So I got a bike talk a little bit
in terms of the title However

what I'm going to Thomas possibly have to
say about climate change because of your

comedy this particularly to come back
to this question of respect a sign

it's natural to ask what we.

Have to say this time.

So that we begin with the story.

Right just.

So a while ago I got in a plane and
Boston's Logan.

And I sat down in my seat.

And when I sat down I got out of my OK and

newspeak for a variety of materials
I spread out in front of me.

And then it became apparent that
the gentleman who was seated next to me

was talk to me.

So maybe you noticed what I have namely
that there are ten two kinds why.

Those who like to have conversations with
her strange are Sunni and the rest of.

Them very much the next thing he ever
worry would use the sole reason for

the book I hear you're the period.

Leading man but he was still himself.

Even there for
sought to start out on stage.

He did decide that he had just had
a living breathing oxygen more

than a journal contradiction
after all is he the economy or

the virus his use of the study
of economics or the study of for

example environmental science so
what his dispraise he did indeed.

So my initial purposes simply to argue.

And I hope to Gen straight then
environmental economics is not oxymoron.

And I say this group to
very specific reasons.

The first is that the cost of
environmental problems in a market economy

such as we now have you know all that I
hear people countries around the world

because of environmental problems
are enough they are the unintended

negative consequences of fundamentally
you heard stories of activity.

First producing goods and services that
you and I want and sometimes as well

they are a consequence of our using
those still saving goods and services.

The fact that the.

External activities are outside of
the scope of the business decision

of the white condiments relating
to the use of this extra Now

one type of ways in which markets
fail you know sometimes people who

are not economists think that economists
run around talking about her remarks

are far from in fact a colleague of
mine over Harvard Business School across

the earth for me he says that
they should all head east or

any school of market field because that's
where we started we study different forms

of market Bill you know whether it's about
belief public goods problems extra values

asymmetric information that's
what's interesting honest don't

sit around looking at perfection
in academia they look at policy.

So that's the first reason why you are not
only your nominee not Monika's and

because of our.

Economic edition to that.

The consequences of environmental problems
hand for new economic dimensions.

So surely if the causes are you
ever consequences have economic

dimensions then economic perspective
to be very useful back I would

say sensual for a full understanding
of the virus problems.

I don't teach it in
the Economics Department were OK and

I rather I'm teaching the Harvard Kennedy
School so it's not understand you

understand it's a pull to
keep reality is that it's

only a full understanding of
current problems that can lead

to solutions that are effective and
by effective I mean

they actually reduce pollutant emissions
not just demonize the bad guys.

Better you're economically sensible which
in the language of the economics would

be they are efficient or
at least cost effective and

therefore they might be more likely
to be politically correct and.

Now this kind of economic thinking
is particularly important for

the formulation of fact the sensible
practical climate policy.

And this I say we're too stupid reasons
one of the interesting things about

environmental economics by the way unlike
some other areas of economics is that we

always got a stark science and this is
an area in terms of I mean jeez where

the science takes us to the economics
takes us to the global CULE politics so

the urge to reality is the first
one is a spatial phenomenon and

then is the greenhouse gases
mix in the end of the sphere.

It doesn't matter.

Whether a tonne of carbon dioxide
was released probably plants in

Georgia from Tokyo Japan Beijing China or

life will have the same effects on
the global climate because greenhouse

gases into the atmosphere has made
the damages are the same everywhere in

the world of those damages are independent
of the location of emissions he needed

nothing terms of climate change is
a move on top of any and something very

important nearly that any jurisdiction
that chooses to take action and

the political jurisdiction that chooses
to take action whether it's a region like

Europe a country like Korea or
a city like the.

That jurisdiction will incur the full
cost of its actions which will specially

be the cost of living of switching cold
petroleum to natural gas to New York and

renewable greater levels and
there you see all of that comes a cost so

the incur the direct deposit their actions
but the climate benefits are going to

be distributed globally that tells us
something very important event is that for

virtually any jurisdiction the climate
benefits to release from these actions

are going to be less than direct cost
curves despite the fact of the global that

is actually might be greater indeed
much greater than the global costs and

then produces a classic free rider off
meaning that it is in the interest

of every jurisdiction every state
every country to not take action but

from then to benefit from the actions
taken by and that's why international

although not truly global with
international cooperation is essential.

Now there's another phenomenon
which is the charitable dimension

which will also leads me to more or
less the same placements and Carol.

