![]() | ||
2011-10-02 06:11:19 | True Cost of Coal Power - Muller, Mendelsohn, and Nordhaus | |
dana1981 Dana Nuccitelli dana1981@yahoo... 69.230.106.125 |
Post on a new paper regarding the external costs of coal power (and other industries/sectors of the economy). | |
2011-10-02 10:14:02 | ||
grypo gryposaurus@gmail... 96.253.55.56 |
This is good. If you want, you can discuss the basics of Pigvogian Tax knowledge problem in the 'uncertainties' section . Uncertainties are actually expected. The goal is to tax the behavior until it gets to societal exceptable levels. It's not really about finding the exact cost.
| |
2011-10-02 10:45:29 | ||
dana1981 Dana Nuccitelli dana1981@yahoo... 69.230.101.55 |
Interesting, thanks grypo. Text revised. | |
2011-10-02 11:49:27 | ||
Andy S skucea@telus... 66.183.165.78 |
This is very good. I was hoping to include some discussion of this paper in my post on fossil fuel resources and SRES scenarios but you have done it far more thoroughly (and quickly!) than I would have done. I didn't quite understand this:
This may have been written in response to Grypo's previous comment. I think that what you are saying is that any Pigovian tax, even if the exact level of an effective tax can't be determined, is a step in the right direction since at least some part of the negative externality gets internalized. It may be just me being thick, but you might consider rewording it. (Off topic, a bit) It bugged me a little in the recent Wigley gas vs coal analysis that the polluting effects of coal-generated aerosols were glossed over somewhat, whereas their effects on cooling were modelled and highlighted. Indeed, the headline conclusion of the Wigley study, that gas may be worse for global warming than coal over several decades (even in the no gas leaks model), depended on the sulphate pollution from coal. The Muller study (and Epstein) shows just how damaging the polluting effects of SO2 really are, even if they do help reduce warming a bit over a few decades. I suppose a skeptic could argue that the Muller paper exaggerates the bad effects of coal, since no credit is given for the effect of sulphate pollution on climate change. | |
2011-10-02 16:41:10 | ||
dana1981 Dana Nuccitelli dana1981@yahoo... 69.230.101.55 |
I'll try to word that a little better - it's a new concept to me [hadn't heard of a piggy tax before!]. Wigley was tricky because they focused just on climate change, whereas Muller and Epstein focused on economics and thus other effects. It's hard because sulfates kind of do us a favor by offsetting warming, but they do also have some nasty health effects. One of those Faustian bargain things. | |
2011-10-02 19:46:05 | ||
Rob Painting Rob paintingskeri@vodafone.co... 118.92.54.246 |
Looks good. Be nice to have a graphic or two though. I wish some of these experts would consider the PR aspect, and provide some simple graphs, pie-charts etc, to better communicate their work. | |
2011-10-03 10:41:40 | ||
dana1981 Dana Nuccitelli dana1981@yahoo... 69.230.101.55 |
Good point Rob. There were a couple graphs in the paper, but they weren't terribly helpful. I think I can come up with something though. How about this? | |
2011-10-03 17:02:56 | ||
Rob Painting Rob paintingskeri@vodafone.co... 118.92.39.182 |
Yeah, that's sweet. Big difference in external costs, between the two studies huh? | |
2011-10-04 02:44:09 | ||
dana1981 Dana Nuccitelli dana1981@yahoo... 64.129.227.4 |
Yeah, basically a factor of three for the ones they both accounted for. Then Epstein accounted for several that weren't in MMN11, but the only significant one was the Apalachian health. A big one though - even larger than climate change. | |
2011-10-04 15:25:13 | dana1981 | |
John Hartz John Hartz john.hartz@hotmail... 98.122.98.161 |
Ceck out "Coal is the Enemy of the Human Race" by Dave Roberts on Grist. He and Brad Johnson have addressed the same paper that you have. | |
2011-10-04 16:18:39 | ||
dana1981 Dana Nuccitelli dana1981@yahoo... 69.230.101.55 |
Hmm frankly I think my post is better because it also discusses the Epstein results. They say MMN11 is conservative, but my post demonstrates it. | |
2011-10-04 20:09:00 | ||
alan_marshall alan.from.tas@gmail... 114.73.53.192 |
It is interesting to learn that regulating CO2 emissions from burning coal would cost much less than regulating SO2 emissions from coal. The latter has been regulated by a cap-and-trade scheme, and yet the economy has kept growing. Refusing to regulate CO2 is just stubborness and greed. | |
2011-10-04 20:09:58 | ||
alan_marshall alan.from.tas@gmail... 114.73.53.192 |
Gets a thumbs up from me! | |
2011-10-05 06:16:02 | ||
Anne-Marie Blackburn Anne-Marie Blackburn bioluminescence@hotmail.co... 80.42.216.92 |
Thumbs up from me - I have little knowledge of the topic but the post is clear and well argued. | |
2011-10-06 09:02:11 | ||
John Hartz John Hartz john.hartz@hotmail... 98.122.98.161 |
This aticle is sure to generate a lengthy comment thread. Well done. | |
2011-10-06 14:06:17 | thanks | |
dana1981 Dana Nuccitelli dana1981@yahoo... 69.230.101.55 |
Thanks guys. This one will go up tomorrow morning. We also passed it along to TreeHugger to see if they want to cross-post it. | |
2011-10-06 23:50:52 | Typo: | |
Kevin C cowtan@ysbl.york.ac... 144.32.72.165 |
Epstein is 2011 in the text and 2001 in the figure caption. |