Monday, March 19, 2007


The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is the primary body studying... well... climate change. In order to establish how emissions might change over time, it must be obvious that one must determine population growth and technological trends over time; it is their A1 family of scenarios that are most interesting to free-traders like myself (and it was this family that, naturally, Stern's Review ignored).
The A1 storyline is a case of rapid and successful economic development, in which regional average income per capita converge - current distinctions between "poor" and "rich" countries eventually dissolve. The primary dynamics are:
  • Strong commitment to market-based solutions.

  • High savings and commitment to education at the household level.

  • High rates of investment and innovation in education, technology, and institutions at the national and international levels.

  • International mobility of people, ideas, and technology.

The transition to economic convergence results from advances in transport and communication technology, shifts in national policies on immigration and education, and international cooperation in the development of national and international institutions that enhance productivity growth and technology diffusion.

It is important to emphasise that while the A1 is not the scenario of lowest emissions, it is the scenario that leads to our descendants being the richest. Stern's Review was based upon the idea of mitigation: if we pay more now, climate change will cost our descendants less. Unfortunately, Stern's Review ignored this family of scenarios—rendering it, effectively, meaningless. Even the BBC seems to have worked this out.

Apparently our fucking arsehole politicians do not understand this...

No comments:

Oh yeah? So what has happened for the last ten years, exactly?

Over at the ASI, they are posting some of the winning entries of the Young Writers on Liberty. One does not want to put such keen minds off,...