Real SCC will always be negative. Financial benefits to society of both warming and higher CO2 levels in better crop yields are significant. On the other side of the ledger there are essentially zero negative effects. Less people freezing to death in the middle of winter?
The most fundamental facts of CO2 emissions being damaging to the earth from fuels that previously had absorbed the CO2 from the atmosphere that is now the original location of the CO2 have not been established
"A forced transition away from fossil fuels would reduce costs."
I imagine pulling a Germany and ditching Russian gas before running back to coal is quite costly.
Real SCC will always be negative. Financial benefits to society of both warming and higher CO2 levels in better crop yields are significant. On the other side of the ledger there are essentially zero negative effects. Less people freezing to death in the middle of winter?
This feels like a very dangerous precedent overall and one for which we will all benefit if it is overturned completely
The most fundamental facts of CO2 emissions being damaging to the earth from fuels that previously had absorbed the CO2 from the atmosphere that is now the original location of the CO2 have not been established