« 2009 — A Year We Will Live To Regret | Main

February 02, 2010



Thank you for this post. Much of the specific analysis was far over my head (I did try!), but I appreciated the articulate way you discuss the basic assumptions at work behind people's positions and your 6 conclusions which I totally agree with.

One question I have concerns your focusing on 450 PPM as the level beyond which we should not go. You may have addressed this elsewhere on your blog, but many people focus on 350 PPM. They seem to base this at least in part on James Hanson's research. The IPCC number is often considered outdated at this point.

A basic explanation for the 350 number can be found on the science page at Bill McKibben's site 350.org : http://www.350.org/about/science

James Hansen's research article explaining the 350 number can be downloaded here:

I am curious to know your thoughts about what the best estimate of the safe level of Co2 should actually be and why you choose 450.

Thanks for a very interesting and thoughtful post!


boxing machine

The most effective article, I agree with most of the things you mentioned. Thank you very much.

Tuyen Dung

well.. wonderful! you're a pro trader. I think so. Your writing really make sense. thanks!

Viec Lam Hai Duong

Thanks for nice share! Economic Growth And Climate Change. I think we economic growth the climate will be hard to predict.


2010 Economic Impacts Report: Additional Analysis of the Potential Economic Costs to the State of Washington of a Business-As-Usual Approach to Climate ...

The comments to this entry are closed.