4 ms·

I always dislike estimates of this sort, because they give the impression of a scaling argument O(trillion $) when they are never validated and they are seldom

by arcanus 10y ago

I always dislike estimates of this sort, because they give the impression of a scaling argument O(trillion $) when they are never validated and they are seldom more than 'this could cause a huge impact'! I'm speaking as someone who is horrified at the loss of coral reefs, both because of the ecological implications as well as the loss of a truly stunning natural beauty (I'm PADI certified and love Scuba).

devoply 10y ago
Well the sort of rhetoric comes from the fact that economic considerations in our world are dealt with very quickly compared to environmental considerations.
Shivetya 10y ago
Well I guess my only real problem is the group assessing the value is not government backed and as such may not have strict enough guidance when determining impact. However the need for assessment if there is a reasonable means to correct the issue or prevent future occurrence. I doubt we can correct it and do we know if this has ever occurred without possibility of man's activities? I would be curious as to the evolution of coral reefs, what is their historic variability?
ajross 10y ago
You must really hate the evening weather report and financial news media then. Hoo boy, and you thought those "scientists" were hand-wavy. Wait until you see what they do with stock picks! (Edit: I can see by the downvotes that no one appreciates the sarcasm. The serious way to express this point is that by demanding rigor and precision of this kind of analysis, you are applying a standard that you very much DO NOT apply to the other important issues in your life. Squishy, hard-to-quantify risk management is pervasive in retirement planning, insurance purchases, education decisions, career choice, marriage... So why are you insisting that climate and ecological decisions be held to a higher standard?)
novia 10y ago
Radiolab had a pretty good podcast explaining where these economic estimates come from and why they are important to have around. It's part 3 at the following link: http://www.radiolab.org/story/worth/ http://www.radiolab.org/story/worth/ Basically, if you do not make a monetary estimate of the worth of some feature of nature, it's assumed worth is $0 when governments are making decisions about policy and land use.

by arcanus 10y ago

devoply 10y ago

Well the sort of rhetoric comes from the fact that economic considerations in our world are dealt with very quickly compared to environmental considerations.

Shivetya 10y ago

Well I guess my only real problem is the group assessing the value is not government backed and as such may not have strict enough guidance when determining impact. However the need for assessment if there is a reasonable means to correct the issue or prevent future occurrence. I doubt we can correct it and do we know if this has ever occurred without possibility of man's activities? I would be curious as to the evolution of coral reefs, what is their historic variability?

ajross 10y ago

You must really hate the evening weather report and financial news media then. Hoo boy, and you thought those "scientists" were hand-wavy. Wait until you see what they do with stock picks! (Edit: I can see by the downvotes that no one appreciates the sarcasm. The serious way to express this point is that by demanding rigor and precision of this kind of analysis, you are applying a standard that you very much DO NOT apply to the other important issues in your life. Squishy, hard-to-quantify risk management is pervasive in retirement planning, insurance purchases, education decisions, career choice, marriage... So why are you insisting that climate and ecological decisions be held to a higher standard?)

novia 10y ago

Radiolab had a pretty good podcast explaining where these economic estimates come from and why they are important to have around. It's part 3 at the following link: http://www.radiolab.org/story/worth/ http://www.radiolab.org/story/worth/ Basically, if you do not make a monetary estimate of the worth of some feature of nature, it's assumed worth is $0 when governments are making decisions about policy and land use.