tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post402845083714442098..comments2024-03-27T23:59:49.801+00:00Comments on Stoat: Words for the word godWilliam M. Connolleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-59895717103389228992019-09-26T16:09:08.779+00:002019-09-26T16:09:08.779+00:00Thanks for the link. It seems similar to what I...Thanks for the link. It seems similar to what I've seen before. From it,<br /><br />"Taxes also fail to seize one of the biggest opportunities for emission reduction – technological switching. As writer Ramez Naam has pointed out, nudging companies to adopt carbon-free technologies – many of which are now cost-competitive with fossil fuels – can get much more bang for the buck than a tax."<br /><br />seems foolish. If this tech is currently competetive, then a CT makes it more so, and people will adopt it sans nudge. And his ref is Twatter.<br /><br />I find the argument that it isn't enough unconvincing; and the arument that it isn't the *first* thing to do (which he doesn't even begin to address) even less so.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-31026548088434539302019-09-26T15:24:12.164+00:002019-09-26T15:24:12.164+00:00Ah yes, carbon taxes again.
https://www.bloomberg...Ah yes, carbon taxes again.<br /><br />https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-09-25/carbon-taxes-won-t-do-enough-to-slow-global-warming<br /><br />Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07567197089095711546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-23345503468396569262019-09-23T18:19:53.708+00:002019-09-23T18:19:53.708+00:00WMC, one thing you say aroused my nit-picking ante...WMC, one thing you say aroused my nit-picking antennae: <br /><br />"But the point is that the composite of all our individual faults is the "true culprit". We are the people emitting CO2. Not fossil fuel companies; they just supply it. They supply it because we buy it. If we stopped buying it, they'd stop supplying it. Markets work like that (unlike, say, the German govt, which is ramming lignite down its citizens throats even though they don't want it3)."<br /><br />I don't think people care about the fuel. They want the power. Most, but not all, want it as cheap as possible. Certainly fuel is fungible for non-transportation issues, and large numbers have chosen more expensive alternatives to fossil fuels for electricity, transportation and water heating.Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12747117922597525042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-39079420137814331462019-09-23T12:47:40.751+00:002019-09-23T12:47:40.751+00:00I think that's right: they only predict steady...I think that's right: they only predict steady / smooth behaviour; "shocks" to say GDP are only in there insofar as they affect the long-term average of GDP growth, and so are effectively parameterised as that.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-75638402484467605092019-09-23T12:24:19.809+00:002019-09-23T12:24:19.809+00:00I'm talking about). But IAMs intrinsically can...<i> I'm talking about). But IAMs intrinsically can't predict the actual pattern of economic events - e.g. the so-called Great Depression of 2008 - any more than GCMs can predict actual ENSO evolution. </i><br /><br />Except, I think that the ENSO behaviour will emerge from GCMs (maybe AOGCMs, rather than simply GCMs) even though they can't actually predict when precisely events will happen. I'm not sure that economic models get close to predicting the pattern of economic events, at least not in the sense of these being emergent phenomena from some kind of self-consistent model. Of course, economists may be able to say something about what type of behaviour increases the risk of some kind of economic event, but I'd be surprised if the models were close to saying anything about the pattern of such events. ...and Then There's Physicshttps://andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-46940779029109156882019-09-23T10:02:50.807+00:002019-09-23T10:02:50.807+00:00> it's still worth trying to see how well t...> it's still worth trying to see how well this model represents reality<br /><br />Yes in principle. And I may just be showing my ignorance of IAMs (your post mentions two sorts in an update and I'm not even sure which type I'm talking about). But IAMs intrinsically can't predict the actual pattern of economic events - e.g. the so-called Great Depression of 2008 - any more than GCMs can predict actual ENSO evolution. Nor, obviously, can they predict policy changes. But they can give you some idea about what effects policy changes would have.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-89280027422341830572019-09-23T08:53:01.056+00:002019-09-23T08:53:01.056+00:00I'm not sure hindcasting makes sense. At least...<i>I'm not sure hindcasting makes sense. At least in my mind, IAMs aren't for forecasting. They're just there to tell you the consequences of your assumptions.