What do you think?
Rate this book
The Spirit of Green: The Economics of Collisions and Contagions in a Crowded World
From a Nobel Prize–winning pioneer in environmental economics, an innovative account of how and why “green thinking” could cure many of the world’s most serious problems—from global warming to pandemicsSolving the world’s biggest problems—from climate catastrophe and pandemics to wildfires and corporate malfeasance—requires, more than anything else, coming up with new ways to manage the powerful interactions that surround us. For carbon emissions and other environmental damage, this means ensuring that those responsible pay their full costs rather than continuing to pass them along to others, including future generations. In The Spirit of Green, Nobel Prize–winning economist William Nordhaus describes a new way of green thinking that would help us overcome our biggest challenges without sacrificing economic prosperity, in large part by accounting for the spillover costs of economic collisions.In a discussion that ranges from the history of the environmental movement to the Green New Deal, Nordhaus explains how the spirit of green thinking provides a compelling and hopeful new perspective on modern life. At the heart of green thinking is a recognition that the globalized world is shaped not by isolated individuals but rather by innumerable interactions inside and outside the economy. He shows how rethinking economic efficiency, sustainability, politics, profits, taxes, individual ethics, corporate social responsibility, finance, and more would improve the effectiveness and equity of our society. And he offers specific solutions—on how to price carbon, how to pursue low-carbon technologies, how to design an efficient tax system, and how to foster international cooperation through climate clubs.The result is a groundbreaking new vision of how we can have our environment and our economy too.
350 pages, Kindle Edition
First published May 18, 2021
40 people are currently reading
448 people want to read
About the author
William D. Nordhaus
36 books74 followersWilliam Dawbney Nordhaus is an American economist and Sterling Professor of Economics at Yale University, best known for his work in economic modelling and climate change.
He is one of the laureates of the 2018 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences. Nordhaus received the prize "for integrating climate change into long-run macroeconomic analysis".
He studied at Yale University and completed his PhD in 1967 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He has been associated with Yale University since 1967 and a professor there since 1973. He has been a member of the Brookings Panel on Economic Activity since 1972, and from 1977 to 1979 he was an economic advisor to President Jimmy Carter’s administration.
William Nordhaus’ findings deal with interactions between society, the economy and climate change. In the mid-1990s, he created a quantitative model that describes the global interplay between the economy and the climate. Nordhaus’ model is used to examine the consequences of climate policy interventions, for example carbon taxes.
He is one of the laureates of the 2018 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences. Nordhaus received the prize "for integrating climate change into long-run macroeconomic analysis".
He studied at Yale University and completed his PhD in 1967 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He has been associated with Yale University since 1967 and a professor there since 1973. He has been a member of the Brookings Panel on Economic Activity since 1972, and from 1977 to 1979 he was an economic advisor to President Jimmy Carter’s administration.
William Nordhaus’ findings deal with interactions between society, the economy and climate change. In the mid-1990s, he created a quantitative model that describes the global interplay between the economy and the climate. Nordhaus’ model is used to examine the consequences of climate policy interventions, for example carbon taxes.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews
April 9, 2022
This book is definitionally why economics is called the miserable science.
Although clearly researched, academically rigorous and expertly explained, it fails spectacularly in imagining a paradigm outside of what he knows.
His entire argument is built on the wrongful assumption that there is no existential threat to human existence if we allow warming to 3 degrees C. Also, for someone to say the costs/benefits are favorable at a threshold that would condemn hundreds of millions to refugees status or even worse is neo-colonial, self-centered and morally corrupt. He can’t seem to get past his econometric handcuffs - how do you model the cost of the complete failing of ecological systems, inclusive of humans? Simply put, you can’t. It’s the wrong tool for the question they he fails to address.
This author would be well served to feel, not think. The author should also consider the fields of climate justice, human rights law, bio mimicry. This book failed to discuss these.
Finally, there was no convincing counter-argument to “deep green” approaches other than it’s hard and not yet supported by many voters. He fails to realize he could be a catalyst to change that.
Although clearly researched, academically rigorous and expertly explained, it fails spectacularly in imagining a paradigm outside of what he knows.
His entire argument is built on the wrongful assumption that there is no existential threat to human existence if we allow warming to 3 degrees C. Also, for someone to say the costs/benefits are favorable at a threshold that would condemn hundreds of millions to refugees status or even worse is neo-colonial, self-centered and morally corrupt. He can’t seem to get past his econometric handcuffs - how do you model the cost of the complete failing of ecological systems, inclusive of humans? Simply put, you can’t. It’s the wrong tool for the question they he fails to address.
