Willett-- Great comment! Right on.
I found this paper absolutely fascinating.
The reason is that it clearly articulates the kind of thinking that
actually drove US policy. It was and is politically salient, while being
scientifically and economically narrow and outdated to the point of seeming
almost bogus. Amazing.
The article seems a relic from the past. Yet it's forthcoming this year in
a legitimate journal. So much for Harvard's review process.
I also learned about the "Joint Center". AEI and Brookings working
arm-in-arm to promote this kind of work. AEI I understand. But Brookings!
I'd thought better of them. Scary!
Paul
Paul Craig
----- Original Message -----
From: "willett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "GEP-Ed" <gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu>
Cc: "Wil Burns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "NICHOLAS WATTS"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 8:54 PM
Subject: Re: Montreal and Kyoto Compared
Ok, an interesting comparison of national benefits from national versus
global implementation. But otherwise, wow, a bizarre article. Perhaps
an example of how you cannot do good political science if you base it on
lousy climatology, old economic analysis, and pretend that there's no
such thing as technical innovation and change. If Nordhaus and Boyer's
estimates of the damages from climate change were remotely close to
correct, we wouldn't really be worried about this problem. Yes, George
Bush believes (or some of his advisors/donors believe) that the US would
be economicaly damaged by reductions in CO2. But he also believes that
evolution is unproven and seems to have difficulty distinguishing the
interests of the United States from the interests of the United States'
fossil fuel industry. The countries that are "foolishly" complying with
Kyoto are developing the technology of the 21st century. E.g. try
Googling: Siemens Wind Power, Vestas, REpower AG, Talisman Beatrice
Project, Shell Renewables, or, hey, even the US can do it -- Tesla
Motors.
Willett Kempton
On 29 Aug 2006, at 14:38, Geoffrey Wandesforde-Smith wrote:
I think this will be of widespread interest.
G.
----------------------------------
Geoffrey Wandesforde-Smith
Emeritus Professor of Political Science
University of California
<MontrealKyoto.pdf>
