This is willwheels's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following willwheels's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
willwheels
Recent Activity
Google offered to translate this page, I'm assuming because of this comment. Have a fun trip, John!
Toggle Commented 7 hours ago on Field research at Environmental Economics
1 reply
Iowa State also has a joint program, with a field in environmental economics for econ students.
1 reply
DC is paying $150 million (barring cost overruns) for a soccer stadium (17 regular season home games) in an area that isn't convenient to metro and is pretty hemmed-in for development. It's crazy. But DC United threatened to move to Virginia!
1 reply
Gah, I had this saved in Feedly to post. I've really got to be quicker.
1 reply
Thanks, Jodie, those are really helpful answers! John, I have Prime, but I think you might have also been close. I spent way too much time on this, but MP3s are downloads and the autorip goes to the Amazon player, so they may be trying to push me towards that (which I use because I can get away with it at work). Or it could have been the treatment of one of their experiments. In any case, I look forward to the album on Friday.
1 reply
It seems odd to me that people offered up data "on request" in a working paper. But I definitely agree that not providing data that you've promised to make available as a condition of publication is really wrong.
1 reply
I thought the interest rate in the note only applied to the final interest payment. I think your NPV calculations are correct.
1 reply
Nice work, thanks!
1 reply
http://www.pnj.com/story/news/local/environment/2015/07/02/gulf-states-reach-settlement-bp-oil-spill/29611591/
1 reply
Nevermind, found it: Economic Claims: $4.9 billion will be paid to resolve the Gulf Coast states’ economic claims: •Florida: $2 billion •Louisiana: $1 billion ••Alabama: $1 billion •Mississippi: $750 million •Texas: $150 million Natural Resource Damages: $7.1 billion (not including the $1 billion already committed by BP for early restoration projects) to the Gulf Coast states and the United States to resolve their natural resource damage claims: •Louisiana: $ 5 billion ••Florida: $680 million •Mississippi: $296 million •Alabama: $296 million •Texas: $238 million •Regionwide projects: $350 million •Open Ocean projects: $1.24 billion In addition, 80 percent of the civil penalty with go to restoration, under a formula that is too complicated for me to remember.
1 reply
And I've been trying to figure out how but I can't because the states are presenting their information differently in the reports that I can locate. That is, some of the states are combining the restoration funds they'll get from the NRDA with the funds that they'll get from the RESTORE Act, and some aren't.
1 reply
But it's mostly over, except for some private claims (e.g., people who opted out of the private claims process.
1 reply
Dammit! I was just writing a post!
1 reply
My understanding (which is outside of my normal area) is that under the relevant part of the CAA, EPA needed to decide whether to regulate power plants and then go ahead and set a standard. The industry argument (supported by the majority opinion) is that EPA needed to take costs into account when it decided whether or not to regulate (costs were obviously taken into account when setting the final standard). It's unclear to me how co-benefits matter in the decision. Standard disclaimer applies.
Toggle Commented Jul 2, 2015 on SCOTUS and BCA at Environmental Economics
1 reply
Mine is having delivery troubles.
1 reply
There's more background here: http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2015/06/08/lee_siegel_new_york_times_op_ed_is_this_the_worst_op_ed_ever_written_about.html (e.g., the loans for were living expenses, not tuition). It's very important to note (as stated in the article) that most people would have had their wages garnished and that the same could happen to Social Security checks.
1 reply
Congratulations!!! (I can't help but notice that beer posts aren't in the original list.)
1 reply
Who wants to be in San Diego in June anyway?
1 reply
I'm also elite!
1 reply
More on LaCour: http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/05/michael-lacour-made-up-a-teaching-award-too.html Don't placement directors review CVs?
1 reply
Let me guess, of the three responses, #2 is the most prevalent. By the way, I agree that every journal should adopt the AER's policy. Yes, it's more work, but soon people won't trust published results, and then where will we be? I'd also suggest (and would love to see a test of this) that Land Econ's policy is insufficient. The tests of similar policies that I've seen have shown that data-only policies don't get it done (and aren't followed): http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~bdm25/jmcb.pdf and http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~bdm25/cje.pdf
1 reply
This is a disaster. Or will be, in about 7 years.
Toggle Commented May 26, 2015 on Bourbon barrel economics at Environmental Economics
1 reply
That's a great reference, thanks!
1 reply