This author would be well served to feel, not think. The author should also consider the fields of climate justice, human rights law, bio mimicry. This book failed to discuss these.
Finally, there was no convincing counter-argument to “deep green” approaches other than it’s hard and not yet supported by many voters. He fails to realize he could be a catalyst to change that.
January 12, 2023
這本書的書名與內容完全相符，卻不會讓人覺得倍受啟發，小小失望。
對於學過一點經濟學的人來說，這本書略嫌粗淺。
作者用經濟學理論把環境議題在個人行動、企業責任、國內政策、國際關係等層面逐一爬梳，整體來說並未脫離外部性與應該正確定價的核心觀念，大部分的論述也比較是在佐證定價的重要性，然而實際應用面的困難，卻是其文字與圖表不足以具體說明的，因此讀起來還是呼籲的感受居多。
印象比較深刻是作者有提到「不後悔政策」，也就是如果一個人可以多做一點點也不會覺得有什麼差，但是這一點點卻能帶給別人很大的不一樣，那這個人就可以去多做他覺得沒差的這一點點。
對於學過一點經濟學的人來說，這本書略嫌粗淺。
作者用經濟學理論把環境議題在個人行動、企業責任、國內政策、國際關係等層面逐一爬梳，整體來說並未脫離外部性與應該正確定價的核心觀念，大部分的論述也比較是在佐證定價的重要性，然而實際應用面的困難，卻是其文字與圖表不足以具體說明的，因此讀起來還是呼籲的感受居多。
印象比較深刻是作者有提到「不後悔政策」，也就是如果一個人可以多做一點點也不會覺得有什麼差，但是這一點點卻能帶給別人很大的不一樣，那這個人就可以去多做他覺得沒差的這一點點。
September 27, 2021
4.5 stars.
While a background in economics is helpful in understanding many of the concepts in this book, it is also unnecessary. Nordhaus writes simply, clearly, and explains much of the jargon used. From the basics of externalities, to navigating political and economic levers for change, I learnt a lot from this book.
It's difficult to summarise a problem as big as climate change in a single book. Often one takes on a specific lens; viewing the issue from a biocentric angle of biodiversity and resource management, or a more human-centric approach. Nordhaus manages to present quite a balanced view, explaining each side and the arguments carefully.
This does not mean that he is without opinion. He advocates very clearly in the last few chapters (and more subtly throughout the book) on his thoughts of a global carbon tax and international compact as a possible solution to the problem. In a sense it's also a study on game theory (without really mentioning that terminology) and the idea of managing global commons.
I love that he not only brings in his own ideas, but builds on the discourse of others; Solow, Friedman, etc. Diving into the history of thought, exploring how different people viewed Green and Sustainability differently with different information.
The Spirit of Green is aptly named. I am not sure how to explain this sentiment, but if you read the book you'll know.
Mostly great stuff!
While a background in economics is helpful in understanding many of the concepts in this book, it is also unnecessary. Nordhaus writes simply, clearly, and explains much of the jargon used. From the basics of externalities, to navigating political and economic levers for change, I learnt a lot from this book.
It's difficult to summarise a problem as big as climate change in a single book. Often one takes on a specific lens; viewing the issue from a biocentric angle of biodiversity and resource management, or a more human-centric approach. Nordhaus manages to present quite a balanced view, explaining each side and the arguments carefully.
This does not mean that he is without opinion. He advocates very clearly in the last few chapters (and more subtly throughout the book) on his thoughts of a global carbon tax and international compact as a possible solution to the problem. In a sense it's also a study on game theory (without really mentioning that terminology) and the idea of managing global commons.
I love that he not only brings in his own ideas, but builds on the discourse of others; Solow, Friedman, etc. Diving into the history of thought, exploring how different people viewed Green and Sustainability differently with different information.
The Spirit of Green is aptly named. I am not sure how to explain this sentiment, but if you read the book you'll know.
Mostly great stuff!
August 22, 2021
I thought this book was great. It provides the economic and sometimes moral rationale for market and government based interventions to address major environmental challenges. It is reasonable and both hopeful. And the writing is clear and succinct.
One area of concern however, is that while Dr. Nordhaus is quick to praise other economists who have done work in this area, but not a single one is a woman. This is not my subfield of economics, but is it really the case that none of the important work here is done by women? That is very hard to believe.
One area of concern however, is that while Dr. Nordhaus is quick to praise other economists who have done work in this area, but not a single one is a woman. This is not my subfield of economics, but is it really the case that none of the important work here is done by women? That is very hard to believe.
