22 October 2015, Ralph Nader, The Downsides of Cheap Abundance. In college, Economics 101 is often described as the social science discipline that deals with the production, distribution and consumption of goods and services. MIT Economist Paul Samuelson liked to focus on scarcity, or more specifically, the allocation of scarce resources. “Abundance” was always a pretty word with an idyllic connotation for Professor Samuelson. I often wonder why there weren’t a few classes about the real-life consequences of abundance, along with scarcity and people’s material welfare. The present generation of internet technology is a proper subject of study within an economic framework. It might help us understand what is happening to our society. Let’s start with today’s highly-touted information age. At our finger-tips is the greatest free trove of information in human history. We can get it quickly and efficiently. Are we more informed? Are we hungry for more information? Do we read more books in an era of record production of books? Do we know more about what our congressional and state legislators are about? Are we more knowledgeable about history and its lessons? Read More here
Yearly Archives: 2015
22 October 2015, Climate News Network, Hurricanes’ economic havoc as world warms. Analysis of insurance data convinces environmental economists that climate change is pushing up the cost of dealing with the disastrous effects of extreme weather events. Climate change could already be costing the US billions of dollars each year in hurricane damage alone. Economists from Mexico and Europe believe that somewhere between $2bn and $14bn of the financial costs of hurricane damage in 2005 could be attributed to the impact of global warming. This is a bold statement. But Francisco Estrada, an environmental economics researcher at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, and European colleagues report in Nature Geoscience that they have looked at the pattern of economic losses from hurricanes that matches a rise between 1990 and 2005 in the number and intensity of tropical cyclones. They say that this upward trend in loss “cannot be explained by commonly-used socioeconomic variables”. The distinction is an important one. Economic damage from climate-related events − ice storms, drought, flood, windstorms and heatwaves – has been on the increase for decades, but one explanation for this is population growth and economic development, even in the poorest regions. Read more here
21 October 2015, Renew Economy, No more dirty COPs – NGOs want fossil fuel lobbies excluded from climate talks. A report from InfluenceMap that exposes Big Oil’s true intentions in climate policy has led to new calls for representatives of fossil fuel companies to be excluded from the upcoming talks on climate change in Paris. The talks, known as the Conference of the Parties (COP21) traditionally have large inputs from industry, NGOs and “civil society”, unlike other international negotiations. A campaign called Kick Big Polluters Out is being launched during the final week of the UNCCC negotiations ahead of Paris. “Around the globe people are calling for action now. We don’t have time to waste; governments must act now,” said Jesse Bragg of Corporate Accountability International, “There are too many lives at risk today to leave tomorrow up to the climate offenders that are driving the problem.” Interference from the fossil fuel industry is proving an obstacle at almost every level, from direct sponsorship of the UNFCCC talks, to the release of a pro-oil report by an alliance between some of the world’s largest oil and gas producers. The report advocates industry friendly “market-placed” solutions. Industry involvement in policy making is not only allowed, but encouraged. Shell & BHP announced a few weeks ago a partnership with McKinsey Consulting to “advise” governments on climate policy. These are similar tactics deployed by Big Tobacco as it attempted to position itself on the side of health and reason, whilst simultaneously staving off any action on Tobacco. Read More here
19 October 2015, Climate Home, UN climate text swells as G77 flexes muscles in Bonn. Developing countries add more than 50 elements to UN’s draft Paris deal, complaining of bias towards richer nations. Time-pressed talks on a global climate deal faced delays on Monday after the co-chairs guiding the process accepted their proposed draft agreement lacked support from most countries. UN officials had presented a radically cut 20-page set of proposals earlier this month, but their work was shredded in an intense and angry morning session in Bonn. Instead of planned negotiations, the text swelled rapidly on a binge of over 50 so-called“surgical insertions” from countries, most ranging between 1-2 pages. Most submissions came from the Africa Group and G77+ China, reflecting their frustration at what they argued was a text tilted in favour of richer nations. Report: Developing countries demand additions to slimmed-down climate text. South African ambassador Nozipho Mxakato-Diseko, representing the 134-strong G77+ China group, said developing country views had been excised from the shorter text. The obligation of rich countries to provide climate finance and help poorer nations cope with expected extreme weather events were specific concerns raised by her group. Experts say planned greenhouse gas emission cuts from major economies are nowhere near enough to limit warming to below the 2C danger zone, meaning many vulnerable countries could face more floods, droughts and rising sea levels. Read More here