I would be really grateful for more thoughts from you on this, Im confused!

Covid was a once in a century event we are still recovering from. This regression to the mean assumption is wrong imo, but to assume the recent past is a good indicator for the future is also hugely fraught.

And presumably new oil and gas is more gradually capital intensive to access so stagnating investment means declining future production? (this thought carries several assumptions I may have wrong)

Thank you!

I'm really grateful for all your work Dan, I'm one of the many who quietly follow your posts to make sense of tax question!

I enjoy your work but this is not appropriate.

A related question I ponder more than I should. Many bathrooms in the UK charge for use. Did someone (likely a consultant) really decide “I don’t think scarce public resources should go to… helping remove human waste from our communities”?

I don’t think this is quite right. A higher discount rate does prevent future benefits from swamping your analysis. Even a modest discount rate really crushes anything 25 years+. And even with climate action a rate close to zero doesnt make sense bc of uncertainty and growth.

And this is just the story of the financial benefits, arguably more important are the range of social, economic and environmental benefits (co-benefits) that dwarf the financial benefits and that pay dividends almost immediately: ukcobenefitsatlas.net

Great article! If this is not too rude, here’s our recent work on car free days showing how the program saves lives by reducing air pollution exposure: www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....

yes, entrepreneurs innovate without universities helping them. But progress is never de novo. "Technologies" of all kinds come from existing knowledge which is available bc of "coordination" and those "technologies" get into the world because of "coordination". It's coordination all the way down.

We’re doing a lot of work on cobens if you’re ever interested let me know! We have some new work on CCC pathways and local cobens soon. Heres some older stuff link.springer.com/article/10.1...

Two, the indirect impacts of climate actions (the cobenefits) are big. Just the health benefits from air quality improvements are huge.

In any case, thanks for this post!

I think we might make a mistake focusing on the first order stuff. One, tech innovation pushed by climate action is a big deal. Battery storage for grid balancing is going to make batteries for other applications cheaper, better, etc.

thanks Andrew, really enjoyed this. It's left me thinking, to what extent is energy expenditure a good way to capture the productivity impacts of climate action? Similarly, to what extent is the productivity impact about the first order impacts vs second order (and sometimes longer term) impacts?

The @data.ft.com style guide has “placed” strictly for cucumber sandwiches, teaspoons, top hats, monocles.

Aren’t assumable mortgages an easier answer? Why aren’t they a thing?

The whole thing is fantastic.