August 9, 2023
In 2018 William Nordhaus became a co-recipient of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his work on attempting to integrate climate change issues into mainstream economics. He began studying this problem back in the early 1990s, when acid rain and the ozone hole were a bigger public concern than greenhouse gas emissions.
The Spirit of Green is quite effectively written in that it clearly conveys Nordhaus' ideas, and so this review will mostly focus on the actual ideas themselves. He finished writing the book as COVID-19 closed in around us all, and so he chose to add some thoughts about the need for governments to act in emergency situations. Strangely, he refrains from talking about any economic issues related to pandemics. A couple of obvious topics would have been to what extent governments should provide financial support to individuals and businesses affected by pandemic restrictions and the cost and availability of new vaccines.
Nordhaus advises government preparedness to meet emergencies such as future pandemics and appropriate government intervention. But his writing about climate change itself doesn't seem to even remotely suggest that this issue should itself perhaps be treated as an emergency right now. He is certainly no neoliberal, but, as a self-professed neoclassical economist, he constrains himself to stay within the limits of his professional outlook. His recommendation to apply a carbon tax to “internalize the externality” has still not been applied in his own country, the US, and has mostly been applied only rather modestly in some other countries. Yet he comes across as patiently optimistic. Perhaps he is encouraged by the fact that government intervention in North America and Europe did prompt technological innovation that significantly reduced acid rain and that a global banning of CFCs reduced the ozone hole. He must hope that a similar result will eventually reduce greenhouse gas emissions ideally on a global scale.
If Nordhaus feels any frustration at this much slower response to curtailing greenhouse gas emissions, it never comes out in the book. In fact, he exorts business and individuals not to try to cut back too much, but only enough to just cancel the cost to society of each additional ton of carbon dioxide emitted. One reason he is so calm is that he firmly believes in the concept of substitution of goods. This is all very well for, say, the creative destruction of the VCR business in favour of DVD technology. But irrevocable damage to the planet isn't really creative destruction, and it's unclear what technological gadgets will make up for the loss.
So, what is the right price to put on a ton of carbon dioxide? Nordhaus explains very smoothly the benefits of simply putting a price on the emissions to signal the actual environmental cost. It all sounds so easy, rational, straightforward. Perhaps the most reasonable thing is to start off with a price that business and consumers will accept and then crank it up over time. That way, you use it as a signal for society as a whole to find ways to shift away from fossil fuels over time, without claiming to know what the correct price is. Nordhaus occasionally hints at this, although he mostly seems convinced that there is a correct price. He often mentions the (now slightly dated) US government estimate of $40 per ton of carbon dioxide, which was actually calculated using a version of Nordhaus' DICE model.
But, even if you have a good handle on the actual future costs of adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere now, the present value is strongly dependent on the discount rate. This is a meaningful enough concept if you are thinking of lending money to someone who you hope will repay it to you in ten or so years time, but what does it mean to discount the future value of the climate for your or anyone else's grandchildren?
Nordhaus talks about a pollution Laffer curve. The standard Laffer curve is meant to show that if you tax economic activity too highly, that activity will cease altogether and you will receive no tax revenue. Nordhaus focusses a lot on the revenue generating capabilities of a carbon tax, without clarifying how he thinks this revenue should be spent. If it is going to be vital for stimulating a Green New Deal initiative, then it is important to actually raise sufficient revenue. But if it is primarily meant to be a signal for all of us to find ways to shift away from fossil fuels, then surely it doesn't matter if it increases over time to become such a prohibitive penalty that it serves to ban certain activities altogether. Who cares that it raises no revenue if it has done its job?
Nordhaus steers well clear of so-called tipping points. He does mention fat-tailed probabilities in a general hand-waving way, but he never comes right out to admit that no minor adjustment to today's economy will help if we are actually moving towards the possibility of massive methane emissions from melting tundra, or a significant destabilization of the Greenland or Antarctic ice sheets. Come to that, even the minor (in geophysical terms) melting of the Himalayan glaciers will not be a minor issue to the millions who depend on them as a primary source of water. Is $40 per ton supposed to cover that?
