Context: forecasts were collected in mid-2022 with outcomes assessed by mid-2025. Here's the report: forecastingresearch.org/near-term-xp...
It'd be good to see details on how "resolved" values were set. H2 costs vary with local renewables, utilization, subsidy eligibility, etc.
It'd be good to see details on how "resolved" values were set. H2 costs vary with local renewables, utilization, subsidy eligibility, etc.
Assessing Near-Term Accuracy in the Existential Risk Persuasion Tournament — Forecasting Research Institute
forecastingresearch.org
Climate-tech forecasting check:
🟢 Green H2 in 2024 -- forecasts: $4.50/kg ("superforecasters"), $3.50/kg (experts). Actual: ~$7.50/kg.
🔵 DAC in 2024 -- forecasts: 0.32-0.60 MtCO2/yr. Actual: ~0.01.
Prediction is hard, especially about the future.
🟢 Green H2 in 2024 -- forecasts: $4.50/kg ("superforecasters"), $3.50/kg (experts). Actual: ~$7.50/kg.
🔵 DAC in 2024 -- forecasts: 0.32-0.60 MtCO2/yr. Actual: ~0.01.
Prediction is hard, especially about the future.
One Battle After Another in 70mm. The only PTA that’s ever matched it for me was The Master premiere at The Castro, where Maya Rudolph was casually working the poster table. Is there a more iconic duo?
I'm pleased to share comments on the draft DOE Climate Working Group report that I coauthored with colleagues: www.epri.com/research/pro...
The energy use modeling detail is impressive, though the magnitude of impact is relatively small ($25 average with some locations decreasing and others increasing).
This is a terrific synthesis of the literature and brings together many moving parts. It's great to see transparent assumptions and range of values that reflect uncertainty in the literature. Check out the full paper here: www.brookings.edu/articles/who...
Who bears the burden of climate inaction? | Brookings
www.brookings.edu
by John Bistline — Reposted by: Kimberly A. Clausing
Great paper measuring the current costs of climate inaction in the U.S. @kclausing.bsky.social, @knittelmit.bsky.social, and @cwolfram.bsky.social find that wildfire smoke and higher insurance drive household costs more than direct temperature-related effects, both for costs and mortality risks.
It's great to see an updated edition of @gregnemet.net's excellent book "How Solar Energy Became Cheap." I reviewed the first edition and have been recommending it ever since: gregnemet.net/book
Here's my review in The Energy Journal: www.jstor.org/stable/26937...
Here's my review in The Energy Journal: www.jstor.org/stable/26937...
Emissions and mortality risks dropped over time due to scrubber installation and coal plant retirements: www.science.org/doi/10.1126/...
Interesting article from Science: "Exposure to coal PM2.5 was associated with 2.1 times greater mortality risk than exposure to PM2.5 from all sources. A total of 460,000 deaths were attributable to coal PM2.5"
Excited to be speaking as part of the plenary on nuclear energy at the 42nd USAEE/IAEE North American Conference, Nov 16-19 in Fort Worth. Hope to see you there!
by Kimberly A. Clausing — Reposted by: John Bistline, Robert Wolfe, Antonio Fatás
🧵 (1/7) With @knittelmit.bsky.social and @cwolfram.bsky.social, happy to announce our new paper on “Who Bears the Burden of Climate Inaction?”, just posted for BPEA @brookings.edu.
We find large climate cost impacts that vary by both geography and income.
www.brookings.edu/articles/who...
We find large climate cost impacts that vary by both geography and income.
www.brookings.edu/articles/who...
by John Bistline — Reposted by: Richard S.J. Tol, Stacy D. VanDeveer
NEW TOOL: a one-stop, searchable home for 250+ state energy and climate policies, targets, and incentives. Perfect for planners, policy-makers, and analysts.
apps.epri.com/energy-polic...
apps.epri.com/energy-polic...
Nominative determinism is undefeated. First Al Gore, next Al Roker runs climate model emulators.
Festivus came early this year, and I've got a few data visualization grievances to air...
Here's a link to the paper by @joseph-s-shapiro.bsky.social and Reed Walker: www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=...
Is Air Pollution Regulation Too Lenient? Evidence from US Offset Markets
(September 2025) - We develop a framework to estimate the marginal cost of air pollution regulation and apply it to assess policy efficiency. We exploit a provision of the Clean Air Act that requires ...
www.aeaweb.org
by John Bistline — Reposted by: Richard S.J. Tol, Joseph Shapiro
Cool new AER paper uses data from Clean Air Act offset markets to assess the efficiency of air pollution regulation. The analysis finds that marginal benefits of abatement exceed mean offset prices more than ten-fold, across most regions and pollutants.
by John Bistline — Reposted by: Richard S.J. Tol
Giving a talk on energy modeling in Hollywood. “All models are wrong, but some are useful” hits different with locals.
Great new analysis that shows how a climate coalition could reduce emissions 7x more than current policies while raising ~$200B/yr in revenue, mostly from domestic carbon pricing.
I was surprised to see that >80% CO2 in the steel, cement, aluminum, fertilizers are already covered by carbon pricing!
I was surprised to see that >80% CO2 in the steel, cement, aluminum, fertilizers are already covered by carbon pricing!
California's electricity bills are rising, not because of clean energy, but because of how fixed costs are included in rates. Great post from Meredith Fowlie on the problem and potential policy levers: energyathaas.wordpress.com/2025/09/15/r...
Interesting new AER paper uses the US-Soviet rivalry in space technology to isolate windfall R&D spending. They find a 77% social rate of return to NASA contractor spending, which is similar to the Bloom, et al. (2013) value of 55%.
www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=...
www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=...
Important research, not only for thinking about the environmental benefits of transport electrification, but broader emissions accounting for electric sector interventions like energy storage, data centers, and electrolytic H2. These issues are important as Scope 2 Guidance is being updated.
Incredible map of electric utility service territories, showing the complexity and significant overlap, from Billy Roberts at NREL
Post-publication peer review is an important part of the scientific process. Kudos to Bob for taking the time to carefully unpack this paper.
Bob Kopp
@bobkopp.net
· Sep 5
I had an engagement with blogger, failed California gubernatorial candidate, and self-identified reporter Michael Shellenberger this past week, which started out being about this new paper being heralded by climate skeptics as disproving global sea-level acceleration. (LONG 🧵)
Here's the @pnas.org paper on "AI-AI Bias:" www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/...
We worried AIs would replace us. Turns out they might just ignore us.
We worried AIs would replace us. Turns out they might just ignore us.
The most 2025 result: AI prefers AI. In tests across product listings and paper abstracts, LLMs consistently favored AI-generated text over human text.
Biofuels with CCS have the advantage of providing negative emissions flows, which are valuable for costly to abate segments (aviation). That route is also has the benefit of not incurring an upfront cost premium. In contrast, H2 is expensive to produce, costly to deliver, and costly for vehicles.