So once again it will start the science
go to economics and then to politics and

policy to greenhouse gases
accumulate to the ends and

more than one hundred years in
the case of carbon dioxide so

unlike a lot of blues that are needed
to do a have an effect precipitate out

in a relatively short period of time
that's not the case for carbon dioxide for

some of the long life recounts gases and
the damages

of these balloons are a function of
the stock not of the flow at any moment

in time not commissions during the year
but the you live stock in the ads.

So we've got a Bafta it's filling
up with water it's got a very very

slow drain and the damages are a function
of the level of water in the bath tub

not a function of the range of
water coming out of the faucet.

The most severe consequences of climate
change are going to be in the long term

I mean not next year or the earth or
the half of the order of ten twenty thirty

fifty years and more I mean the other
hand climate change policies and

get into cost of achieving those climate
change policies that is mitigated

emissions those are going to be
a problem that has a very difficult

political conversation for miners
this combination of up front cost and

lead benefits Christians a very brief
chance because remember the political

incentives in democracies is to give
the better this to the voters today and

place the cost of future generations
to have a problem free so security and

hundreds of other policy issues in this
country and in other representative

democracy kind of problematic is asking
politicians to do precisely the opposite.

To the place because of the current
generation of voters going to

bring about Bennett.

It's for future generations so
together Mohan in the name of property

as is not in the individual interest of a
single jurisdiction take action even those

in the interest of all jurisdictions
to take action you do together

with this in your temporal asymmetry
up front costs and believe benefits

me climate change the period tough little
champion indeed a member of the U.S.

Senate who I used to work with
a great deal very intense intense.

Heat we're going to lots
of policy problems as any

member of the senator House would and

he used to say that climate change through
a little perspective close to the problem

big was it was designed to be
difficult for democracies to.

Address it also tells us given the nature
of these two challenge the global commons

nature of the problem together
with the upfront cost and

lay benefits suggest that
economics can help with design

better public policy wise ages economic
perspective one of the reasons

the secret of our perspective can be
particularly useful in this debate.

Now come policy analysts actually do
favor economic approach to this and

not just economists cannot policy
analysis of American policy of all

stripes paper carbon pricing by which I
mean either carbon taxes that's a tax

on the content of the rules
of the natural gas or

a camel train system which is a market
approach which generates right to a market

so why is there all this interest in these
instruments it's not right in your life

who reasons it's not because the market is
cool it's because there is first of all

know whether feasible approach that would
provide meaningful emissions reductions

and when I say meaningful including what
is the official international goal and

then it wasn't previously.

Strange the official launcher and
US target

which is that every duction back here
twenty fifty of greenhouse gas emissions

are people on the order of about eighty
three percent relative to two thousand and

five the reason that no other meaningful
neuer coach could keep that is and

we're talking about carbon dioxide of
state is one greenhouse gas drought we're

not talking about of a few minder of
industrial sources we're not talking

about the two thousand sources we're
talking about for softer dockside and

we here at the limits of ninety ninety
two address acid rain we're talking

about every electricity generators every
industrial facility every commercial

the sale of every residence every motor
vehicle every backyard barbecue every

want more on and on and on and the notion
of developing technology standards or

uniform performance standards to
regulate all of those activities is so

absurd that nobody that proposes bad
among the policymakers world and

policy analysts of the world the second
reason is an economic one is the least

costly approach in the short term because
a big cost are highly heterogeneous

the fear if you're mentally across
stores in Los Angeles alone one from

a dry cleaner tube in a while
refinery movie review of marginal

cost will be on the order of about
two hundred ten thousand to one and

had suggested having everyone control the
same level would be unnecessarily costly

rather it is important for everyone to be
tolling at the same cost on the margin

that way whatever is achieved is achieved
at minimal cost and then finally.

Carbon pricing is the least
costly approach in the long term

because it provides incentives for

carbon friendly technological change
if the kind of targets that are talked

about certainly from the national science
community are to be achieved amassed.

About technological
change will be required

I'm not talking about diffusion
of existing technologies but

then shouldn't you know
they should virtualization.

To do.

So and instead of a current price in the
equally sure you have there are in fact

current pricing used to reduce the place
around the world there are readers here

to Canada tree systems in
place in the United States and

Europe as well as in the Caribbean China
is going to be easy in a cap and

trade system either again this year or
early in twenty years teen

years but in addition to that
there are also carbon taxes but

the reason I didn't put a price on
these words I did resist the system

is that many of these are actually energy
taxes it's very hard to distinguish To

what degree they're really current taxes
but other jurisdictions in the world

will not employ it all but they will
try to use the warming standards or

even technology standers Instead this
can be less cost effective the current

pricing of the price in the room you do or
even the story but

still believe that implicit shadow
price implicit price on carbon

down what are the the results of
the consequences of carbon pricing

whether it's done through carbon price
instrument or it's done implicitly through

a digital regulatory instrument so

we can trace this through in terms
of coal natural gas and oil.

