Climate change

Refer to “Oppenheimer and Anttila-Hughes – 2016 – The Science of Climate Change”, available on Canvas, to answer the following questions. a) How do the authors contrast uncertainty in our ability
to predict exact outcomes of the climate with certainty over negative effects and damages? Does uncertainty in this case mean that we shouldn’t act, or that we should? b) What is the difference
between paleoclimate evidence of climate change and current day evidence? How do these bodies of evidence combine with modeling efforts to predict future changes? c) Why do the authors say that the
indirect effects of climate change may be worse on children than direct ones? Explain. Why is this concern particularly heightened for children in developing countries? d) Why might issues related
discounting be particularly relevant when discussing children’s outcomes? How might that effect what ethical standard would be best suited for choosing optimal policy responses to climate change?
e) The House Science Committee meeting that we watched in class on March 29th (available here: https://www.facebook.com/TheHill/videos/10154707025269087/ ) featured several scientists who claimed
that uncertainties over climate change mean that we should delay action, and one who did not. What do you think is driving the differences in valuation between Dr. Mann and the other scientists,
and how do you think different ethical standards or conceptualizations of social welfare play a role in valuation in this case?