John Cochrane says it brilliantly. Wondering just how much navel gazing Europeans are going to do is the question in economics, energy, immigration, and alliances.
Perhaps all will become clear to them when the Russians are marching down the main street in Brussels.
It’s always fun to hear and read the assumptions that if the US & EU proceed with their climate change policies that economies in China, SW Asia, Africa, South America et.al. will fall in line and the world will be all sunshine and rainbows 🌈.
Yes, climate change is real. Always has been. Earth's climate, and the climates of other planets in our solar system are changing. How could it be otherwise?
It is amazing hubris to think that an insignificant species that has been on earth for an amazingly small fraction ot the earth's existence (something like 0.00007) is somehow responsible for climate change and can somehow keep the climate from changing.
Wouldn't it be refreshing and engaging if people who claim to be scientists and people who claim to be thoughtful, critical thinkers actually were?
But even Europeans, I guess, should be happy she's behind the times so much. A really up-to-date central banker would be using the bank's powers to intervene in the Russo-Ukrainian War.
This isn't surprising. You knew that after the election in the U.S. European leaders would get nervous about their ability to drive global behavioral change. As such, they are trying to alarm people to stimulate action and prevent efforts to slow G20 fiscal commitments to funding programs... "keep your eye on the ball!"
It is rather ironic that they have this attitude of "Don't bother me with talk of nuclear war, invasion, or middle-east conflict right now, I'm trying to save us from climate catastrophe in 75 years." The fact that they are so ignorant of other more prescient threats makes one wonder if this is more than just an effort to "save the planet" but more of an agenda to remake the systems of governance of the planet.
My entry for Most Obscurely Published Paper is on point. You want a central banker who cares only about inflation, nothing else.
"A Theory of Trustees, and Other Thoughts," in Public Debt and its Finance in a Model of a Macroeconomic Policy Game: Papers Presented at a Workshop held in Antalya, Turkey on October 10- 11, 1997, , ed. by Tahire Akder. This paper combined a brief description of my work on negotiation with comments on other papers presented on central banking and a new paradigm for thinking of judges and central bankers as trustees working on behalf of beneficiaries as directed by settlors. It has my 4 P's Theory of motivation: Place, Pride, Policy, and Power. Available, including a post- publication postscript adding Principle, http://rasmusen.org/published/Rasmusen_98.BOOK.trustees.NEW.pdf).
This is clearly all religion. But it is not the first time that the elites cling to the religion more strongly when it is being questioned. Politics and the consequences of elite politics on the ground in the US and Europe will put paid to this nonsense. Defenestration is coming.
Humanity has always had a weak spot for priests who proclaim that we will burn in hell because of our guilt. CO2 is the gas of life. We would benefit for more of it. It's effect on climate is tiny. See CO2COALITION.ORG
"It has become habitual to think of our relationship with energy as one of transition: with wood superseded by coal, coal by oil, oil by nuclear and then at some future point all replaced by green sources. Jean-Baptiste Fressoz’s devastating but unnervingly entertaining book shows what an extraordinary delusion this is. Far from the industrial era passing through a series of transformations, each new phase has in practice remained almost wholly entangled with the previous one. Indeed the very idea of transition turns out to be untrue.
"The author shares the same acute anxiety about the need for a green transition as the rest of us, but shows how, disastrously, our industrial history has in fact been based on symbiosis, with each major energy source feeding off the others. Using a fascinating array of examples, Fressoz describes how we have gorged on all forms of energy – with whole forests needed to prop up coal mines, coal remaining central to the creation of innumerable new products and oil still central to our lives. The world now burns more wood and coal than ever before.
"This book reveals an uncomfortable truth: ‘transition’ was originally itself promoted by energy companies, not as a genuine plan, but as a means to put off any meaningful change. More and More and More forces its readers to understand the modern world in all its voracious reality, and the true nature of the challenges heading our way."
Jean-Baptiste Fressoz is a historian of science and technology, previously at Imperial College London, now based in Paris at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.
"Irresistible March of Energy Realism: Trillions in pork is doing nothing to influence CO2 or climate change." By Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. on Nov. 19, 2024
"As this column has pointed out, subsidies for green energy, adopted globally by the Obama imitators in lieu of carbon taxes, only end up subsidizing more energy use, including copious fossil energy to make batteries, wind turbines and solar panels. ...
"The faulty assumption here is that phasing out fossil energy will be any easier in 50 years when the world is consuming twice as much energy and half is still fossil energy, producing the same emissions as today. A likelier outcome: When the green subsidies stop, as inevitably they must, the result will be a burst of emissions as the formerly subsidized users shift to fossil energy to stay solvent."
* * *
"An Oxfam report finds up to $41 billion in World Bank climate spending, backed by U.S. taxpayers, unaccounted for. This is only the beginning. What happens when voters realize not billions but trillions doled out to the green-energy lobby have had no effect on atmospheric CO2 levels or climate? ...
"Our path—unavoidable adaptation—was laid down long before today’s believer-denier debate, language effectively developed and deployed to promote climate pork, not meaningful climate action. Last year, by one accounting, global emissions topped 40 billion tons for the first time. I suspect carbon taxes may yet be adopted, albeit for fiscal reasons."
Well-argued piece, Having some insider knowledge of the European institutions I would say that there is a rather widespread unease among ECB staff about the lack of rigour exhibited by the likes of Lagarde and Elderson (neither of which, by the way, is trained in economics) when discussing climate change and monetary policy. Elderson was probably reacting to such unease among staff when made the notorious remark that staff needed to be ‘re-programmed.’
I am all in on facing climate change heads on, but Lagarde given her ECB position should stay away from this value-laden policy issue. Her preaching on this is probably a habit from her IMF time, when she was able to pontificate about every issue under the sun.
I've long been frustrated by the extent to which the global "cool kids" have bought into the idea that climate change is the most important issue of our time, that it can be prevented by the right wonky policies, and that it is their proper role to implement these policies without bothering to convince their respective publics that this is the right thing to do.
The waste of resources is staggering. The US has committed $800 billion through the "Inflation Reduction Act", much of which is devoted to green energy and "the energy transition". Meanwhile, large parts of the Navy are undeployable because of maintenance work that can't be funded. I'm sure the Air Force and the Army are equally hamstrung, but not as visible.
We are saved, thus far, by the fact that Russia's investment in its military has been incompetent and corrupt, giving little military capability. I'm not sure we can expect China to be as ineffective.
Outstanding post. Lagarde, as a good politician, recognizes this is a great strategy: focus on something that (1) is labeled as 'existential', and therefore justifies any action you want to take; and (2) the outcome of which will only be resolved in the very long term, so you avoid any accountability.
The most damaging part, as you correctly note, is that this further undermines the credibility of technical expertise. "The Science" has become a religion, and Lagarde puts herself forward as yet another prophet or high priestess.
John Cochrane says it brilliantly. Wondering just how much navel gazing Europeans are going to do is the question in economics, energy, immigration, and alliances.
Perhaps all will become clear to them when the Russians are marching down the main street in Brussels.
It’s always fun to hear and read the assumptions that if the US & EU proceed with their climate change policies that economies in China, SW Asia, Africa, South America et.al. will fall in line and the world will be all sunshine and rainbows 🌈.
Yes, climate change is real. Always has been. Earth's climate, and the climates of other planets in our solar system are changing. How could it be otherwise?
It is amazing hubris to think that an insignificant species that has been on earth for an amazingly small fraction ot the earth's existence (something like 0.00007) is somehow responsible for climate change and can somehow keep the climate from changing.
Wouldn't it be refreshing and engaging if people who claim to be scientists and people who claim to be thoughtful, critical thinkers actually were?
What a fool President Lagarde is! And a blackguard, of course (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/blackguard). We outside of Europe should be thankful our central bank presidents are not so power-mad.
But even Europeans, I guess, should be happy she's behind the times so much. A really up-to-date central banker would be using the bank's powers to intervene in the Russo-Ukrainian War.
This isn't surprising. You knew that after the election in the U.S. European leaders would get nervous about their ability to drive global behavioral change. As such, they are trying to alarm people to stimulate action and prevent efforts to slow G20 fiscal commitments to funding programs... "keep your eye on the ball!"
It is rather ironic that they have this attitude of "Don't bother me with talk of nuclear war, invasion, or middle-east conflict right now, I'm trying to save us from climate catastrophe in 75 years." The fact that they are so ignorant of other more prescient threats makes one wonder if this is more than just an effort to "save the planet" but more of an agenda to remake the systems of governance of the planet.
My entry for Most Obscurely Published Paper is on point. You want a central banker who cares only about inflation, nothing else.
"A Theory of Trustees, and Other Thoughts," in Public Debt and its Finance in a Model of a Macroeconomic Policy Game: Papers Presented at a Workshop held in Antalya, Turkey on October 10- 11, 1997, , ed. by Tahire Akder. This paper combined a brief description of my work on negotiation with comments on other papers presented on central banking and a new paradigm for thinking of judges and central bankers as trustees working on behalf of beneficiaries as directed by settlors. It has my 4 P's Theory of motivation: Place, Pride, Policy, and Power. Available, including a post- publication postscript adding Principle, http://rasmusen.org/published/Rasmusen_98.BOOK.trustees.NEW.pdf).
See also my notes for a new paper based on this (http://rasmusen.org/papers/trustees-rasmusen.pdf) and the discussion in Measuring Judicial Independence applying it to judges at https://rasmusen.org/published/Rasmusen-03-5ps-japan.txt
she's a lawyer
not a scientist
she might be a nice person, but she's High Church elite
Europeans can't stop being European
it's what they do
it's who they are
as long as they're in meetings they can't do much harm
they love meetings
This is clearly all religion. But it is not the first time that the elites cling to the religion more strongly when it is being questioned. Politics and the consequences of elite politics on the ground in the US and Europe will put paid to this nonsense. Defenestration is coming.
