ClimateFran
banner
climatefran.bsky.social
ClimateFran
@climatefran.bsky.social
professor @UCDavis | climate change economist / scientist / general nerd | White House CEA 2022-23
https://franmoore.faculty.ucdavis.edu/
Check out our paper on ecological costs of climate change - we have a three (!) good utility function . Not unheard of in economics.

www.nature.com/articles/s41...
August 20, 2025 at 7:27 PM
Was looking at EPA's impact assessment of the GHG powerplant regulation repeal today. Truly Kafkaesque. EPA simply asserts that the costs of the repeal (i.e. higher GHG emissions) are "too uncertain" and therefore the net-benefits of repeal are lower compliance costs

www.epa.gov/system/files...
August 4, 2025 at 9:01 PM
The paper walks through a simple illustration using an information spectrum constructed from a forced Lorenz model and two different decision contexts - a short-term "insurance decision" and a long-term "infrastructure decision"
July 15, 2025 at 7:45 PM
We propose operationalizing VOI for climate risk using an information spectrum, that places different information states on a continuum from simple to complex. The value of different information states can be evaluated relative to each other. (But not relative to "truth", which is unknowable)
July 15, 2025 at 7:45 PM
A VOI approach provides a broad framework for quantifying the value of new climate information to a particular decision-maker. Essentially it boils down to the change in the expected value of the decision made under the new vs the old climate information
July 15, 2025 at 7:45 PM
EPA's 111 power plant rules reduce emissions at low cost, primarily through the retirement of coal capacity, with correspondingly large improvements in air quality, in addition to the climate benefits
January 16, 2025 at 10:38 PM
Pacific Palisades is one of the highest concentrations of exposure for the CA FAIR plan, with $5.8 billion in underwriting within a 7 mile radius.

As of March, the program was "one event away from a large assessment" on insurers and CA policy holders.
www.eenews.net/articles/cal...
January 8, 2025 at 7:32 PM
This "Synthetic SCC" distribution integrates both parametric and structural uncertainties. Our 2020 SCC distribution has a median of $185 per ton CO2, a mean of $283 and a 95th percentile of $874 - higher than the large majority of government estimates
December 17, 2024 at 9:42 PM
This procedure is essentially a structured re-weighting of the 1823 SCC distributions from the literature. Papers integrating elements that are relatively under-sampled compared to expert assessment and that contribute meaningfully to SCC variance will receive greater weight
December 17, 2024 at 9:42 PM
We also ask experts about their confidence in studies using different model structures to estimate the SCC. Translating responses into probabilities, we see a substantial under-sampling of these alternate structures in the published literature, relative to expert assessment.
December 17, 2024 at 9:42 PM
Experts attribute the perceived downward bias in published SCCs to a range of factors. Discounting parameters, underestimated damages, under-representation of growth rate damages, and limited substitutability of climate impacts with consumption are notable.
December 17, 2024 at 9:42 PM
The vast majority of respondents believe published SCC values to be downward biased. The average "best-guess" SCC ($142 per ton CO2) is more than twice their literature estimate ($60 per ton). Experts substantially underestimate published SCC, at least compared to our findings.
December 17, 2024 at 9:42 PM
We also analyze SCC variation in a multi-variate setting, looking at relative changes in the SCC as a function of model structure. This summarizes information from the large body of work adding richness to earlier SCC models in the Earth system, uncertainties, impacts and representation of utility
December 17, 2024 at 9:42 PM
Our rich set of covariates allows us to illustrate how the SCC distribution shifts under different model structures and parameter values. Note important roles for persistent or growth-rate damages, Earth system modeling, and the discount rate.
December 17, 2024 at 9:42 PM
For an informed take on the risks of crypto, Chapter 8 of the 2023 Economic Report of the President is a good start.
www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/u...
With the most epic burn of all chapter titles: "Digital Assets: Relearning Economic Principles" and this fantastic list of sub-headings:
December 7, 2024 at 7:07 PM
The "Modal Pathway" in our model of the coupled climate-social system had peak emissions in the early 2030s, so a pre-2030 peak would be beating our forecast by several years
www.nature.com/articles/s41...
November 14, 2024 at 11:16 PM
This world is also rife with appalling conflicts of interests
September 24, 2024 at 3:47 AM
September 13, 2024 at 8:48 AM
This paper by Eli Fenichel and colleagues makes the point clearly. I use this figure in my classes
www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/...
September 4, 2024 at 5:35 AM
This "Synthetic SCC" distribution integrates both parametric and structural uncertainties in SCC estimates. Our 2020 SCC distribution has a median of $185 per ton CO2, a mean of $284 and a 95th percentile of $874. Mean values are higher than government estimates.
June 13, 2024 at 9:47 PM
This procedure is essentially a structured re-weighting of the 1823 SCC distributions from the literature. Papers integrating elements that are relatively under-sampled compared to expert assessment and that contribute meaningfully to SCC variance will receive greater weight
June 13, 2024 at 9:47 PM
We also ask experts about their confidence in studies using different model structures to estimate the SCC. Translating responses into probabilities, we see a substantial under-sampling of these alternate structures in the published literature, relative to expert assessment.
June 13, 2024 at 9:46 PM
Experts attribute the perceived downward bias in published SCCs to a range of factors. Discounting parameters, underestimated damages, under-representation of growth rate damages, and limited substitutability of climate impacts with consumption are notable.
June 13, 2024 at 9:46 PM
The vast majority of respondents believe published SCC values to be downward biased. The average "best-guess" SCC ($142 per ton CO2) is more than twice their literature estimate ($60 per ton). Experts substantially underestimate published SCC, at least compared to our findings.
June 13, 2024 at 9:45 PM
We also analyze SCC variation in a multi-variate setting, looking at relative changes in the SCC as a function of model structure. This summarizes information from the large body of work adding richness to earlier SCC models in the Earth system, uncertainties, impacts and utility
June 13, 2024 at 9:45 PM