Michael Tobis wrote:
> First of all, policy is a very blunt instrument, not an ensemble > Kalman filter. (Most readers will not even know what I am talking > about...) The point is that the optimization has to be performed in an > environment where the grasp of statistical methods is very weak. I > think the public understands probability better than they are given > credit for. Most people can play poker passably well. However, > adaptive optimization doesn't really map onto games of chance very > well, and it's a tall order to implement such a thing using the > mechanisms we have. As a consequence, the optimization will have to be > performed offline and passed as a recommendation to the policy sector. > This can be done adaptively, but the adaptation will not be > instantaneous. In fact, policy will necessarily match the best advice > of a few years previous. > > The effect of irresponsible denialists and irresponsible alarmists > alike is to inject noise into the observation system, which means the > response of the controller will continue to be especially sluggish. In > a sense, the more public attention there is to the subject, the less > effective the communication of genuine expertise will be, and the less > responsive the policy sector, viewed as a control system, will be to > new input. > > We aren't running entirely open loop, but for present purposes we > might as well be. This is why setting an explicit set of constraints > on CO emissions (very much in the spirit of engineering tolerances: > not to exceed a certain rate, or a certain maximum, to asymptote to > within a certain range of a certain final value...) is sensible. I wish things were actually as rational as you suggest. Al Gore (whether you like his movie or not) has a new commentary on the "control" side of things. Here's a link to an excerpt: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1622015,00.html Gore may be faulted for portions of his presentation of the science behind the global problem of climate change. In the political arena, he is most certainly an expert. Thus, I think he must be taken seriously when he comments about the political world with which we in the U.S. are "controlled". ES -- --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change. Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
