A meta review of the no-longer-new DOE report

I still haven't read the bloody thing, and at this rate I never will, but happily CarbonBrief have read it for me. I'm going to assume that they've put their two best criticisms up front - you'd be mad to do anything else - and those are:

The executive summary of the controversial report inaccurately claims that “CO2-induced warming might be less damaging economically than commonly believed”.

It also states misleadingly that “excessively aggressive [emissions] mitigation policies could prove more detrimental than beneficial”.

Sadly, Stefan Rahmstorf was foolish enough to believe that CarbonBrief make sense. 

But "CO2-induced warming might be less damaging economically than commonly believed" is true; and "excessively aggressive [emissions] mitigation policies could prove more detrimental than beneficial" is also true. I mean FFS, "excessively aggressive" is almost by definition detrimental. These people are clowns. Of course, that doesn't actually make the report itself good; it just shows you how uselessly debased the "discussion" is.