So the greatest impact globally.

Will be on the coal industry due
to the high carb content of coal

particularly through the United States
where you had a store of

higher lines on coal or
electricity generation

the facts are in three ways One
is it immediately impact on the.

Are the sources of electricity
generation that a task and

dispatched on to the grid there's the dead
end editions that have long term impacts

both on the investment into the past and
I.E. less capacity to do the whole.

And long term impacts on earlier
retirement of existing coal fire.

In terms of natural gas the impacts
are smaller because of the lower cop cars

content much lower carbon content of
natural gas here coal in the short

term they're actually be a demanding race
because of the fact that natural gas is

a substitute recall at least in the
United States for electricity generation.

But it should be acknowledged
less to do things bad.

Climate policies which don't exist in
the US a proper environment regulations

are going to lead to the collapse of
the U.S. coal industry in the U.S.

coal industry visited the mine to this
didn't climb to thirty five years

that's a result of technological change of
the combination of horizontal drilling and

hydraulic fracturing or fracking which
has brought down the price both of life

in the U.S. but it's also brought down the
price to increase the supply of natural

gas that's been vastly more
important anything else and

there are some other factors Well we
can talk about years later I only

let me comment on oil here to leave
potentially significant impacts in

the long term the muted and the reason is
that there are limited substitutes oil at

least in this country is used largely
now in the transportation sector and

there are limited substitutes for
oil obviously there are Sameer electric

vehicles into the Pentagon sources
of electricity this using the drugs

in those miracles to get into
the atmosphere climate changes that would.

In Colorado work could be good news
climate change is good Massachusetts for

example because we're generating
electricity from hydro from gas

to be a VAX on so in the short term
because of the high marginal cost cost

effective portfolio flown to address a lot
of issues reductions in the transportation

sector advocates look at the sale that's
bad news economists look at that and

say well that's good news you want a cost
effective portfolio with Evers being cheap

but the political target we said let's
achieve the lowest possible cost

after all we also hear about
price of food the price of fuel.

The price of vision the price of health
care so it never makes sense for

anything to shoot yourself in the foot
by spending for it is necessary

the effects of oil markets could largely
be through suppressed demand due

to increased energy efficiency and
we're seeing really research efficiency

partly because of public policies but also
simply because energy comes at a cost so

the energy intensity of
the economy has been falling for

over a decade as you saw in the long
term you will see the introduction.

Substitutes first for
more of your transportation.

Not the economic impacts or
you hear it cross sectors I already said

that in terms of fuels a new generation
of bad news cold here giving us

constant setter's purpose but even in
the short term Miss Crew natural gas and

possibly you do for a while but
that also means it's good news for

some other energy generation sectors
renewables and possibly nucular of what I

said all the other race cars because
that and on top of a policy and a hot.

Cup of exceptions.

But other sectors will also be affected
outside of actually getting energy juries.

Use because pirate policies essentially
even reduce energy costs so

a simple rule of thumb is that climate
policy is believe it bad news for

sectors that use energy I keep all.

But what can be good news for
some particular sectors so

a manufacturer is of energy
consuming durable goods so

I used the example showing
here crack companies.

The major Vaska of doing business
in the airline industry the major

variable cost is the price of jet fuel
asked what results the fact is to be read

in the newspapers that some years
airlines are making money and

some years they're not making money
because of the price of jet fuel.

That's good but because of the price of
jet fuel goes up what do the airlines do.

They get a new airplane because they heard
the new generation of the earth wrap my

more fuel efficient so they go in-doors
the seventy's with United Airlines

buys a Boeing seven eighty seven they
don't buy it because in those blue lights

to the ceiling mind you because the costs
are lower of life played by a waiter

possibly not lower because the Indians in
engineering sense are more efficient or

cost lower because the aircraft is lighter
weight has a greater use of composite

materials rather than metals it is
construction so it is good news for any

to consuming durable goods in fact if you
go back you know that economists whenever

you see what industries are lobbying for
or against usually assume it's

in their economic interest did you go back
there was a group of the United States of.

Manufacturers and
others called the Climate Action.

Coalition something like that at the time
of the Met Waxman Markey bill that was

passed the House bill in the Senate and
if you look at the list who are companies

that are supporting a greater more
stringent climate policy United States.

General lectured to believe
they were the sponsor of

Boeing Caterpillar some of
the automobile manufacturers

right down the line producers of
energy consuming durable goods but

that also tells us who these policies are
particularly bad and those are going to be

the users of energy consuming durable
goods and I gave here the example

of United Airlines because it makes all
the difference when their prices go up.

