[field_article_title-raw]

The question policymakers should be asking is how aggressive do policies need to be in the near term. Society needs to weigh a number of alternatives besides just stabilizing concentrations at 550 ppm.

"A half mile below the ground at Prudhoe Bay, above the vast oil field that helped trigger construction of the trans-Alaska pipeline, a drill rig has tapped what might one day be the next big energy source."

the expression ‘climate change will be worse for the poor’ amounts to a much stronger argument for creating wealth than it does for the abolition of climate change.

So it is with global-warming legislation and the economy. Government-forced cuts in energy use, whether by cap and trade or by a clean-energy standard, would cut incomes and destroy jobs.

With each passing year, it’s clear that international climate change talks are less about climate and more about wealth redistribution.

But the economic reality is that PHEVs are not ready for primetime, and the best indicator for when they will be is when the government stops using taxpayer dollars to subsidize their production and consumption.

Almost all the increase in energy demand and emissions will come from developing countries, where a quarter of the global population lacks any access to electricity.

The optimal way to deal with potential climate change is not to embark on a futile attempt to prevent it but to promote growth and prosperity so that people will have the resources to deal with the normal set of natural disasters.

A lot of businesses, convinced that the federal government will somehow raise the price of using fossil fuels, are investing in developing green technologies because they believe that the market for them is bound to grow.

Many people often assume that one of the negative impacts of climate change will be a decrease in crop production. In this piece, however, Ron Bailey cites a few studies suggesting that increased temperatures could actually increase production.

The Lancet report details at length how warmer temperatures will lead to so-called tropical diseases such as malaria moving northwards and to higher altitudes. But this ignores the vast range of human and ecological factors that surround disease.

What is this miraculous policy? It's called a carbon tax—really, a carbon dioxide tax—but one that starts at zero and ramps up gradually over time.

This piece briefly breaks down the scientific studies available on the economic impacts of climate change.

The real costs Americans will face if they are to meet President Bush's recently stated goal of stopping the growth of the U.S.'s greenhouse gas emissions by 2025. He also explains why none of the policies proposed by the three presidential candidates are economically feasible.

The excessive projections of the Stern Review derive from ignoring hard data on concentration trends, and instead using carbon cycle models to predict concentrations from projected emissions.

If we substitute the Stern Review’s assumptions about time discounting and the consumption elasticity into the DICE model, the calculated optimal carbon tax is much higher and rises much more rapidly.

In the optimistic cases, commodity prices decline, as there are benefits from warming in all areas, with the exception of electricity-based space cooling, under each of the climate change scenarios.

The effect on global emissions of the decrease in global energy intensity during 1970 to 2004 has been smaller than the combined effect of global per capita income growth and global population growth.

The real, observed concentration of methane has not increased for the last 7 years, contrary to all IPCC modelling and scenarios.

The legislation would increase unemployment levels for every year: 1.9 million fewer jobs in 2012, and an average of 1.14 million fewer jobs from 2012 through 2035.

Heritage Foundation energy policy experts explain why an imposed national RES would be bad for families, bad for business, and bad for the economy.

"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projects that temperatures in the major grain-growing areas of North America will rise by 3–4 °C by 2100. Such abrupt changes will create major challenges, significantly altering the area suitable for wheat."

How sensitive are intensively-managed and lightly-impacted ecosystems to different levels of climate change?

The welfare theory is developed in the context of three empirical studies on the economics of global climate change. I argue that the theoretical foundations of intergenerational welfare economics are still unsettled even in deterministic models.

While this study does find the possibility of agricultural losses under models that assume the largest temperature increases, it generally concludes that the world will be able to continue feeding itself over the next century, despite global warming.

"The evidence for global warming's being relatively benign is overwhelming. Historical data show that climate has always fluctuated but that warmer climates were better for plants and animals, including humans; statistics demonstrate that warm weather and hot climates reduce mortality and morbidity...."

This paper explores a range of methodological issues surrounding projecting greenhouse emissions over the next century, including an evaluation of the Castles and Henderson critique.

An article attempting to place a positive economic spin on environmentalism. It hopes to turn the typically dour business opinion of it into a new way to create profit and capital in the world.

Climate change presents a unique challenge for economics: it is the greatest example of market failure we have ever seen.

The present study uses the tools of economics and mathematical modeling to analyze efficient and inefficient approaches to slowing global warming.

