11 Comments

While I agree, for the most part, with his post 2008 analysis, I disagree with his take on Carbon Tax. To make the switch will take 3 uncoordinated moves all taken simultaneously. 1. A serious transferable tax on emissions. 2. Subsidies to the renewable arena in both research and purchase areas. Investment in, and modernization of, our electric distribution grid including vast numbers of charging stations. One of the major thrusts should be the decentralization of our Power Grids and burying the transmission lines. Doing this would help prevent more climate damage, stimulate the economy and leverage our economy into the 21st Century.

Expand full comment

Do you agree that the fundamental requirement of a transition to a low-carb and energy sector is nuclear fission? Yes or no? I haven’t been really that long so I don’t know what you’ve written about it in the past, but I see no other way to do this that makes any sense.

Expand full comment

Fantastic read, good job!

Expand full comment

Re: "time to come up with a serious plan for the United States [...] ; Step two would be for the Europeans to follow the US lead"

That may be for some policy areas, but how does this square with the political aspects of policy highlighted in this article?

* The energy industry is in the topmost echelon of sponsors of the political process in the US. Unconditional veto power over Republicans, and a healthy influence over Democrats.

* Energy, in the US, is considered a vital aspect of national security. But in a de-carbonized world, The US advantage in cheap energy vanishes. Worse yet, China becomes the global leader -- in manufacturing, deployment, and export of all of the big 4 energy sources: solar, wind, hydro, and nuclear.

So IMO, between the industry and the national security bloc, the US will have much more robust political opposition to near-term de-carbonization. I'm afraid leadership on this topic will necessarily come from elsewhere, with the US dragged along, resisting the whole way.

Expand full comment

“It was not a coincidence that Stalinism was delivering ten percent growth rates as the capitalist world economy plunged ever deeper into depression”. Yes, but the Soviet Union was producing this growth on a much lower baseline than western nations, so comparing in % growth terms feels seems about as fair as comparing the % growth of covid cases in Vermont vs. Texas. Western democracies were far more prosperous and remained so throughout the existence of the ussr. Also, no mention of Stalin’s unsustainable campaign of coercion driving this growth.

Expand full comment

Well, I surely enjoyed this romp through economic history and policy-making, with some side dances into military policy. I probably agree with 90% of this post, which makes me suspicious of its merits.

Perhaps steady but small increases in gasoline taxes are politically impossible in the US. As the author probably knows, US national gasoline taxes are small, due in part to the Senate having two Senators from every small (population wise) but vast rural state. They drive a lot.

Decades ago, perhaps before the author was born, I advocated for a nickel per year hike in US gasoline taxes. This slow but steady increase in taxes would both reduce gasoline consumption, and send a signal to markets about likely future conditions. This idea may still be a good one, even if "too late" now. It would just take some deal-cutting with the rural Senators. They get a big infrastructure projects in their states etc., or more corn ethanol subsidies, etc.

The other big simple idea, which may work if the promising solid-state battery is a commercial idea, is big subsidies for battery cars, maybe those built in the US. Get the buy-in through the domestic sourcing idea with some flag-waving.

Nuke plants are a good idea too. So is the elimination of property zoning.

I respect the yellow-vest and other populist movements which are really legitimate complaints about the declining fortunes of the employee classes across the developed world. But I think higher gasoline taxes in the US can be sold. Europe already has high fuels taxes.

BTW, oil consumption in Japan and Europe has been declining ever since the 1970s. So higher fuels taxes do work.

Geo-engineering a cooler planet may be a good idea too. What puzzles me is the recurrence of Ice Ages in the recent past. This present warm spell is the anomaly.

Expand full comment

Why does elite group-think only apply to economists and not atmospheric scientists?

Expand full comment