Yale Conservation Finance Camp – June 6 – 10.
Economic Tools for Conservation – 2011 International Course at Stanford, August 15 – 26.
Key Resources from Conservation International’s Economics and Planning Team.
This has got to be one of the best deals around. I got this mail from the highly ranked Toulouse School of Economics,
Tuition fees for [the English language] Master’s degree amount around 300 Euros for one academic year. Social security (compulsory health insurance) for students amounts 200 Euros per academic year. For living expenses in Toulouse, you should count at least 500 Euros per month (survival) and more probably 700 to 800 Euros all included.
Toulouse School of Economics
Université Toulouse 1
Manufacture des Tabacs
31042 Toulouse Cedex (France)
tel: + 33 (0)5 61 12 87 65
fax: + 33 (0)5 61 12 86 37
From BBC’s website,
The focus on reducing carbon emissions has blinded us to the real problem – unsustainable lifestyles, says Eamon O’Hara.[...]
We urgently need to think about the more fundamental concept of sustainability and how our lifestyles are threatening not only the environment, but developing countries and global peace and stability[...].
How many people are tired and weary of modern living? The endless cycle of earning and consumption can be exhausting and does not necessarily bring happiness and fulfillment. Can we do things differently, and better?
I don’t think an appeal to our better selves to change our lifestyles is going to work. And I certainly don’t want the government to tell me in detail what I can or can’t do.
What we need to do is to get the prices right. The enormous environmental problems in China and India show what happens if you don’t get prices for water, power, and pollution right. This is not at all simple and easy to do; rich OECD countries are also struggling to get to grips with it. But it is absolutely fundamental.
On Maverecon, Willem Buiter writes a sensible post, Carbon Offsets: Open House for Waste, Fraud and Corruption,
Offsets, the creation of credits that can be added to the (national, regional or global) CO2E [carbon dioxide equivalent greenhouse gas emissions] quota under cap and trade schemes, require not only the (difficult) verification of how much CO2E is actually emitted in the real world, but also the impossible verification of how much CO2E would have been emitted in some counterfactual alternative universe. The quantity of offset credits earned by some activity is the net quantity of CO2E that has been saved as a result of this activity.
Just stating it makes one shout out: impossible! Fraud! Bribery! Corruption! Wasteful diversion of resources into pointless attempts at verification! And indeed this is what is happening before our eyes. Enterprises get paid for not cutting down trees and for installing filters and scrubbers they would have installed in any case. The new Verification of the Carbon Counterfactual industry is growing in leaps and bounds. The amounts of money involved are vast and the opportunities for graft, bribery and corruption limitless. The offset proposal has birthed a monster.
Who came up with this demented offset concept? It’s an attempt to placate the developing world for not having enough CO2E emitting activities historically to benefit from a significant free initial allocation of credits in proportion to a country’s historical track record of CO2E emissions[...]
- but read the post.
|1||Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)||USA||5.75|
|6||U Toulouse I (Sciences Sociales)||France||3.87|
|7||U California – Berkeley||USA||3.77|
|9||New York U (NYU)||USA||3.66|
|10||London School of Economics||UK||3.57|
|12||U California – San Diego||USA||3.25|
|13||U California – Los Angeles||USA||3.19|
|16||U Wisconsin – Madison||USA||3.07|
|18||U Texas – Austin||USA||3.01|
Source: Productivity ranking from econphd.net. The ranking is based on the average number of equivalent papers published by a department’s top 15 authors.
France’s new president, Nicolas Sarkozy, recently persuaded his fellow European leaders to drop the principle of “free and undistorted competition” from Article 3 of the old constitutional treaty. He asked, “Competition as an ideology, as a dogma: what has it done for Europe?”
He is right. Apart from making the Europeans prosperous, keeping prices low, businesses honest, encouraging innovation, and sweeping away incompetence, what has competition ever done for Europe?
One possibility is that the IDEI is too free-market oriented for the French establishment. The French establishment, both on the left and on the right, is statist.
And of course there is a long French tradition of having the best of everything in Paris. A French academic who made it to one of the Paris institutes is not about to go into exile in the provinces. So if there is a large group of good economists in Paris, why not organize them into a school and gain critical mass?
There is now also a Toulouse School of Economics. It offers various programs, including a two year master’s degree program, taught in English.
Abstract: Renewables are not green. To reach the scale at which they would contribute importantly to meeting global energy demand, renewable sources of energy, such as wind, water and biomass, cause serious environmental harm. Measuring renewables in watts per square metre that each source could produce smashes these environmental idols. Nuclear energy is green.[...]
The article is discussed in New Scientist under the heading Renewable energy could ‘rape’ nature.
Denmark prides itself on giving a large proportion of its GDP as foreign aid to poor countries. But is there a trade-off between quality and quantity?
Follies rise amid Afghan ruins
By Rachel Morarjee and Stephen Fidler
It was a showcase project to demonstrate the benefits of renewable energy: a fountain and a display of coloured lights at a traffic island in Kabul run from solar panels. The project was small – but significant enough to attract a handful of foreign and local notables to its official opening in December 2005.
All seemed to be well during the opening ceremony. But soon after the dignitaries left, the fountain was switched off, never to work again. In fact, things were not as they seemed: the fountain had been powered not by solar energy but by a diesel generator hidden nearby. The solar panels were never powerful enough to run the fountain, say people associated with the project, and there was no electricity storage to allow the lights to be turned on at night.
The project, managed by the Asian Development Bank and financed ostensibly by Denmark, represents to some a microcosm of the failings of aid to Afghanistan [...]
The article in Financial Times (subscription necessary) goes on to discuss two other project of similar quality.