A level let me remind myself and

you that this is a global commons
problem and so I shifted my focus.

For a bit probably domestic concerns to

international cooperation which
will be absolutely essential.

So you may know that there is a new
agreement to do with the December twenty

fifth teen here I'm in agreement and it is
in my mind very good news it's a landmark

I'm good according to the manager
Archer from the approach to structure

the structure of the previous twenty years
of international climate negotiations get

clients but I recall a lot of
foundation for Legal long term progress

dues was expanded scope of participation
among countries top on a fight.

So this new approach can be but
I put my talents can be

a key step toward reducing
the threat of climate change but

whether the agreement is truly successful
in the long term in terms of bringing

visions down sufficiently is going to
depend and has not going to be known for

decades so dearest agreement provides
an important opportunity for

a new path forward and as I said one of
two key necessary conditions that men and

ask have with a scope of participation so
one of the second commitment

period of the of the euro protocol which
we're still in the sunset and twenty two.

Twenty.

Countries participating in count for

fourteen percent of global greenhouse
gas emissions that's the European Union

a New Zealand United States did not
ratify a Russian dropping out of hand and

dropped out of hand rubbed out an
Australian rock so what's left is the E.U.

Zealand forty percent under the Paris
heightening agreement signatory countries

participating in participating in terms
of the missions reductions count for

fully ninety seven percent of
global greenhouse gas emissions but

that's only one is a serious condition the
other necessary condition of course has to

do with what each of the contributions
are from those countries that represent

ninety seven percent of the visions
plus successful patient that is why.

Now with that also tells us is
that it really is going to be

necessary at the national level for
individual countries to step

up to take action because
national policies are heat so

the direct impacts of the piers agreement
are really quite trivial rather

the most important ones are hidden
directly impacts through domestic policies

that the signatory countries put in
place and then his mind motivation for

turning to my final topic that
I promised to talk about and

that is U.S.
climate policy in the gauge of trouble.

I'm going to do this to two steps I'm
going to talk first about the U.S.

domestic climate change policy and
your frustration and

then I'm going to turn and talk about
international climate change policy.

In the strange and out.

So in terms of U.S.

domestic climate policy you need
to be aware that in the center.

Or twenty thirteen the president
was quoted as saying were actually

Gore's tweeting.

The warming is a total
Imperial spends a hoax and

there was a subsequent posts a tweet
which he said is a total very

expensive post put on this by
a Chinese would be even less and

he would sit there so that that
film is something that sounds like

they can really roll back could
roll back climate change policy and

indeed ministration together with
the Congress which of course the same

party will try to rule back environmental
regulations were possible the been

singularly on climate change with
the wind which I want to pause for

a moment actually because some
of the next things I say and

what I just as good sound like slamming
the scourge of the distribution and.

I want you to understand it is
not because the below biased so

I have been I have worked more
closely with the White House under

Republican history right up to
right the ninety nine here and

than I have with democratic history at
work with members of the Senate and

House both sides of the aisle I
am hopelessly of life hours that.

Have not ever stepped
to the office of one.

So having said that you really are the one
that out of the way there are a variety of

things that are candidates chromatic deal
a lot of these were listed executive

order from the president in March
of the clean power plan which

is probably the most important element of
the Obama era I'm in policies that would

have been used to achieve the Obama
era tarp under the hearer's greed and

on this with hands substantial events
put into place and human life to stay.

It's because it was a flexible policy
works with the states to look at how they

wanted to of it would have to give it
a VAX on investment especially retirement

purely the electricity sector and again
take this with coal to natural gas from

people and move to later it also audience
final version of the cost of cap and

trade systems probably in many many parts
of the country not throughout the country

but we don't know yet actually
whether it is going to be repealed but

we don't know who will be replace and it's
simply unknown to this point so with it

in the movie grid to scale back some to
do certain jobs we talked about Dale's.

Second something in steering your to
Congress Hart was also very important

in terms of talk of policy was bad
the Obama administration through the year

easy task force of economists through all
the other parts of the government and

got hold of the best models that
they could from academia and

with those estimated what are the damages
on the margin of putting one more

on the C O two into the atmosphere in
terms of the damages those in some

particular future years and then look at
it as a present discount value of damages

from now to then and that's reverse
who is the social cost of the car.

Which is most recent manifestation be
given in the present a strange estimate is

forty two dollars per ton of C O two Some
people think that it's not large enough

some people think it's too small but from
from the best economic research that says

just guesses and what's good about our
balance and serve your course around.

