2 ms·
I hear you, but honestly I'm not sure this is a reasonable request for an article of this scope. Pricing "negative climate externalities" is hardly a simple tas
by tony_cannistra 4y ago
I hear you, but honestly I'm not sure this is a reasonable request for an article of this scope. Pricing "negative climate externalities" is hardly a simple task.
I appreciated this article for its cogency, but also because he clearly is aware of the climate-related impacts of burning natural gas, and attempts to address them pragmatically. (e.g. the sections about carbon taxes, and carbon capture.)
- namuol 4y agoThankfully it’s an important enough question that some people have already done some work for us. The IMF put out a report last year about this very subject. Here’s a relevant snippet from the summary: > Globally, fossil fuel subsidies were $5.9 trillion in 2020 or about 6.8 percent of GDP, and are expected to rise to 7.4 percent of GDP in 2025. Just 8 percent of the 2020 subsidy reflects undercharging for supply costs (explicit subsidies) and 92 percent for undercharging for environmental costs and foregone consumption taxes (implicit subsidies). Here’s the full report: https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2021/09/23/Still-Not-Getting-Energy-Prices-Right-A-Global-and-Country-Update-of-Fossil-Fuel-Subsidies-466004 https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2021/09/23/Sti...