In this essay, I begin with a review of the estimates of the total economic effects of climate change. I then focus on marginal cost estimates, which are especially important for economists thinking about policy design.

"The economics of climate change uses economic theory and computer models to study the interactions among government policies, the climate system, and the economy. In this article, I survey the field and some of its major controversies."

"[N]ew research suggests that climate warming will not be as harmful as we once thought it might be. Climate scientists have reduced the magnitude of predicted warming, suggesting milder future climate scenarios."

Two extensive critiques of the Stern Review by various economic and climate change experts.

In this report, a team of authors led by Dale Jorgenson of Harvard University developed an integrated assessment of the potential impacts of climate change on the U.S. market economy through the year 2100.

In this podcast, Patrick J. Michaels discusses the 2009 G20 summit and the worldwide struggle over climate change and emission issues.

In two of his recent op-eds for the New York Times, Nobel laureate Paul Krugman has challenged critics of the government's intentions to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, and he has even specifically endorsed the pending Waxman-Markey bill which includes a 'cap-and-trade' program.

In this clip, Al Gore ... [compares] skeptics of climate change to racists during the Civil Rights Movement. Gore was sitting down for an interview with Alex Bogusky of the Climate Reality Project, and suggested that young people today whose parents do not believe in climate change are asking the same questions now that race-conscious young people in the 60s asked their parents.

In his first address to the United Nations as Commander-in- Chief, President Obama addresses the pressing issue of climate change. The one-day UN summit brought together delegations from 90 nations.

This film by the documentary-maker Martin Durkin presents the arguments of scientists and commentators who don't believe that CO2 produced by human activity is the main cause of climate change.

In order to create a clean energy economy that will increase our Nation's prosperity, promote energy security, protect the interests of taxpayers, and safeguard the health of our environment, the Federal Government must lead by example.

Produced by the English Parliament, this piece of climate change legislation seeks, among other things, "to set a target for the year 2050 for the reduction of targeted greenhouse gas emissions; to provide for a system of carbon budgeting; to establish a Committee on Climate Change; [and] to confer powers to establish trading schemes for the purpose of limiting greenhouse gas emissions or encouraging activities that reduce such emissions or remove greenhouse gas from the atmosphere...."

I see this Conference helping to accelerate the IPCC's agenda as it searches for understanding of some very critical questions, broadening the dialog by exploring the link between scientific research and economic analysis in the study of global change.

Thank you for your letter of March 6, 2001, asking for the Administration's views on global climate change, in particular the Kyoto Protocol and efforts to regulate carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act.

When the savings of new, more energy efficient technologies exceed the costs of adopting those technologies, markets have the incentive to adopt them. Indeed the difference between the savings and the costs is the measure of the increased value the economy generates.

The main activity of the IPCC is to provide at regular intervals Assessment Reports of the state of knowledge on climate change. The latest one is "Climate Change 2007", the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report.

"The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The major feature of the Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. These amount to an average of five per cent against 1990 levels over the five-year period 2008-2012."

The analysis draws from numerous published sources to summarize the current state of climate science and provide a conceptual framework for addressing climate change as an economic concern.

Global climate change poses one of the nation’s most significant long-term policy challenges.

I cannot think of a business that will be more directly and profoundly impacted by global warming than the ski business.

The workshop, summarized in this volume, comprised three dimensions: policy, analysis, and economics. Discussions along these dimensions were meant to lead to constructive identification of gaps and opportunities.

Dr. Roy Spencer observes that our obsession with global warming has only clouded the issue. Forsaking blindingly technical statistics and doomsday scenarios, Dr. Spencer explains in simple terms how the climate system really works, why man’s role in global warming is more myth than science, and how the global warming hype has corrupted Washington and the scientific community.

Lomborg presents us with a second generation of thinking on global warming that believes panic is neither warranted nor a constructive place from which to deal with any of humanity's problems, not just global warming.

This volume takes a close look at the ways in which economies—particularly that of the United States—have adjusted to the challenges climate change poses, including institutional features that help insulate the economy from shocks, new crop varieties, irrigation, flood control, and ways of extending cultivation to new geographic areas.

The Cato Institute's section on climate change, featuring commentary and reviews of scientific and economic reports related to environmental degradation and climate change.

A listing of economic analyses completed by the EPA.