Improving the Scientific Basis for Estimating the Social Cost of Carbon

[rangerrebew]

Improving the Scientific Basis for Estimating the Social Cost of Carbon

Cora Kingdon and Kevin Rennert
 
Date

July 17, 2020
 

Calin Tatu/Shutterstock

This week, the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) published a report reviewing the Trump administration’s use of the social cost of carbon (SCC)—an estimate, in dollars, of the economic damages that would result from emitting one additional ton of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. GAO initiated its review in 2017 at the request of several US Senators, in response to the Trump administration’s sharp downward revision of SCC estimates in regulatory analyses, from the prior central value of roughly $50 per ton of carbon dioxide used in the Obama administration to a range of $1–$7.

Because the SCC is an estimate of the economic benefits of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, using a lower value for the SCC lowers the total benefits estimated in regulatory impact analyses of policies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The Trump administration has used the lowered SCC values to support the repeal of several policies that were previously calculated to be net beneficial—like the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan—on the grounds that such policies are now estimated to have net costs.

https://www.rff.org/events/rff-live/the-social-cost-of-carbon-key-scientific-and-policy-considerations-for-the-biden-administration/

[rangerrebew]

It doesn't appear to me there is any standardized method of measuring the "COST OF CARBON" in the US, let alone the world.  So, at best, any author who discusses the subject is taking a stab in the dark and should not be used to evaluate global warming.

[Fishrrman]

Carbon has no "social costs".

This is a fantasy constructed by the greenunist-communists to wrest control of the world, after which they can "rebuild it" to their whims...