A cow grazes in a pasture near a coal-fired power plant earlier this year in Harrodsburg, Kentucky. Credit: Luke Sharrett for the New York Times
We seem to be having a moment in which three groups with very different agendas – anti-environmentalist conservatives, anti-capitalist people on the left and hard scientists who think they are smarter than economists – have formed an unholy alliance on behalf of the proposition that reducing greenhouse gas emissions is incompatible with growing real gross domestic product.
The right likes this argument because it wants to block any action on climate. Some on the left like it because they think it can be the basis for an attack on our profit-oriented, materialistic society. The scientists like it because it lets them engage in some intellectual imperialism and invade another field (just to be clear, economists do this all the time, often with equally bad results).
A few days ago, […]
Sustainability is a better course of action than growth.
Weak “slow steaming” argument by Krugman. Slowing shipping speeds necessitates more ships so what data shows that this saves energy?
For all anyone knows more energy would be needed.
Yes, energy conservation and efficiencies can reduce demand. Hell, Euros use half the energy Americans do and have a comparable standard of living but historically economic growth has been directly related to energy consumption. Krugman offers no ideas or plan for how that relationship would be decoupled.