A week ago, I published a research paper, along with my colleagues Paul Gilding and Jimena Alvarez. For 20 leading fossil fuel producing firms, we measured the economic cost to society of the climate change impacts caused by the use of their products, and compared this with their profits in each year from 2008 to 2012. Because… Continue Reading and comment
Author Archives: cwhope
Why BP’s 2015 energy outlook is so scary
Earlier this week, BP published its 2015 Energy Outlook which shows fossil-fuel CO2 emissions growing by 25% by 2035. What do BP’s emission figures imply for the climate change impacts that we would be committed to, if they were to come about? Suppose we were able to wave a magic wand and make all CO2 emissions… Continue Reading and comment
The US China climate deal – don’t get carried away
The US and China today announced what has been hailed as a historic deal on greenhouse gas emissions, with China agreeing to cap emissions around 2030 and the US committing to 26 – 28% reductions by 2025. What does this actually mean for the climate and for the damage that climate change might bring? Running the agreements… Continue Reading and comment
Existential risks: Climate Change and Superintelligence
Nick Bostrom’s new book, Superintelligence, is a fascinating read for anyone interested in existential risks. I imagine that includes most people concerned with climate change. Marty Weitzman’s analysis and my own calculations make it clear that a substantial part of the expected impact of climate change come from catastrophes we would face if the world turns out… Continue Reading and comment
A new economic model of climate change?
Today, Simon Dietz and Nick Stern (D&S) of the LSE released a new working paper. They make a few simple changes to Bill Nordhaus’s DICE model. The most important are that they allow for a range of climate sensitivities, and the possibility that climate change could cause catastrophic damages if the Earth’s temperature were to… Continue Reading and comment
Has the treasury omitted £300 million per year of extra climate impacts from its fuel duty reduction calculations?
Today the Treasury published its analysis of the dynamic effects of fuel duty reductions. The headline message of its analysis is that ‘these reductions in duty will increase GDP by between 0.3 and 0.5 per cent in the long-term’. Apart from a single short paragraph (section 3.25), the report does not mention pollution. It does not mention… Continue Reading and comment
Extreme Weather, Economics and the Arctic
Last Friday, the Guardian published a short piece by two colleagues and me in its EcoAudit ‘Why has British weather been so bad?’ Here is the complete piece that we sent to the Guardian, which includes a bit more about the scientific programme which is just starting to try to understand and better model the… Continue Reading and comment
We need a strong and sustained carbon price to combat climate change
In Business Green last week Tom Burke argued that a narrow cost-benefit analysis and an obsession with carbon pricing is steering politicians away from the action climate change demands , but he appears to misunderstand what he is criticising. It is unfortunate that he should state “We have a very precise idea of what constitutes… Continue Reading and comment
What Matt Ridley won’t tell you about climate change impacts
Matt Ridley has a short piece in this week’s Spectator entitled Why climate change is good for the world. In it, he draws heavily on one paper by the Climate Economist Richard Tol, claiming that this paper supports his view that climate change would be beneficial. Let’s leave aside for now that Tol is careful to… Continue Reading and comment
‘An evidence-based approach to pricing CO2’ could benefit from some evidence
The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) is a think-tank associated with noted climate dissentient Lord Lawson. So it is somewhat surprising to see it publishing a paper arguing for a carbon tax today. Most of the paper, by Ross McKitrick, is a standard and sound statement of the reasons why economists tend to favour a… Continue Reading and comment