The ministration has just roll them back
on they get to these rather than looking

at global damages they look at domestic
damages only for which there's actually

an argument in any way they did bad and
they also used a different discount read

read read percent discount rate which
the previous administration used which is.

Exist to the United indeed today and
even lower discount rate for generational

impacts used to seventy percent rate which
is really a feature of the earlier office.

And budget and together the forty two
dollars goes down to arrange a new release

from this industry of one to six dollars
per ton now while they're worried because

that's used all sorts of regulations in
what's called a regulatory impact analysis

that the government does way back to Jimmy
Carter never do regulations with places

the government needs to has to do
a better cough Dallas's out and

there really are impacts and C O two
emissions the social cost a car you love

so it could be a fuel efficiency standard
people sort of be on highways all sorts of

things so it became very important there
also as the fossil fuel friendly policies.

Big with through the Federal Police
the moratorium the Keystone pipeline.

Is now committed to go for
trade because not all bad news and

then there is are really talking
about fossil fuel friendly policies

there was a policy proposal
from the secretary of energy.

So we the secretary of energy typically
has been a career politician but

of the previous to the top of the first
under previous to this regime

was a Nobel laureate for her laugh and

then the more recent one was a colleague
of mine who say also is this

like the previous The secretary
visits from MIT her to me.

And now we have the former governor of
Texas the slight difference between

the two nothing of the benefit
of Texas who was so

the governor now the secretary
of energy period he released

a proposal that I did not to describe
something I wrote two weeks ago and

I was searching and searching on
the side of this call of duty.

And it is a whole that even
the regulated industry the regulated

industries the electricity sector can't
stand no lights it's a whole industry and

it's the subsidy in those cars in the
United States that have what are called

restructured markets for electricity so
there's actually competition

in those markets there is a subsidy for
coal to make

the Cold War have the risk playing against
them our goal is not to have the last

place a good batch of gas the idea is
to make coal more have also taught

me to leave for coal and ever live in
the nice little letters in the street.

Vastly post office the natural gas
sector post with a colder which

is not actually a very good word to get
out and do the United States in terms of

additions to G.D.P.
more like it's very very supportive and

there's also a review of the poor
fuel economy standards and

how we regulate where you should see
in the United States those are surely

going to be slowing the this coming here
drill that will see what you just ration

decides to do on that also other
efficiency standards the big question

is whether or not you know stray she will
make a move this is I think a bigger issue

in the executive office of
the president who didn't actually.

Do entire history.

Of whether or
not to actually an E.P.A. It's.

Position to regulate carbon dioxide
be it was a result of a Supreme Court

decision the E.P.A.
was told it has to look at the C O two.

And decide whether or not C O two
in danger is public health well.

And because if it does to deviate
in terms that a particular here

the dangers public health and welfare that
is obligated to clear and to regulate.

And so you're about to straighten him out
of that so-called didn't find it said it

doesn't Peter and therefore there are a
lot of empty triggered a whole series of

regulations of Cebu to now unfortunately
should also recognize that

the parts of the Clean Air Act that
are there my triggers were not written

in one thousand seventy or updated in one
nine hundred ninety to do with my B.G.

they were localized earlier so
it is a very very cumbersome approach

to dealing with climate change but
it is the approach the industry

took of the US They were not
successful in doing rational.

Rational act.

However there is a lot though
is non-trivial to change

environmental laws and regulations that's
why I say that if the trigger of the V.A.

was through me why did they cut
to the scalpel rather than X.

it meaning he's as I said a new
regulation actually he'll regulation you

actually a good problem here regulation
that doesn't repeal it goes to the public

comment process ninety days we do it
the power plant of four point two

million of the contents of it and every
one of which has to be responded to by

a reaction contractors response so
it's a very cumbersome

process itself also many regulations
are required by Stan shoes and

statutes are much harder to change they've
already not true in Congress they have

constituencies frequently
handles sides of the box and

then some venerable get all state client
policies of course remain during this

period or the even the strain
that there are wind and

solar tax credits that
were extended extended.

In December.

Twenty third did he name remarkable moment
of bipartisanship in the Congress or

through a budget agreement and a blue.

Tax credits why why why
are those bipartisan support so

economists will tell you right away
because there are subsidies and

politicians in a democracy where they
have to get reelected don't like giving

out cost but they love giving out so
subsidies are very very

very popular these are subsidies which
they're buying introduce problems but

they're also very good in terms
of C O two emissions reductions

in California there's a very vicious
liar policy that I work on a lot.

And that's now going to be raised in St
John's post twenty twenty in the Northeast

we have electricity greenhouse gas cap and
trade system that is not good finding

large puzzle prizes natural gas and but
it looks like this could become more and

more binding going forward so
for all these reasons in the U.S.

subnational action is going to be
worth over the past four years.