Since Nordhaus first started thinking about these issues thirty years ago, considerable progress has been made in renewable technologies such as solar and wind, but the large-scale adoption has been miserably slow. Nordhaus is brutally realistic when he states that, even if carbon taxes were applied globally to his complete satisfaction, there is no chance that we will keep the global temperature rise within 2º C, and little chance that we will stay within 3º degrees for that matter. There are other more inspirational economists who propose more radical ideas, such as Kate Raworth's doughnut economics. Raworth and others are ultimately attempting to change the global zeitgeist in order to move us all towards a truly sustainable mode of economic behaviour. This is absolutely necessary but it is also (if one is to be even mildly realistic) hard to imagine it ever happening. Meanwhile, it surely doesn't hurt to have someone like Nordhaus try to nudge the more reactionary members of society to accept some sort of cost structure for what has become the most omnipresent economic externality of them all.
The Spirit of Green is quite effectively written in that it clearly conveys Nordhaus' ideas, and so this review will mostly focus on the actual ideas themselves. He finished writing the book as COVID-19 closed in around us all, and so he chose to add some thoughts about the need for governments to act in emergency situations. Strangely, he refrains from talking about any economic issues related to pandemics. A couple of obvious topics would have been to what extent governments should provide financial support to individuals and businesses affected by pandemic restrictions and the cost and availability of new vaccines.
Nordhaus advises government preparedness to meet emergencies such as future pandemics and appropriate government intervention. But his writing about climate change itself doesn't seem to even remotely suggest that this issue should itself perhaps be treated as an emergency right now. He is certainly no neoliberal, but, as a self-professed neoclassical economist, he constrains himself to stay within the limits of his professional outlook. His recommendation to apply a carbon tax to “internalize the externality” has still not been applied in his own country, the US, and has mostly been applied only rather modestly in some other countries. Yet he comes across as patiently optimistic. Perhaps he is encouraged by the fact that government intervention in North America and Europe did prompt technological innovation that significantly reduced acid rain and that a global banning of CFCs reduced the ozone hole. He must hope that a similar result will eventually reduce greenhouse gas emissions ideally on a global scale.
If Nordhaus feels any frustration at this much slower response to curtailing greenhouse gas emissions, it never comes out in the book. In fact, he exorts business and individuals not to try to cut back too much, but only enough to just cancel the cost to society of each additional ton of carbon dioxide emitted. One reason he is so calm is that he firmly believes in the concept of substitution of goods. This is all very well for, say, the creative destruction of the VCR business in favour of DVD technology. But irrevocable damage to the planet isn't really creative destruction, and it's unclear what technological gadgets will make up for the loss.
So, what is the right price to put on a ton of carbon dioxide? Nordhaus explains very smoothly the benefits of simply putting a price on the emissions to signal the actual environmental cost. It all sounds so easy, rational, straightforward. Perhaps the most reasonable thing is to start off with a price that business and consumers will accept and then crank it up over time. That way, you use it as a signal for society as a whole to find ways to shift away from fossil fuels over time, without claiming to know what the correct price is. Nordhaus occasionally hints at this, although he mostly seems convinced that there is a correct price. He often mentions the (now slightly dated) US government estimate of $40 per ton of carbon dioxide, which was actually calculated using a version of Nordhaus' DICE model.
But, even if you have a good handle on the actual future costs of adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere now, the present value is strongly dependent on the discount rate. This is a meaningful enough concept if you are thinking of lending money to someone who you hope will repay it to you in ten or so years time, but what does it mean to discount the future value of the climate for your or anyone else's grandchildren?
Nordhaus talks about a pollution Laffer curve. The standard Laffer curve is meant to show that if you tax economic activity too highly, that activity will cease altogether and you will receive no tax revenue. Nordhaus focusses a lot on the revenue generating capabilities of a carbon tax, without clarifying how he thinks this revenue should be spent. If it is going to be vital for stimulating a Green New Deal initiative, then it is important to actually raise sufficient revenue. But if it is primarily meant to be a signal for all of us to find ways to shift away from fossil fuels, then surely it doesn't matter if it increases over time to become such a prohibitive penalty that it serves to ban certain activities altogether. Who cares that it raises no revenue if it has done its job?
Nordhaus steers well clear of so-called tipping points. He does mention fat-tailed probabilities in a general hand-waving way, but he never comes right out to admit that no minor adjustment to today's economy will help if we are actually moving towards the possibility of massive methane emissions from melting tundra, or a significant destabilization of the Greenland or Antarctic ice sheets. Come to that, even the minor (in geophysical terms) melting of the Himalayan glaciers will not be a minor issue to the millions who depend on them as a primary source of water. Is $40 per ton supposed to cover that?
