ThinkProgress Logo

Climate Progress

Grantham’s “Things that Really Matter in 2011 and Beyond”: “Global warming causing destabilized weather patterns, adding to agricultural price pressures”

Back in July I wrote about uber-hedge fund manager Jeremy Grantham, a self-described “die hard contrarian,” telling it like it is in his blunt 2Q 2010 letter (see “Grantham: Everything You Need to Know About Global Warming in 5 Minutes“).

He wrote back then, “Global warming will be the most important investment issue for the foreseeable future.”  He went through the basics of climate science and then wrote:

Do we believe the whole elite of science is in a conspiracy?  At some point in the development of a scientific truth, contrarians risk becoming flat earthers.

He noted that “the obfuscators of global warming actually use the same “experts” as the tobacco industry did” and wondered, “Have they no grandchildren?”

Grantham has earned his contrarian cred the legit way.  He is former Chairman and now Chief Investment Strategist of Grantham Mayo Van Otterloo (GMO), which has “more than US $107 billion in assets under management as of December 2009. Grantham is regarded as a highly knowledgeable investor in various stock, bond, and commodity markets, and is particularly noted for his prediction of various bubbles.”

In his January 2011 newsletter, “Pavlov’s Bulls,” he has a discussion of climate and commodity prices (emphasis in original):

Read more

Yglesias

Separation of Teaching and Credentialing

Another thing to consider about college costs is the strange way that we’ve fused the instruction and credentialing functions. The supply of prestigious credential-bestowing institutions is necessarily constrained because that’s what it means to be prestigious. But there’s no reason to think that it’s necessarily expensive to operate a prestigious credential-bestowing institution. MIT isn’t prestigious because its TAs are unusually competent at grading problem sets. Teaching by contrast seems expensive to do properly but also in principle open to unlimited competition.

But right now a lot of our conventional practices are upside down. For example, Paul Krugman and Greg Mankiw are both high-profile economists attached to prestigious institutions (Princeton and Harvard) who both have introductory economics textbooks. One is a liberal and one is a conservative. Now suppose that instead of having competing economics textbooks they came together to collaborate on creating the Mankiw-Krugman Introduction to Economics Certificate. The MKIEC would be a test, basically, administered on regular dates and it would say “hey, these famous guys say people who get a good score on this know introductory economics.” Of course you’d have a problem with regulatory and accreditation cartels. But even so, there could be some value. Personally, I sometimes need to admit in a slightly embarrassed tone that I’ve never actually taken an intro economics course. The best I can say is that I have read both the Krugman and the Mankiw textbooks and I think I understand the material well enough to be taken seriously by economics bloggers with PhDs and everything. But if I had a test blessed with the good housekeeping seal of approval of an ideologically diverse set of famous economists, that would have some value to me.

But what’s more, if you could somehow persuade Harvard and Princeton to both start giving the MKIEC test to their own undergraduates the ball would really be rolling. Suddenly any institution in the country—an accredited college or otherwise—could compete on a level playing field with fancy ivy league schools in terms of teaching introductory economics. Then instead of a buch of institutions competing to recruit the most famous economists to teach their intro classes or competing to recruit the students with the highest SAT scores, you’d actually be competing to deliver skills in a cost-effective manner because the prestige factor has been outsourced to MKIEC.

Climate Progress

The Clean Air Act and carbon hotspot deaths

This 2010 post from Brad Johnson is even more timely today given the efforts by conservatives to stop the EPA from fulfilling their mandate to regulate harmful emissions of carbon dioxide.  I have comments from the study’s author at the end.

The Clean Air Act requires the Environmental Protection Agency to set standards for plants, cars, and factories that emit greenhouse gas pollution. Because global warming is by definition a global problem, there is support for scrapping individual source standards for a national cap-and-trade system that limits the collective pollution, instead of local emissions. However, scientific research by Mark Z. Jacobson, finds that carbon dioxide pollution is a two-fold killer “” causing not just global warming but also forming “domes” that trap other pollutants in urban areas:

Read more

Climate Progress

Oil reduction as a transportation policy

By CAP’s Lee Hamill and Valeri Vasquez.

What happens when military leaders and CEOs join forces? A nation gets a plan for action. In their February 9th report released by Secure America’s Energy Future, or SAFE, the Energy Security Leadership Council, or ESLC, follows through on a muscular statement of purpose and minces no words:

Hostile state actors, insurgents, and terrorists have made clear their intention to use oil as a strategic weapon against the United States.

Read more

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up