignoring the economists. Stoat has already written about it and, as you might imagine, doesn’t seem to like it. Even if suggesting … Continue reading

Posted in Carbon tax, economics, Philosophy for Bloggers, Policy | Tagged , , , , | 142 Comments

Deferential?

I was listening to a podcast interview with Steve Keen, whose work I’ve written about before. It was about his paper the appallingly bad neoclassical economics of climate change. I have a lot of sympathy with what he’s presenting. Some … Continue reading

Posted in Climate change, economics, Environmental change, physicists, Policy, Scientists | Tagged , , , | 54 Comments

The Neoclassical Economics of Climate Change

I thought I would advertise a post by Steve Keen, that may be of interest to some of my regular readers. It’s about Neoclassical Economics of Climate Change and is extremely criticial of the assumptions used to drive Integrated Assessment … Continue reading

Posted in Climate change, economics, The scientific method | Tagged , , , , | 41 Comments

A physicist for president?

Jim Al’Khalili has an article in Scientific American called [a] physicist for president? Jim is a physicist, so he’s probably being somewhat provactive. Also, he’s mostly arguing for someone who applies the scientific method to thinking and decision-making and is … Continue reading

Posted in economics, physicists, Politics, Scientists, The scientific method, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | 51 Comments

Estimates of the economic impact of climate change

I realise Stoat has already covered this, but I thought I would also briefly discuss it here. I posted a couple of tweets, that got quite a lot of responses, about the economic impacts of climate change, that tried to … Continue reading

Posted in Carbon tax, Climate change, economics, Global warming, Philosophy for Bloggers | Tagged , , , , , , , | 200 Comments

Societal tipping points

Noami Oreskes and Nicholas Stern have a New York Times Opinion piece called Climate Change will cost us even more than we think. Some are very critical, others are a little more circumspect. I, on the other hand, think that … Continue reading

Posted in Climate change, economics, Global warming, Policy, Politics, Severe Events | Tagged , , , , | 173 Comments

The GRRRRROWTH Institute

Posit an opiniator O* from the Super Wonderful Punditry think tank SWP. Deadlines displease him. The international community failed to meet so many since 1995 that such call becomes self-defeating, or so O* worries. To interpret IPCC deliverables, time for … Continue reading

Posted in ClimateBall, economics, GRRRRROWTH, Philosophy for Bloggers, Satire | 45 Comments

IAMs – Open Thread

There’s been an interesting debate about IAMs. IAMs are Integrated Assessment Models that are used to develop mitigation pathways. In this article, Kevin Anderson argues that IAMs are simply the wrong tools for the job, while Jessica Jewel clarifies the … Continue reading

Posted in Carbon tax, Climate change, economics, GRRRROWTH, Philosophy for Bloggers, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | 103 Comments