3/ Consuming less fossil energy is great, but getting “people to adjust their habits” won’t fix the problem. Decarbonization will not be driven by consumer behavior.
4/ C pricing promotes fuel *switching* -- to other #fossilfuels. No evidence that it results in firms abandoning them. https://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/%28ASCE%290733-9402%282008%29134%3A2%2840%29
7/ Also there's the question of actually generating political will to implement this among a core group of states. See my discussion of Nordhaus on this https://twitter.com/greenprofgreen/status/1250419963451461636
8/ So gee, what could we do instead of pricing carbon? Something that’s good for climate…something economically efficient? Hmm.. I don’t know, maybe END FOSSIL FUEL SUBSIDIES? https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1920-x
9/ What else could we do? With NEGATIVE oil prices, there’s never been a cheaper time to nationalize the oil industry. Nationalization won’t solve all our problems, but it’s a start. Cc @katearonoff https://twitter.com/MarkVinPaul/status/1239622327035461632
10/ Along w/ c pricing, they suggest “simplifying & eliminating regulations.” Translation: less pressure on firms to *actually* decarbonize.
12/ Regulations, contra their assertions, can be immensely effective in reducing emissions. See especially fuel efficiency standards and renewable portfolio standards.
13/ Authors also don’t miss an opportunity for BRIC bashing, calling on them to “do their fair share. Two words on this: HISTORICAL EMISSIONS. Just stop w/ that shit already.
You can follow @greenprofgreen.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: