Thank you Herbert. As a heterodox economist I generally agree with you with regard to the standard Neoclassical economics school of thought. But by “economically” in this case I was referring to the realism of thinking that near-term human civilization will collectively be able to cut and drawdown GHG sufficient to stay below these very real (based on the work of Rockstrom, Lenton, McKay etc.- see links in my previous post) earth system thresholds. Best, Ron
Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 9, 2023, at 9:06 AM, Herbert Huppert <[email protected]> wrote: > So long as global warming is mediated through an economic lens, the > likelihood of a happy ending is pretty remote. > >>> Regards >>> Robert >>> > Totally correct, in my opinion. And also much more widely correct, > especially if slightly altered (and generalized) to: > > (Almost) anything mediated solely through an economic lens is unlikely to > have a successful and happy ending. > > (Of course, special counter examples can be dreamed up; but in general the > statement is totally apposite in my opinion, even if not understood by many > economists) > > 2 > H > > Professor Herbert E. Huppert FRS, > Institute of Theoretical Geophysics > King’s College > Cambridge CB2 1ST > Mobile +44 7814 582 707 > www.itg.cam.ac.uk/people/heh -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/D9C4084A-DC9C-4DA2-86C4-866CBD43006E%40gmail.com.
