Climate 411

Mankiw's Argument Against Cap-and-Trade

The author of today’s post, Nat Keohane, Ph.D., is Director of Economic Policy and Analysis at Environmental Defense.

In yesterday’s New York Times, Harvard economics professor N. Gregory Mankiw, advisor to President Bush and presidential candidate Mitt Romney, threw his hat into the climate policy ring. Mankiw called for an international carbon tax to address global climate change.

We’re glad that a highly regarded academic economist is calling for serious action to stop global warming. But we part ways with his prescription for what action to take.

Read More »

Also posted in Climate Change Legislation / Read 6 Responses

Bjorn Lomborg's Fundamental Mistake

Today’s post is by Jon Anda, president of Environmental Markets Network. It’s a response to a column in Tuesday’s New York Times.

The column’s writer, John Tierney, goes along with Bjorn Lomborg, author of the book “Cool It”. Lomborg acknowledges that global warming is happening, but is against “hysteria and headlong spending on extravagant CO2-cutting programs.”

In the world of greenhouse gases, the devil is in the details. Climate policy is not about any specific scenario – like the one-foot sea level rise Lomborg wades us through – but the chance of a catastrophic outcome.

Read More »

Posted in Economics / Read 2 Responses

How Not to Manage Risk

Today’s post is by Jon Anda. He is President of the Environmental Markets Network, an organization within Environmental Defense focused on legislation to create an efficient carbon market.

Bjorn Lomborg, who wrote the infamous “The Skeptical Environmentalist,” has a book coming out this fall called “Cool It.” He says we should spend minimal resources to fight global warming.

I wrote a guest post for Grist yesterday about why his approach is wrong. Here’s a key point from it:

Lomborg’s preference is to leave future generations more cash and less technology. Our grandchildren can easily go back to burning coal if climate turns out to be manageable. But how easily can they spend the extra cash if the Greenland ice sheet is irreversibly melting?

And here’s the whole post.

Posted in Economics / Read 3 Responses

Ensuring Carbon Offsets are Real

The author of today’s post, Sheryl Canter, is an Online Writer and Editorial Manager at Environmental Defense.

Carbon offsets are a good idea that, unfortunately, without guidelines, can be implemented badly. The basic idea is to reduce and then offset the carbon emissions produced by your lifestyle by funding projects that reduce carbon emissions elsewhere. This works because, from a global warming perspective, it doesn’t matter where the carbon comes from. A reduction anywhere reduces the global total.

But how do you know a given offset is truly reducing carbon emissions?

Read More »

Also posted in Greenhouse Gas Emissions / Read 4 Responses

Why does the "safety valve" matter to farmers?

Today’s post is from Sara Hessenflow Harper, a policy analyst for our national climate campaign. She does extensive outreach to the agricultural community.

Yesterday, Mark MacLeod wrote about the “safety valve” and its flaws. I wanted to add to the discussion a more specific look at its implications for rural America. In addition to the problems Mark noted, the “safety valve” would also cut farmers out of the carbon market. Here’s how.
Read More »

Also posted in Climate Change Legislation / Comments are closed

What is the "safety valve"?

Today’s post is by Mark MacLeod, director of special projects for the national climate campaign at Environmental Defense.

Some people have proposed a “safety valve” to control the costs of a cap-and-trade policy to fight global warming. This post explains what a safety valve is, and why it provides only an illusion of cost management.

Read More »

Also posted in Climate Change Legislation / Read 2 Responses