What do you think?
Rate this book


260 pages, Paperback
First published January 31, 2012
Zero pollution will mean shutting down most industry and most of the economy. All other policy options--both command-and-control and market-oriented environmental policies--involve allowing some pollution. Absolutely zero pollution is neither viable nor intellectually serious.I didn't find this a particularly charitable representation of greens--almost like he was engaging with the most convenient adversary. There is a lot to be done between where we are (~40 gigatons of CO2e added annually) and net zero emissions. When I read a work like Tyler Cowen's Big Business, I basically understand him as arguing that large corporations are undervalued. When I read a work about the environment, I often understand the writer as arguing that the planetary systems we have relied on to build civilization are undervalued. But if I was to treat Taylor's argument the way he does environmental arguments, I suppose I'd say that dismissing environmental concerns is not intellectually serious. Taylor goes on to write: "The reasonable policy goal is to balance the benefits of production with the cost of pollution, or, to put it another way, bring the social cost and social benefits of production in to align with each other." Because that alignment is nebulous, and because economics assigns very little value to the atmosphere, we quickly devolve into negotiations about tradeoffs.