So let me turn now to the international
climate change policy my final say

so in the I'll start up again over the
major twenty sixteen the president's and

I will cancel that here is agreement and
stop all use of U.S.

tax dollars to you in the morning
program so the president can do and

has done the latter but obviously
the president can't cancel breathing down

to be fair with you probably meant my
dad and I will drop I will cancel U.S.

participation in the group
here is fine green but

what I want to start with my kid is I want
to replace it with you on our home and

here we should actually think
the communist regime or something because

it is because of the time that industry
person might be missed coming to

force would not be in force and
this is for the following

reasons appear like an agreement just like
the Kyoto Protocol or it has a provision.

The same numerical provision that will
come into force as soon as countries

fit pretty soon as fifty five
countries accounting for

at least fifty five percent
of global emissions by.

That fundamental requirement for

it to come into force the same of your
problem with the GO TO WAR of all to

the seventy years after it was signed
in Kyoto Japan ninety ninety seven for

it to come into force because to give
them granted occasion is very difficult

it's not just the E.U. parliament it's
every one of the E.U. member states and

it's a whole lot of other countries in the
world and it finally came into force seven

years later when the deal was being Russia
to cede to the W T O in exchange for

red line green so everyone figured
there's no way the dearest by military

is going to come into force you know
we've been here so are three or

four or five be a similar process and

years more contentious that particular
Kyoto Protocol was released.

But something else was recognize
that the Paris climate the region

has provisions that explain how
it is a country with ROVs and

it says that any country can initiate
withdrawal process three years but

only three years after
the room has come into force.

And then takes one year delay for
them withdraw all to be in effect.

So starting last spring would look
like Mr Trump might be nominee.

Would said he would draw from there
then this summer he was nominee then in

the fall it looked like he might twenty
three probability drawing up the date for

elections might be elected president
countries of the world move very very fast

every European country China the United
States Brazil Korea South Africa Mexico

into these key large emerging economies
must be enough to live world.

Moved quickly to ratify it to
make sure he didn't the force.

Before John got into office and that's
exactly what happened and just go for

the election just like the six days before
the election the fifty five percent

was achieved and the Kyoto Protocol into
Course and a very poor twenty sixteen.

Now it's also true though for the reasons
I just said it was a domestic policy

is that the US target won't be achieved.

So the options for the ministration were
to drop in the year is agreed to the for

your delay withdraw from the overall
United Nations for you to climate change

which only takes one year to
the Congress that would be absolutely

really crazy that was signed into
law by President George H.W.

Bush Bush forty one it was ratified
by the US Senate not unanimous

voice vote or number three what many of
his favorite given the option was revealed

here is agreement but simply revise
the twenty six to twenty eight percent

target that was set by the Obama
administration after all gunning for

their actions now the best modeling
says we're probably going to achieve in

the US A fourteen to nineteen percent
reduction without any further policy of

the emissions by twenty twenty five two
thousand but as you know the president

announced on June first in the rose
garden bed the United States would draw

up to my personal guest Mr Bannon
had left the White House prior to

June first probably probably would have
the opposite problem with the state but

to the change we can actually
determine the country the plan is

one of the key and
stakeholder tuples in the back stadium and

get out is where we're you know so
the withdrawal time to be affective in

till twenty twenty in the meantime to
us to continue to be a party to the.

There's agreement that sounds like
announcement is not a word for

the most important of activities
New York New U.S. position and

appearance agreement media's impact on
other countries particularly those large

emerging economies like this time
China India still South Africa next

India and initial signs
are remarkably hungry China did not

feel that they made some statements and
said we're going to stay here they

said We love being co-leaders with
the United States which they were for

the previous six years or so and
they're even happier to be so

leaders in India who are sort of
pulled into it like China to ask also

are not scaling back their country so
too with Brazil other key.

Countries.

So what's important for
the parties here is agreement unless they

make me who is a truck disobey then
against one route is to think of U.S.

actions as being geographically defined
not simply in terms of the U.S.

federal government and that raising
getting or the Saudis of national and so

a very important issue now is how can
Southern national policies of the G.

mainly like the States but

it could also be local governments be
recognized under the piers of freedom.

I said that this me turning out to be the
issue for the months and years ahead but

as an academic as a self-serving statement
the best besides what research on right I

don't know how all that can be
achieved is completed the for

good with Gotta get it were
presented to you that being pushed.

On.

Reason.

So to include economic get next to
climate change will likely next C B M G

policies as save the cost will likely
see in the economic impacts of unimpeded

mining cheap over the next day the two
decades of the fear is climbing agreement.

