Jeffrey Shrader

New working paper! Derek Lemoine, Catie Hausman, and I have written a review of the economics literature studying damages from climate change. The heart of the review is an argument that, to estimate climate change damages, any single method faces a trilemma. We’d all like to study climate change, which is persistent, widespread, and anticipated. But to do so, papers must trade off quasi-experimental identification, robustness to economic model structure, or fully capturing all of the features of climate change. Rather than cause for despair, though, we view this trilemma as meaning we should embrace the strengths of multiple, different empirical approaches to understanding the economics of climate change. I learned a ton from writing the paper, and I’ll share some highlights in the coming weeks!

Matthew Gibson and I have submitted even more public comments, this time to the EPA on their “Reconsideration of the 2009 Endangerment Finding and Greenhouse Gas Vehicle Standards.”

Matthew Gibson and I have submitted these public comments to the DOE on their recent climate impacts report. The report does a terrible job accurately portraying the climate impacts literature. Our comments focus on three particular areas where the report team failed to cite many relevant studies—mortality, non-fatal health impacts, and market impacts as measured by GDP.

Working on a paper recently, I wanted to cite the original Nordhaus DICE paper. The list below is me trying to sort out the publication history. If you see errors, let me know! (...more)

Matthew Gibson, Derek Lemoine, and I have submitted these public comments to the EPA on their proposed repeal of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards for Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric Generating Units.

Running weather regressions and using clustered standard errors? I have a modest proposal to cluster at the National Weather Service (NWS) County Warning Area (CWA) level. (...more)