Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
Wed Jun 5, 2013, 08:26 PM Jun 2013

The Obama climate move that nobody noticed

The Obama climate move that nobody noticed

By David Roberts

The Obama administration just made a fairly significant move on climate change, and it flew right under the radar.

To explain, let me back up a bit...One thing Obama doesn’t get enough credit for is the Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Carbon, which his administration convened to establish a social cost of carbon that OMB and other agencies can use in assessing carbon-related regulations. In 2010, the working group released its report (PDF)...Last week, the White House put up a blog post touting new energy-efficiency standards for microwave ovens. Thrilling, right? Halfway down, it mentions that “the underlying analysis of these standards includes an update to the social cost of carbon values.”

Oh?

Sure enough, over on OMB’s website we find a “Technical Update of the Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis” [PDF], dated May 2013. It doesn’t change the basic mechanics of the earlier analysis — same discount rates, same emission scenarios, same climate sensitivity. All it does is update the climate impact models (the “Integrated Assessment Models”) to reflect the most recent versions used in the peer-reviewed literature.

Here’s the result:

The (social cost of carbon) estimates using the updated versions of the models are higher than those reported in the 2010 (report). By way of comparison, the four 2020 SCC estimates reported in the 2010 [report] were $7, $26, $42 and $81 (2007$). The corresponding four updated SCC estimates for 2020 are $12, $43, $65, and $129 (2007$).

You don’t have to be an economist to see that the second set of numbers is about 60 percent higher than the first. Why the big jump? It sounds like it mostly had to do with the models updating their estimates of damage from sea-level rise, though there are several other factors as well...Regardless, this is really something to pause and take note of:

The federal government just bumped up the cost of carbon by 60 percent. This will, all things being equal, increase by 60 percent the amount of carbon mitigation that can be economically justified. That’s a big deal, especially in light of the fact that EPA regulations are going to make (or break) Obama’s second-term climate legacy.

- more -

http://grist.org/climate-energy/the-obama-climate-move-that-nobody-noticed/



13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Obama climate move that nobody noticed (Original Post) ProSense Jun 2013 OP
This is good news. I can see why it's not a headline, though. Honeycombe8 Jun 2013 #1
We're Saved! RobertEarl Jun 2013 #2
Especially Wall Street Octafish Jun 2013 #5
I see what you mean RobertEarl Jun 2013 #6
Kick. Every bit helps politicasista Jun 2013 #3
Thanks for helping to get it noticed, ProSense! Cha Jun 2013 #4
Obama~ Stealth Fighter! sheshe2 Jun 2013 #7
K & R MoreGOPoop Jun 2013 #8
A bit OT, but may I say your user name makes me laugh out loud!! nt MADem Jun 2013 #10
: ) MoreGOPoop Jun 2013 #12
k&r... spanone Jun 2013 #9
This needs more exposure. AverageJoe90 Jun 2013 #11
Yup. n/t ProSense Jun 2013 #13

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)
1. This is good news. I can see why it's not a headline, though.
Wed Jun 5, 2013, 08:29 PM
Jun 2013

These sorts of things are complex and hard to understand, unless you follow the issue.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
2. We're Saved!
Wed Jun 5, 2013, 08:33 PM
Jun 2013

On paper.

Thank gawd there is no crisis, because if it were a crisis, seeing how there is nothing really being done, we'd be doomed.

In all fairness, if it wasn't for the "Clownish Activists" who are fighting with every tool available, and sometimes looking clownish to everyone who is not an activist, we'd have worse pollution than we have. Right?

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
6. I see what you mean
Wed Jun 5, 2013, 09:49 PM
Jun 2013

Since the 'value' of co2 pollution has been increased by 60%, there now is a market that can be manipulated to a greater degree.

Buy your co2 bonds now. Be the first on the street to get in on a earth warming opportunity!

Cha

(297,481 posts)
4. Thanks for helping to get it noticed, ProSense!
Wed Jun 5, 2013, 09:19 PM
Jun 2013
It won’t alter the politics of those regulations, and sadly, political considerations generally count for more than cost-benefit analysis. So this may not have any big short-term impacts. Nonetheless, if this number stays on the books — and if the government continues to update it based on the latest science — it will eventually worm its way deep into the regulatory apparatus and do something that no amount of argument and advocacy have been able to do: force the federal government to properly value the climate.

MoreGOPoop

(417 posts)
12. : )
Thu Jun 6, 2013, 12:45 AM
Jun 2013

Yep, the Grand Ol' Poop was getting on my last nerve that day and finally had to sign
up to commiserate.

 

AverageJoe90

(10,745 posts)
11. This needs more exposure.
Wed Jun 5, 2013, 11:47 PM
Jun 2013

TBH, I really do wish things could be better for us all, but the thing is, at least Obama's trying to do what ought to be done. Let's keep encouraging him by pushing for more and more energy reform.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Obama climate move th...