'Floods do not threaten our economic survival" ... as long as we can swim.
Humanity has always had a weak spot for priests who proclaim that we will burn in hell because of our guilt. CO2 is the gas of life. We would benefit for more of it. It's effect on climate is tiny. See CO2COALITION.ORG
"More and More and More: An All-Consuming History of Energy" by Jean-Baptiste Fressoz
https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/464145/more-and-more-and-more-by-fressoz-jean-baptiste/9780241718896
"It has become habitual to think of our relationship with energy as one of transition: with wood superseded by coal, coal by oil, oil by nuclear and then at some future point all replaced by green sources. Jean-Baptiste Fressoz’s devastating but unnervingly entertaining book shows what an extraordinary delusion this is. Far from the industrial era passing through a series of transformations, each new phase has in practice remained almost wholly entangled with the previous one. Indeed the very idea of transition turns out to be untrue.
"The author shares the same acute anxiety about the need for a green transition as the rest of us, but shows how, disastrously, our industrial history has in fact been based on symbiosis, with each major energy source feeding off the others. Using a fascinating array of examples, Fressoz describes how we have gorged on all forms of energy – with whole forests needed to prop up coal mines, coal remaining central to the creation of innumerable new products and oil still central to our lives. The world now burns more wood and coal than ever before.
"This book reveals an uncomfortable truth: ‘transition’ was originally itself promoted by energy companies, not as a genuine plan, but as a means to put off any meaningful change. More and More and More forces its readers to understand the modern world in all its voracious reality, and the true nature of the challenges heading our way."
Jean-Baptiste Fressoz is a historian of science and technology, previously at Imperial College London, now based in Paris at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.
"Irresistible March of Energy Realism: Trillions in pork is doing nothing to influence CO2 or climate change." By Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. on Nov. 19, 2024
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/irresistible-march-of-energy-realism-new-book-climate-change-trump-appointee-4a56abca
"As this column has pointed out, subsidies for green energy, adopted globally by the Obama imitators in lieu of carbon taxes, only end up subsidizing more energy use, including copious fossil energy to make batteries, wind turbines and solar panels. ...
"The faulty assumption here is that phasing out fossil energy will be any easier in 50 years when the world is consuming twice as much energy and half is still fossil energy, producing the same emissions as today. A likelier outcome: When the green subsidies stop, as inevitably they must, the result will be a burst of emissions as the formerly subsidized users shift to fossil energy to stay solvent."
* * *
"An Oxfam report finds up to $41 billion in World Bank climate spending, backed by U.S. taxpayers, unaccounted for. This is only the beginning. What happens when voters realize not billions but trillions doled out to the green-energy lobby have had no effect on atmospheric CO2 levels or climate? ...
"Our path—unavoidable adaptation—was laid down long before today’s believer-denier debate, language effectively developed and deployed to promote climate pork, not meaningful climate action. Last year, by one accounting, global emissions topped 40 billion tons for the first time. I suspect carbon taxes may yet be adopted, albeit for fiscal reasons."
Well-argued piece, Having some insider knowledge of the European institutions I would say that there is a rather widespread unease among ECB staff about the lack of rigour exhibited by the likes of Lagarde and Elderson (neither of which, by the way, is trained in economics) when discussing climate change and monetary policy. Elderson was probably reacting to such unease among staff when made the notorious remark that staff needed to be ‘re-programmed.’
I am all in on facing climate change heads on, but Lagarde given her ECB position should stay away from this value-laden policy issue. Her preaching on this is probably a habit from her IMF time, when she was able to pontificate about every issue under the sun.
I've long been frustrated by the extent to which the global "cool kids" have bought into the idea that climate change is the most important issue of our time, that it can be prevented by the right wonky policies, and that it is their proper role to implement these policies without bothering to convince their respective publics that this is the right thing to do.
The waste of resources is staggering. The US has committed $800 billion through the "Inflation Reduction Act", much of which is devoted to green energy and "the energy transition". Meanwhile, large parts of the Navy are undeployable because of maintenance work that can't be funded. I'm sure the Air Force and the Army are equally hamstrung, but not as visible.
We are saved, thus far, by the fact that Russia's investment in its military has been incompetent and corrupt, giving little military capability. I'm not sure we can expect China to be as ineffective.
It suggests that Lagarde and the ECB board have lost their bearings.
Outstanding post. Lagarde, as a good politician, recognizes this is a great strategy: focus on something that (1) is labeled as 'existential', and therefore justifies any action you want to take; and (2) the outcome of which will only be resolved in the very long term, so you avoid any accountability.
The most damaging part, as you correctly note, is that this further undermines the credibility of technical expertise. "The Science" has become a religion, and Lagarde puts herself forward as yet another prophet or high priestess.