One thought on “Obama official to defend ‘social cost of carbon’ in Hill hearing”
Fair is fair. If we’re going to talk about the social cost of carbon dioxide and climate change, let’s be sure we also look at the social cost of carbon dioxide restriction. Then we have to work out the cost-benefit.
We can quantify some of the social cost of CO2 restriction in terms of reduced GDP, higher cost of living, impact of energy poverty, lost jobs and wages, subsidies etc. Since the actual verifiable social cost of CO2-related climate change is zero, the net social cost is whatever we allocate to CO2 restriction.
Leave a Reply
Discover more from JunkScience.com
Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.
Fair is fair. If we’re going to talk about the social cost of carbon dioxide and climate change, let’s be sure we also look at the social cost of carbon dioxide restriction. Then we have to work out the cost-benefit.
We can quantify some of the social cost of CO2 restriction in terms of reduced GDP, higher cost of living, impact of energy poverty, lost jobs and wages, subsidies etc. Since the actual verifiable social cost of CO2-related climate change is zero, the net social cost is whatever we allocate to CO2 restriction.