</i><br /><br />I'm not sure I'm quite getting what you're saying, but if IAMs simply allow you to develop some kind of model with a set of assumptions and then test how your model respond to perturbations, it's still worth trying to see how well this model represents reality. Maybe in this context hindcasting is indeed difficult, but that may then indicate that it is very difficult to model these kind of socio-economic systems and that we should be very cautious in how we interpret the results from these kind of models....and Then There's Physicshttps://andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-9902295935741864342019-09-23T07:28:26.866+00:002019-09-23T07:28:26.866+00:00> Fossil fuel companies have time and again sou...> Fossil fuel companies have time and again sought to deny climate change<br /><br />Yeeees, although they have also time and again admitted GW; for example, Alsup.<br /><br />> In a few US states it's not legal to sell a car unless you have dealerships in the state.<br /><br />That's a problem with your laws and your pols.<br /><br />> the energy market isn't a free market.<br /><br />That also sounds like political interference.<br /><br />> may be a false equivalence<br /><br />It is more of an analogy than equivalence; don't expect it to be exact. But false? I think "unpleasant" would be closer.<br /><br />> predict large differences depending on small changes in the assumptions made about growth and discount rates<br /><br />But if you model growth as exp, and take a 2% factor for one and 3% for the other, you *will* end up with large differences. That's just how it goes. I don't see that as an error.<br /><br />I'm not sure hindcasting makes sense. At least in my mind, IAMs aren't for forecasting. They're just there to tell you the consequences of your assumptions.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-35239434747716922902019-09-23T07:19:46.124+00:002019-09-23T07:19:46.124+00:00> the German govt, which is ramming lignite...
...> the German govt, which is ramming lignite...<br /><br />I thought that was uncontroversial; https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/when-will-germany-finally-ditch-coal for example tells me "Germany’s hard coal production fell almost 90 percent between 1990 and 2013 and has long been propped up state subsidies" although that's about hard coal, not lignite. https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Artikel/Energy/coal.html rather suggests that lignite isn't subsidised, so I'll strike my probable error.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-39452122726961511952019-09-23T00:06:08.409+00:002019-09-23T00:06:08.409+00:00@-WC
" he doesn't like the answers from t...@-WC<br />" he doesn't like the answers from the IAMs, and wants to wish them away. Rather like the Watties, who don't like the answers from the GCMs and want to wish them away."<br /><br />This may be a false equivalence. <br />Watties reject GCM results because of the implications for fossil fuel use, and the business model that drives it is threatened. Their objections to the underlying science of the modelling process are invariably unfounded. <br /><br />But many distrust the answers from IAMs because they rely of reified mathematical formalism to simulate socio-economic processes that have shown little skill and a susceptibility to predict large differences depending on small changes in the assumptions made about growth and discount rates.<br />Do you know if IAMs can successfully hindcast?izenhttps://izenmeme.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-19866280916703291992019-09-23T00:05:24.694+00:002019-09-23T00:05:24.694+00:00Re #3: I don't think it's as simple as peo...Re #3: I don't think it's as simple as people demand FFs so companies supply that market.<br /><br />Fossil fuel companies have time and again sought to deny climate change, fund politicians to deny climate change, tried to kill public transportation in the US, and to kill renewable technologies -- see: Who Killed the Electric Car or the current attempt in Colorado to stop the government from publicly funding recharging stations.<br /><br />https://www.hotcars.com/oil-industry-attempts-to-quash-the-growing-electric-car-movement/<br /><br />In a few US states it's not legal to sell a car unless you have dealerships in the state.<br /><br />And so on. It's not a level playing field and the energy market isn't a free market.David Appellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03318269033139447591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-49517376267875590332019-09-22T21:37:10.230+00:002019-09-22T21:37:10.230+00:00What is your interesting plan to save the world?
...What is your interesting plan to save the world?<br /><br />"<i>Markets work like that (unlike, say, the German govt, which is ramming lignite down its citizens throats even though they don't want it).</i>"<br /><br />When I was young the electricity sector, as a natural monopoly, was public. But in the neo-liberal age the sector has been privatised. I presume the same happened in Germany. At least now they are private.<br /><br />So these are private companies selling their power to everyone who is willing to pay its price. (Not me, I get green power). Libertarians should really stop calling everything they do not like "the government". Victor Venemahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02842816166712285801noreply@blogger.com