Fwd: Social Cost of Carbon - new NAS report (on methodology - not values of)

[Ronal W. Larson]

List:

I was thinking biochar (not geoengineering) when I listened and did a further search on today’s webinar.  One main message out of this is that biochar will never get much incentive support from climate sources if decisions are based on a discount rate of 5%.

I have not done much reading yet except looking through the 26 slides.  

The presentation and video itself (probably available soon) and scanning their long document convinced me that this NAS Committee did a very thorough job.  I like their 4-part methodology.

Anyone else know more on this topic that might help biochar growth?

Ron

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Ronal W. Larson" <rongre...@comcast.net>

Subject: Social Cost of Carbon - new NAS report (on methodology - not values of)

Date: January 11, 2017 at 2:18:21 PM MST

To: Geoengineering <Geoengi...@googlegroups.com>

List:

1.  I listened to a webinar today by the panel that put a (free , huge @394 pages) new report together.  Here is part of the first page, showing how to download the full report:

  http://www.nap.edu/24651 

   394 pages | 6 x 9 | PAPERBACK ISBN 978-0-309-45420-9 | DOI: 10.17226/24651

'Valuing Climate Changes: Updating Estimation of the Social Cost of Carbon Dioxide”

2.    The slides used today are at:  http://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/dbassesite/documents/webpage/dbasse_176580.pdf

3. Part of the history and a little of the methodology is captured in this part of slide 13 (out of 26):

4.  This figure is available on page 5 of this much shorter August US Interagency document

 https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/inforeg/scc_tsd_final_clean_8_26_16.pdf

5.       Nothing here at any of these three sites on geoengineering or CDR, and only the few numerical values given, but still likely important new data in justifying future Geo costs.

Ron