Since Nordhaus first started thinking about these issues thirty years ago, considerable progress has been made in renewable technologies such as solar and wind, but the large-scale adoption has been miserably slow. Nordhaus is brutally realistic when he states that, even if carbon taxes were applied globally to his complete satisfaction, there is no chance that we will keep the global temperature rise within 2º C, and little chance that we will stay within 3º degrees for that matter. There are other more inspirational economists who propose more radical ideas, such as Kate Raworth's doughnut economics. Raworth and others are ultimately attempting to change the global zeitgeist in order to move us all towards a truly sustainable mode of economic behaviour. This is absolutely necessary but it is also (if one is to be even mildly realistic) hard to imagine it ever happening. Meanwhile, it surely doesn't hurt to have someone like Nordhaus try to nudge the more reactionary members of society to accept some sort of cost structure for what has become the most omnipresent economic externality of them all.
April 10, 2023
I read this book because Jordan Peterson made some statements regarding Nordhaus that I just knew were completely out of context, so I wanted to prove him wrong which, unsurprisingly, was very easy. Overall I liked the book, and would give it 3.5 stars. It was informative but a bit too academic, so it wasnt ever really gripping. Found myself at the end just reading for the sake of finishing. That being said, I think there are a ton of good lessons and takeaways scattered throughout, but there is not necessarily a lot of depth on any one of them.
Basically the whole book was one long way of saying the only feasible way to fight climate change is a coordinated carbon tax, and increasing the price of carbon to $40 compared to roughly $2 today. In addition, the target of a 2 degrees celsius increase in global temperatures by 2100 is essentially impossible, and we should likely prepare for somewhere between 3 and 4. I actually found this to be one of the most interesting and compelling points of the book but he didn’t really go into it too deeply. I want to know more about this future state and the economic aspects of it.
Overall the approach to climate change is extremely pragmatic and seemingly impossible to disagree with. However everywhere I look his core ideas are taken completely out of context.
Basically the whole book was one long way of saying the only feasible way to fight climate change is a coordinated carbon tax, and increasing the price of carbon to $40 compared to roughly $2 today. In addition, the target of a 2 degrees celsius increase in global temperatures by 2100 is essentially impossible, and we should likely prepare for somewhere between 3 and 4. I actually found this to be one of the most interesting and compelling points of the book but he didn’t really go into it too deeply. I want to know more about this future state and the economic aspects of it.
Overall the approach to climate change is extremely pragmatic and seemingly impossible to disagree with. However everywhere I look his core ideas are taken completely out of context.
August 9, 2021
I hadn’t heard of Nordhaus’ work, but he was on Michael Shermer’s podcast, and the book sounded interesting. I don’t read enough about climate change issues even though it’s something I care about it, so I picked this up. This book is great and covers a wide range of topics for how we can combat climate change on a national and global level. The author thinks deeply about all of these topics and brings up solutions as well as all of the challenges we face from economic and behavioral angles. This is a great book that I highly recommend, but as someone who isn’t much into economics, there were definitely parts of the book that flew way over my head, but it was still digestible.
February 27, 2024
This book is great for beginners, but it's just that, a sort of introductory book to sustainability sciences basically, albeit fairly comprehensive, and for laymen of course. Unfortunately it works poorly as an audio book. When listening to it, everything turns into a grey mush. Beacuse it's written so factually, it's not easy to pin point all the things that the author actually concludes to be most useful when combating 'green' challenges. Sometimes I find that Nordhaus uses very simple or skewed premises, where a more nuanced discussion would serve the book better. At times the book seems to be written for a hypothetical elderly person who hasn't bothered to follow what's been happening in the world during the last decades. This does presumably make it better suited for people who haven't yet really made up their mind about how important green issues are. However, no such person would of course pick up a book carrying the name of this book. In essence, it's written for people who won't read it. Those who are intrigued by it at face value, will find it disappointingly basic and archaic.
November 15, 2021
This book is written with the rigor we can expect of a renowned professor and also with the clarity that so many times is absent when dealing with subjects of high complexity. Never evading the enormous difficulties with which we are faced, the author clearly states that we are not confronted with an inevitable catastrophe and points out the means to deal with the environmental threat.
Governments, supranational institutions, corporations, groups of interest, NGOs and all of us, common citizens, are called to participate in a decisive, long-term battle. It is crucial that we know how this battle can be won, and only informed people will be able to defend the positions that best protect ourselves and the next generations. The questions and doubts abound - the answers to many of the most important of them can be found in The Spirit of Green.