Fix a hundred eighty seven countries
the actions are are sexually

diverse intrusive there are stringent
seams and there are forms and

there are going to be a good regional
level in Europe at the national level

in those parts of the world subnational
level at least in the United States and

indeed in Canada use
well the economic impacts

will vary greatly geographically from
within countries such as the US and

also centrally and I give you for
some generalizations of those dumb

about their pointing to which
are really sensitive industries

there will also be vastly get on the
benefits of climate change I haven't taken

time to talk about those I've been
focusing on one side of leisure but

in the morning to recognize is
that in general those economic

benefits that is better changes than the
weather changes coastlines life are going

to be more diffuse than the cost in
the past we should continue or industries.

Invent constitutes another political
challenge with there are using cost

money diffused then of those
who are concentrated cost

then our political system tends to
give greater weight to the cost so

that together with the global commons
nature the problem together with it

could your temporal asymmetry of
trying to possibly benefit those

are the trifecta that makes this
theory difficult political chance.

So environmentally and
homicidal claimed by every illustration in

those treated to you that
is not an oxymoron or on.

Any account perspective is hello fully
essential for a full understanding

of our health problems and the reason we
hear about it for others to heart problems

to the bad that can be eat with
the sign of solutions that

are viral effective economically
sensible and politically pragmatic.

I want a lot of information you want
to follow up with copies of each serial

part of Russia I find it was not perfectly
calm it's a program which I direct

my website I have a lot of tools
to obviously follow your lead.

And you need your.

Three.

Minutes for every.

Mr to give you a very strong who
are speaking with us or your faculty

Yeah you believe in the worst ever but you
know whether you want to reverse a vision

they are higher than yes I wanted
to go home and walk in the studio.

You didn't know of that we know that
there is no I don't get what they don't.

Like and I think that would be more.

Odd but are they going for the public or
the fact that it will seem more like

you've got to be an awful lot
of our to do that going on we

don't want you to join your argument
was that you got me on the things.

So while you were very clear how we should
get you going on the road to function.

Why would you go for tomorrow.

So I think it's fair to say that

the you decide on what action
the sensible hard line.

That there is a person with the problems
you're in the legacy of the academic

economics community and I'm living your
life to be over the ridge Massachusetts

great use of that had nothing that there
is proof supposed to look at the stats and

I don't see however the reason why and
procedures differences.

Then you.

Hear that the economic analysis cases to
a certain action in the Senate so for

example there are actions that people will
talk about I would say does not make any

sense economically in trying to achieve
one point five degrees any reader for

that matter to the reset a grid of your
maximum level within the centuries

reactions to the next ten years results is
infeasible it's not going to happen but

if you were possible happen it
would be excessively costly.

So.

I don't I don't know me I mean
as much difference as you might

think because if I mean that
statement said nothing else

then you go dig up some great
way to find the sky and

you say I'm on one side of the fact
everything I said today was the others.

Yes the other questions.

Yes I don't want to tell me how or
hire you.

I mean I'll listen.

To my thinking.

I think we will see how out of.

It will be on.

The.

Need for change in the.

Past few.

Years.

We know that the future.

Will be.

In the form.

Of the earth's climate
itself possibly any other.

So I understood you know something I
mentioned earlier today I was with

a wonderful.

Trip.

And I said that cliche it's true

that you do a huge deal it's all about
learning more and more about less and

less the smaller pool is a good man's
neck Yemenite exceptionally has

just got out of my history G.'s which is
economics and only a small part of the.

So that's fundamentally
the scientific question of whether or

not the missions reductions there brought
about by the years agreement will affect

the slowing the rate of
those motion is if I could

tell you to contact my own institution or
you could ask people here I don't want to.

SPEND.

Years of planning to do that.

Because.

I was the do that but
believe me you know this is history.

Although.

Even if we are that.

Good the rule is.

You will see that all of
the bees on these balls to be

told people that are not in the here and.

There we're back that was and

there will be the leaders of you
know kind of new books that.

Will be here this year with this in the.

News so it can be reversed first of
all I'm not sure the administration

go through with the weather here in
the street who knows that's a long time.

And a lot of things are going to have
an interest in you I don't need like I'm

guarding the election and the chances are
the decision of the year is it removed it

appears that it is going to work
there Earth will voters never post

here is that I think
Wall Street should not go so

I think there's no question where
the West will actually exit the U.S.

does would drive that point that the two
days after the next general election.

If they do with draw and there is a change
of heart in the next two ministries you

could reverse the decision the thirty
day delay just takes thirty days now so

the big question is how is
this to the street change

OK I was the last and
I'm an English Patient.

I don't speak on behalf of
the Chinese they're really here and

so there are several people forming
a government around California

might go and there introduce me and

I'm listening to it on simultaneous
translation right here the gentleman from.

Talking about the one trying to
keep decision made about China.

And he says Now Professor Stephen Harper

is going to bring us some good news from
the United States this is like the sixty's

I checked with a lesser charge why
they might be completely make out.

And so I don't know what to say so
I made my way slowly You're right

it's the water faucet and then I said
well you know when you get to the mining

you realise that for
many years it's not a long time feeling.

That you're.

Away in the back to resume the research.

That's.

Coming into the Southwest you
know to come get ready for

your local governors and state.

You know what they can you really are sure
that if you're inspector a multi-national

company kind of more sort of a move
he'll look at how to do that.

So.

Both have played board roles up to
now to do so in terms of the states

in the US I mean without the leverage
of federal regulation to the power for

example there will be less action by the
states that are would otherwise bid but

as a result of trouble
having been elected there is

more action than there otherwise would yet
bill or the like for the state level

it's pretty good case California to
really do this to them straight VIVIE.

Which calls the bills there too so

we'll see very boring actually California
Oregon Washington to the northeast

of the Atlantic states upper Midwest you
think of all that I just said you look at

a map of the last election that's the blue
states so that's where the action will be

whether there will be action outside of
that rally without a strong center for

because we're out of
the cities within those

in your stations are talking about taking
action for a lot of what cities talk about

are aspirational goals and
you know Rob policy.

And progressive.

Policies not just uniting agonize or
sounding good but

really affecting the kids and their real
problems with the nation's leaders smaller

the general the smaller the jurisdiction
the higher the likelihood that you reduce

your visions by placing costs on the
production of current is the service of

your station that simply spills
over to your neighbors that

there is more economic activity in
those areas there which could be any

result in more than one hundred percent
who wish they were going to send.

In terms of the multinational community
very interesting is because you do need to

know that.

The multinational corporations but
also the largest U.S. companies.

Were very strongly predisposed
to being the earth's climate So

Exxon Mobil was outspoken about it but
the rest of us who was there also

see you know we just didn't know they
were supporting the oil companies were

definitely supportive of it obviously
natural gas was accorded the support of

much of much of a large
manufacturing base with support of

a summary of all on the line that
describes your leader their interests or

not so a lot of support from
the market for good reasons what

would become of these don't lie and of his
having to produce more than one hundred so

what is the reason as to why we have a
federal environmental law starting in one.

He said he is the God of you
will companies do my produce one

part of California and another part
of the rest of the United States so

they said OK let's have
a little sleep instead and so

multinationals feel that way across
borders because it gets more expensive

to produce two or three times a to install
the kinds of plans to put it in different

parts of the world to show there's a lot
of support for them I think we've got the.

Backs of the public policies they
are their own will not do what will be

necessary I would expect that you
know it's not in the interest

of all there surely there is
your responsibility to do it but

most of them would like to make many
measures they would like to have laws or

regulations in the string which must
sound funny because it sounds like

a person's a movie he's on the back
you know they they want back slowly

everybody else in the industry has been on
the back also so doesn't the fact that.

We seem to be more questioning the way.

Things are like.

Come.

On let's.

Talk about having.

People.

Like that because it is good news.

Yes you're.

Right there's a lot of.

You know.

Just like going.

On and this is just.

About.

This law.

So look very good at
the international level

very important aspect of all
I should like to go back to.

This for the use of France.

The distributional that I'm going to
differ it's your responsibility to expect

to hear the name of the all of the others
it will cause problems with some countries

that you're true to or you know there's
obviously a nationalist countries to do

this stuff in the atmosphere something
the others have a great deal of

here is agreement to do this
properly fleshed out because that

is just thirty eight years now
all work as it was probably but

left out in one part which is hard
work our colleagues articles it.

Was called policy limits then
it provides the opportunity for

common diversion responsibilities among
my friends I distributional last week

while also the last.

That's a significant amount as
an economics we often find a trade off

because they're the sort of fishes just.

To look at domestic examples California.

There is a very important phrase
environmental justice work work in

the other part of the country we're more
than any other part of the world today

absolutely who are asking
all policy discussions and

the important thing here recently
that you possibly renew the cap and

trade is that very importantly we're
screening people who are just as for

various reasons didn't
like they want to kill.

You Lee what they've done instead
is renew their true system and

address the legitimate service
of the environment must be.

The same.

On a running meter publishing.

Let's.

Bring in outside.

The good old.