https://blue.feedland.org/?river=http://data.feedland.org/blue/feeds/twiskich.xml It's just a feed for now Sat, 06 Apr 2024 13:21:16 GMT feedland v0.6.43 https://cyber.harvard.edu/rss/rss.html Sat, 06 Apr 2024 13:21:17 GMT http://rpc.rsscloud.io:5337/pleaseNotify Sat, April 6, 2024 9:21 AM EDT <p>What should the relative prices of carbon dioxide and methane be? My new paper investigates their social costs under both deterministic (predictable) damages from global warming and uncertain tipping events. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-024-00864-z">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-024-00864-z</a></p> <p>Current IPCC policy weighs these emissions using their global warming potential over 100 years (GWP100). But some argue for a 20-year period (GWP20), which would roughly triple the methane weight (the price of methane relative to carbon dioxide).</p> <p>Another method to weigh these gases is by enforcing a temperature limit, such as 2C, and pricing emissions by how much they will raise the temperature in the future, say in 2100. This approach leads to a low methane weight today, increasing as we approach 2100.</p> <p>The same weights apply in an economic model with a catastrophic tipping event at 2C. But this temperature is arbitrary – we don’t know when a tipping event will occur (or if one already has). A more realistic model considers the uncertainty of tipping events...</p> <p>In my benchmark model, a tipping event has a permanent, fixed proportional economic impact after some delay (100 years), and tipping risks rise linearly with atmospheric temperature. This implies a fixed methane weight slightly higher than the current GWP100 weight.</p> <p>Other assumptions mean social costs depend on future warming levels and the methane weight changes. Under RCP4.5 the methane weight &lt; GWP100 due to increased long-term damages. Under RCP2.6 the methane weight &gt; GWP100 if the probability of tipping is quadratic in temperature.</p> <p>Overall, my results align more with GWP100 rather than GWP20. But the key contribution is an analytical framework for social costs, allowing easy calculation given different parameters, models and future warming levels.</p> Sat, 06 Apr 2024 13:21:16 GMT https://blue.feedland.org/?item=335669 https://blue.feedland.org/?item=335669 What should the relative prices of carbon dioxide and methane be? My new paper investigates their social costs under both deterministic (predictable) damages from global warming and uncertain tipping events. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-024-00864-z Current IPCC policy weighs these emissions using their global warming potential over 100 years (GWP100). But some argue for a 20-year period (GWP20), which would roughly triple the methane weight (the price of methane relative to carbon dioxide). Another method to weigh these gases is by enforcing a temperature limit, such as 2C, and pricing emissions by how much they will raise the temperature in the future, say in 2100. This approach leads to a low methane weight today, increasing as we approach 2100. The same weights apply in an economic model with a catastrophic tipping event at 2C. But this temperature is arbitrary – we don’t know when a tipping event will occur (or if one already has). A more realistic model considers the uncertainty of tipping events... In my benchmark model, a tipping event has a permanent, fixed proportional economic impact after some delay (100 years), and tipping risks rise linearly with atmospheric temperature. This implies a fixed methane weight slightly higher than the current GWP100 weight. Other assumptions mean social costs depend on future warming levels and the methane weight changes. Under RCP4.5 the methane weight < GWP100 due to increased long-term damages. Under RCP2.6 the methane weight > GWP100 if the probability of tipping is quadratic in temperature. Overall, my results align more with GWP100 rather than GWP20. But the key contribution is an analytical framework for social costs, allowing easy calculation given different parameters, models and future warming levels.