Happy Birthday JCT
27.02.2026 06:58
👍 2
🔁 0
💬 0
📌 0
Happy Birthday JCT
Kavanaugh’s dissent says IEEPA’s text allowing the president to “regulate … importation” includes the power to tax imports.
Would he agree that the Clean Air Act’s directive that the EPA “Administrator shall regulate" pollution from electric utilities includes the power to tax their emissions?
6) from @adriandeveny.bsky.social
"If the federal government wants to more heavily regulate greenhouse gas emissions, Congress needs to pass a new law."
The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 explicitly amended the Clean Air Act to designate six greenhouse gases as air pollutants.
While that can sometimes work, and while simple rules often clarify, when long unwieldy subclauses junk up the front of a sentence pushing the main clause to the end, following that rule buries the main information.
6) Got more? Add your own.
5) “the Supreme Court will eventually rule on this week’s move, as well, ostensibly in favor.”
Really? A U.S. District Court in January tossed the DOE’s fake-science report meant to support the endangerment repeal.
4) “light and medium-duty cars and trucks combined to generate just 1.8 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions in 2022.”
Cars and light trucks account for around 16% of U.S. emissions. The U.S. accounts for around 12% of global emissions. Why are we multiplying those two numbers?
3) “free-market-driven innovation has done more to combat climate change than regulatory power grabs like the “endangerment finding.”
Really? You have evidence, or is this just empty ideological bluster?
2) “There may come a time when the people elected to enact laws decide the modest benefits of regulating greenhouse gases outweigh the considerable economic costs.”
Wrong. Benefit cost analyses regularly show the benefits of reducing GHGs vastly outweigh the costs.
1) “in 2009, the EPA decided it would treat greenhouse gases like other pollutants, despite their damage being global rather than local.”
No, the Bush-era EPA decided *not* to regulate greenhouse gases, was sued, and lost in the Supreme Court.
The new WaPo is wrong, wrong, wrong in so many ways. Let's count:
www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/202...
Tariffs on solar panels have been even worse than I thought. Never mind the environmental cost, the pass-through rate to US consumers was more than 100%.
Each $1 of tariff cost US solar customers $1.17.
And a federal judge tossed the report. Not because it's junk science, but because of a DOE process foul selecting the junk scientists who authored it.
www.nytimes.com/2026/01/30/c...
I watched and learned as @chadpbown.com explains trade policy (nicely) to @pkrugman.bsky.social.
(Love the screen grab, too.)
youtu.be/kVZMns6NuVI?...
Economists make climate policy seem so straightforward.
If you you miss reading a proper cost-benefit analysis of environmental policy, one that fully accounts for costs AND benefits, here's California CARB's proposed GHG cap-and-invest regulations, dropped at noon.
No "we won't value public health benefits just because they're uncertain" shenanigans.
Pre-ordered mine. 5 months early. Because I'll read anything by these two explainers.
www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/...
Pepco (Exelon) send me this unhelpful alert, informing me that I spent more on electricity this month than last.
But guess what? I used *less* electricity. I spent more because the company charged me more. Thanks for nothing, @exelonofficial.bsky.social.
📢 Just accepted in #JAERE! 📢
"Decarbonizing Aviation: Cash-for-Clunkers in the Airline Industry" by Jan K. Brueckner, Matthew E. Kahn ( @mattkahn1966.bsky.social ), and Jerry Nickelsburg.
Read it here: buff.ly/JExG0Iz
📈📉 #Econsky
More news on CBAM expansion plans.
www.reuters.com/sustainabili...
It's even worse than Max humorously gripes. Can anybody look at Max's bill and calculate his incremental cost per kWh?
[ChatGPT tells me it's "approximately $0.65 per kWh.]
All is not well at Elsevier richardtol.substack.com/p/fraud-and-...
🌍 Are you in the market? Dream postdoc opportunity for environmental economists!
@envdefensefund.bsky.social + @ucsb.bsky.social's @emlab.ucsb.edu are hiring 2-3 postdocs to work on carbon markets, nature-based solutions & resource economics with Chris Costello (emLab Director/EDF Chief Economist).
Not sure how this got past the administration's communication controls, but EIA had a nice piece last Friday on the increasing role of solar/wind/batteries in Texas.
www.eia.gov/todayinenerg...
🔌💡
Jim Sallee gives a master class in how to explain complex policy in simple prose. I'm definitely assigning this to students.
✨ We will be featuring the 2025 AERE Scholars & Mentors over the coming weeks! Stay tuned to learn more about the amazing cohort! ✨
Ok so the Trump administration blew up the international agreement to tax CO2 from shipping. 14 years ago the Obama administration successfully opposed applying the EU carbon price to US airlines operating in Europe.
Just because Ds and Rs both agree on something doesn't mean it's right.
Great news!
Andrew Plantinga will be succeeding Nick Kuminoff as one of the four editors of @jaereaere.bsky.social starting January 1.
Compensation for the less great but inevitable news that Nick's term must end. Thanks Nick and welcome Andrew.
www.journals.uchicago.edu/toc/jaere/cu...
Hey #EconSky working in environmental econ! Looking for things to do this weekend? Why not write up a 2-3 page proposal for a cool conference-publication combo, happening in May 2025 in Washington, DC?
Submit your proposal (or paper) here by Oct 20: conference.nber.org/confsubmit/b...
🎉 Congratulations to Professor Ivana Komunjer on being elected a Fellow of the Econometric Society
@econometric.bsky.social one of the highest distinctions in the field of economics! Since 1931, only 1,254 scholars have received this honor 🧵 [1/3]