Governments, supranational institutions, corporations, groups of interest, NGOs and all of us, common citizens, are called to participate in a decisive, long-term battle. It is crucial that we know how this battle can be won, and only informed people will be able to defend the positions that best protect ourselves and the next generations. The questions and doubts abound - the answers to many of the most important of them can be found in The Spirit of Green.
January 1, 2022
Dr. Nordhaus presented to my work for a keynote session, and I ended up reading his book as a result. One thing that really impressed me with this book is that it’s written in a way that someone like me, with literally no economics understanding, felt like they were keeping up with the book. There were many analogies in the book that made it easily digestible, and even though it’s a heavy topic, I really enjoyed the book. I absolutely cruised through the first 200 pages, but then because of life had to slow down, but even though it was almost a month and a bit later between picking the book back up, I never felt like I slowed a step. Would definitely recommend this book, I thought it was interesting, and I’m glad I’ve read it now. It’s definitely given me a lot to think about.
November 14, 2024
The Spirit of Green is a fantastic introduction to environmental economics. In this book, Nordhaus introduces the idea of an efficient pollution level, an important economic concept. In addition, Nordhaus advocates for a carbon tax, and the use of cost-benefit analysis to determine policy choices. Furthermore, Nordhaus explains why there is a need for the careful use of subsidies and other incentives to try to ameliorate the double externality of climate innovation investment. The Spirit of Green is a great book for people who are concerned about how to ensure that people enjoy the highest possible living standards today without compromising the ability of future generations to achieve at least the same standard of living.
May 21, 2022
Probably a good book for anyone who doesn’t know much about economics and is interested in understanding it. If you have taken economics 101, then this book will have little other than economics 101 taught with a green example.
The most interesting chapter of this book was on double externality for green innovation as a challenge to the field. However, the concept isn’t terribly well explained. It would have been good to have focused more resources on this chapter, and actually going into sources rather than simply saying “some sources have said” e.t.c.
The most interesting chapter of this book was on double externality for green innovation as a challenge to the field. However, the concept isn’t terribly well explained. It would have been good to have focused more resources on this chapter, and actually going into sources rather than simply saying “some sources have said” e.t.c.
March 8, 2023
3.5/5 - Good introductory book by the best-known climate economist William D. Nordhaus. If you have read anything by Nordhaus before this or are familiar with the basics of environmental economics, it will be somewhat repetitive in some places. The insight that high carbon prices, smart regulation, and innovation support are the basis for climate action is not new, but it is all the more important. There are also good approaches at the global level through Nordhaus' concept of a so-called climate club.
June 28, 2023
Nordhaus has done really good work on climate econ over the past couple of decades, and I think Spirit of Green works as an attempt to pull those thoughts together. Honestly, I think the broad focus actually hurts more than it helps- I may be biased, I disagree with Nordhaus' notion of a well ordered society on a pretty fundamental level- but he still manages to do a good survey of the ideas and policies that make up the Green movement. All in all, I liked the book, even if I reject some of the core premises.
September 27, 2021
Read the book please. This book is not for the converts to environmentalism, but for the sceptics. If, after reading it, you still sustain a sceptical view, I will be extremely sorry because the negative externality of sustaining that view will also affect me.
Having said this, the writer is extremely cautious not to sound sanctimonious, which he achieves to a large degree. Please read it, even if you have a thousand things to do.
Having said this, the writer is extremely cautious not to sound sanctimonious, which he achieves to a large degree. Please read it, even if you have a thousand things to do.
June 12, 2023
when we discussed carbon tax last semester i did not have a good enough foundational understanding of the mechanisms behind it. this book initially feels like a review of ec10. most importantly it highlights how green economics corrects flaws within standard economics. the emphasis on negative externality got repetitive toward the end. the figures are penetratingly clear though.
August 1, 2021
'Finding the right mixture of market and government is one of the most vexing issues of economic and environmental policies. Each plays a central role in maintaining the balance between improving living standards and controlling pollution.'
November 1, 2021
Ws mas un maual de economia que un ensayo
September 24, 2022
Long and dry dive into green economics possibilities
May 12, 2023
Una buena introducción a la economía ambiental.
July 23, 2025
A reminder to myself not to buy a book based on its cover. Unfathomably shite. Still a cool cover, albeit borrowed from Bjarke Ingels.
November 26, 2022
Never finished the book. It read like a textbook. The author outlined the ways in which our economic systems do not account for the true cost of various products for example ignoring the ecological damage, the cleanup, the pollution and other collateral effects of production and use. He poses various solutions. I just get depressed reading books like this. I seems so hopeless to expect people to cooperate until some catastrophe is immediately upon us individually.
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews