tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.comments2023-12-28T04:34:57.199-08:00G-FEEDsolhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00936469103707728475noreply@blogger.comBlogger123125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-28484727169092818842020-10-19T10:26:51.056-07:002020-10-19T10:26:51.056-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04217556184903823153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-47908332054775918512020-03-22T05:25:02.312-07:002020-03-22T05:25:02.312-07:00Of course the answer is yes but the answer would b...Of course the answer is yes but the answer would be no if China had anything like a Clean Air Act that our president is trying to dismantle.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11718763417970866046noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-79419493114420060212020-03-20T04:36:38.966-07:002020-03-20T04:36:38.966-07:00I am upbeat to locate your recognized method for c...I am upbeat to locate your recognized method for composing the post. Presently you make it simple for me to comprehend and execute the idea. Much obliged to you for the post. <a href="http://skynaite.com/" rel="nofollow">Sky Naite VICI</a><br /><br />David astonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02037441490772586988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-30136463512782704922020-03-19T07:51:14.908-07:002020-03-19T07:51:14.908-07:00Won't a bunch of these people die anyway when ...Won't a bunch of these people die anyway when pollution levels return to normal?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-11788769024695593052020-03-12T21:41:40.127-07:002020-03-12T21:41:40.127-07:00Poverty kills, and even small reductions in income...Poverty kills, and even small reductions in income across a large number of people can mean a large cumulative loss of life and quality of life. I am sure that any reasonable assumptions about the effects of lost income added into this analysis would imply a net loss of life in China. I suspect that US measures to contain Corona will indirectly kill more people than the virus will, given the lack of agreement about the facts and policy goals.<br /><br />This is the very first time I've ever summarized an environmental economics article as "looking for a silver lining"CraigMnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-26862293806444401742020-03-12T02:47:28.534-07:002020-03-12T02:47:28.534-07:00Even easier to see at the end of this calendar yea...Even easier to see at the end of this calendar year will be the reduction in road traffic deaths in China as a result of the coronavirus lockdown. In 2018, according to the WHO, an estimated 256,000 people died in China in road traffic accidents. Assuming SIGNIFICANTLY less road/bicycle/pedestrian traffic China-wide through Q2 of this year, could this pandemic save 100,000 Chinese lives that would have been lost in road traffic accidents? It seems likely to me.Robertohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15658466320690980920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-20570477761295290282020-03-12T01:51:32.327-07:002020-03-12T01:51:32.327-07:00Now it is becoming more consistent ... Daily CO2
M...Now it is becoming more consistent ... Daily CO2<br />Mar. 10, 2020: 413.78 ppm<br /><br />Mar. 10, 2019: 412.79 ppm<br /><br />This is showing an approximately 1 ppm increase over the same date one year ago. What I have been observing and keeping an eye on is the Co2 reaction - if any - to the novel virus.<br /><br />A normal reading would be in the range of 2.5 to 3.0 (plus or minus) increase. As we an see, this is an approximately daily reading that indicates just about 1 ppm difference. This is a huge decrease in Co2 if this is right. But I am waiting for someone official with scientific background to come out and clarify this for us.<br /><br />I think this is important because we are so drastically cutting back on travel and consumption. Is there a direct relationship between the apparent decrease, is it actually decreasing - ??? I am posing the question.Frankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10165248993907385765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-31890475076485426352020-03-12T01:43:30.644-07:002020-03-12T01:43:30.644-07:00An email to a friend...
Well, I would not say tha...An email to a friend... <br />Well, I would not say that we are terribly frightened, but handshakes and hugs with this thing being a threat is just a bad idea. So, one of us comes down with it, then the other. Then we might be mildly ill, but also, if we are infected we can pass it along and this can get to someone who will die as a result of it. Of course we could end up in the hospital but I am hoping that this will never happen.<br /><br />I am stuck on the idea of what this is or is not doing to Co2 though. I was thinking of it again today and thought - okay - if I am right, then this level of direct shutting down of airlines, cruise ships, less driving, less eating out, less shopping less container ships, less tourism - basically all these things are reducing Co2 if we are not doing them. So if it is doing that then what is the economic impact? Huge. ! Almost impossible to sustain. And this is for a slight drop in Co2 if I am right. <br /><br />If I am wrong, then that is even worse. That means that all that we are doing which is basically a dry run for emergency measures to stave off extinction is doing nothing. If it is not affecting Co2 as I theorize and I am wrong, then that is 10 times or 100 times worse because that means there is nothing we can do to stave off extinction. <br /><br />But then again, that was the conclusion I came to in my 2009 paper anyway so nothing has changed and in the end it is really all academic. Frankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10165248993907385765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-54897515363157322272019-08-27T17:28:42.307-07:002019-08-27T17:28:42.307-07:00This reminds me of my favorite of David's post...This reminds me of <a href="http://www.g-feed.com/2013/09/i-try-not-to-use-this-blog-much-for.html" rel="nofollow">my favorite of David's posts</a>. solhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00936469103707728475noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-64304124585920143692019-08-27T09:53:46.077-07:002019-08-27T09:53:46.077-07:00I think the fact that the BHM model performs poorl...I think the fact that the BHM model performs poorly relatively to those with region-year FE by a cross-validation metric IS evidence of overfitting. Regardless, the crux of their paper IMO is the levels vs rate issue. I'll look forward to blog post addressing that. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04217556184903823153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-83244081580881637212019-08-27T09:22:10.681-07:002019-08-27T09:22:10.681-07:00Obviously. To be clear, that paper did not present...Obviously. To be clear, that paper did not present any actual evidence of overfitting, which is why it was in quotes above and deserves a separate post (as mentioned above). However, the conclusion of the Newell et al. paper was to advocate for models that do not have any trends in them, which seems to be a challenging view to adopt in the face of simple scatterplots.solhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00936469103707728475noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-30310642536805160002019-08-26T10:43:01.386-07:002019-08-26T10:43:01.386-07:00You can't respond to a charge of over-fitting ...You can't respond to a charge of over-fitting by pointing out that your modeling choice fits the data well. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-75630659924916768632018-11-12T08:49:11.607-08:002018-11-12T08:49:11.607-08:00I'm reading your paper and I think I found a c...I'm reading your paper and I think I found a couple things of potential interest to you.<br /><br />On page 6 you say: "For reference, the energy from the sun reaching the top of Earth’s atmosphere is 342 W/m2".<br /><br />This is a minor nit but that is expressed the power per unit area, not the "energy".<br /><br />The second issue is more important. The solar constant is 1367 W/m2. This, of course, has to be adjusted for being distributed over half of a sphere rather than a perpendicular plane. The area of a circle, divided by one half the area of a sphere is (pi R2)/((4 pi R2)/2) which is 1/2. Hence this, unless I am missing something, results in there being about 684 W/m2 of solar energy reaching the surface of the atmosphere instead of the 342 you state in your paper.Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01432474207127983686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-12619365452818900132017-11-17T17:18:15.428-08:002017-11-17T17:18:15.428-08:00super interesting, pat, and partially answers some...super interesting, pat, and partially answers something interesting we'd found in some regional composites we'd been looking at for a project. Thanks!<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05093280480617055607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-66607739813233501712017-11-14T06:39:15.106-08:002017-11-14T06:39:15.106-08:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.aliyaahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06184256288293330921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-75041052756318732602017-08-15T00:11:36.138-07:002017-08-15T00:11:36.138-07:00Hello Florent,
Thanks for your comments. I hope t...Hello Florent,<br /><br />Thanks for your comments. I hope these responses are helpful, happy to clarify if you still have questions.<br /><br />Normalizing temperature:<br />• I haven’t experimented with regressing on normalized temperature. However, with state fixed effects, I’m already using within-state deviations of temperature exposure from the sample average to identify the causal effect on suicides. Despite that, you are absolutely right that it’s possible a given level of temperature increase has a differential effect on suicides in locations with heterogeneous average exposures, and/or heterogeneous within-location variances. While I haven’t tested this possibility directly, the results shown in Figure 3A in the main text show that locations with higher average temperatures do tend to have a distinct response function, although this result is noisy.<br /><br />Normalizing precipitation:<br />• As you mentioned, it’s very possible that with different average levels of rainfall, the suicide rate in different regions will respond heterogeneously to the same treatment of rainfall. In my main model, I don’t estimate this heterogeneity. However, in the drought and surplus rainfall regressions shown in Figure 2B (main text) and S8 (SI), I do use a normalized measure, where the definition of “surplus” and “drought” is location-specific. <br /><br />Temporal effects:<br />• This is a great question. As is pretty standard, I don’t report the coefficients on either year fixed effects or on state-specific linear trends. Of course, there are many non-climatic drivers of suicide that are changing over the years in my sample, and these trends and year effects are statistically significant in many specifications. However, take a look at Tables S3 and S8 (SI) to see that my main findings are not very sensitive to the types of temporal controls I use. I’m working on getting my final dataset and replication code up on my website, at which point you can take a look at the coefficients on these time controls directly. <br />Tamma Carletonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07497735143872664080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-18214708269279618972017-08-14T08:17:48.322-07:002017-08-14T08:17:48.322-07:00Sad but very interesting paper, congratulations! I...Sad but very interesting paper, congratulations! I got couple of questions on the econometric estimation you followed. I am also working on climate and econometrics and I'd be happy to read your insights: <br />- have you tried normalizing temperature (deviation from mean / trend, etc.)? if so, what are the results?<br />- same for precipitation, for example using SPI or SPEI - considering the range of precipitation in the different seasons - and particularly what a 100-mm increment means in the different regions, could this have implications on your results?<br />- how does the linear trend interact with your results, where could we find the value of the linear trend coefficient in your paper, as well as the time fixed effects for the different model specifications?<br />Florent Baarschnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-74981206769902956262017-07-17T15:43:13.096-07:002017-07-17T15:43:13.096-07:00Hey Guys: You know I'm a broken record bout pr...Hey Guys: You know I'm a broken record bout prices. Actually, Nordhaus got famous by reminding Meadows and Meadows to think about prices. As a result of prices--you know, the economics--the sign and sign of the physical impact can look very different from economic incidence. Our farmers had record profits during our record drought in 2012. GDP maybe even went because of a bad thing, since we export a lot of food. People on the other side of the world suffered from higher food prices. Health effects might really be local, but energy, food, and even labor productivity shocks will spread out. You really ought to acknowledge this gaping hole in most impacts work. Michael Robertshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16455035518968529794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-48595331113273171522017-07-03T17:45:03.764-07:002017-07-03T17:45:03.764-07:00Hi Carl - thanks a lot for the clarifications, and...Hi Carl - thanks a lot for the clarifications, and for the link to the earlier hot bath study. Definitely appreciate the difficulty of doing these sorts of studies. My own beef was more with the NYT coverage. For instance their article opens: "There are many ways to cope with exercising in hot weather. But one of the most effective may be, surprisingly, to soak in long, hot baths in the days beforehand.." And they then go on to describe your study that doesn't really say anything about heat acclimation relative to a control of doing nothing (and nothing about baths), but really (as you point out) draws conclusions about heat acclimation vs heat acclimation+pre-cooling. So even setting aside issues of research design, the NYT coverage doesn't make much sense. <br /><br />At any rate, thanks again for the clarifications. -MarshallMarshall Burkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15436297075698378164noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-9013782574080016352017-07-02T04:45:37.257-07:002017-07-02T04:45:37.257-07:00Hi, thanks for your blog entry. As the author of t...Hi, thanks for your blog entry. As the author of the heat training study, I got a notification about it being discussed on your blog. I hope you don't mind me responding, in the interests of accuracy, to elaborate on a couple of points. <br />The study didn't seek to see if training in the heat for 5 days would work, rather it was comparing heat training against precooling, a combination of heat training + precooling & a control condition. So you are quite right - it's no surprise that they improved, the novelty was in the comparison against the other treatments - which athletes routinely use. Previously, no-one had studied which may be better or by how much. <br />Training studies such as this chronically suffer from a low n, predominantly because it is so time consuming to conduct studies such as this. In this instance, it took something in the region of 30 hours in the lab per person... so it is tough from both the researcher and participants perspectives. <br />Also please note the ~25 min running time was in the heat, all runners were <22 min standard & trained at least 3 times per week. So whilst not elite, we recruited the best runners we could. <br />Finally, the 5 training sessions were not all exercise. Rather, they trained for ~45 min during this period, with the rest of the time sitting, but being kept hot because of the hot environment. So yes, training volume may be a contributing factor, but I would suggest not to the extent that you describe. <br />For interest, the link to the hot baths originated from a discussion about a previous study we did, as hot baths can be used in combination with exercise to achieve heat acclimation (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27330883), but you are completely correct that it didn't feature in this paper.<br />Thanks again for taking the time to read the paper. <br />CarlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-33904074356453219522017-06-30T15:43:27.824-07:002017-06-30T15:43:27.824-07:00I read it too, sweetie.I read it too, sweetie.pollyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02325478081328751519noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-58009907262569501712017-06-30T10:39:29.061-07:002017-06-30T10:39:29.061-07:00Dr. Hsiang:
It may be that your inequality paramet...Dr. Hsiang:<br />It may be that your inequality parameters should be checked with your colleagues, Saez, Zucman, and Milanovic. Even given the telling internecine battles that prevail in academia, it might be worth it. David J. Thomas, PhD, Anthropology, University of Michigan, 1973Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-76253221470524482962017-06-29T14:19:39.841-07:002017-06-29T14:19:39.841-07:00Well I'm glad at least our g-feed blogging tea...Well I'm glad at least our g-feed blogging team read g-feed :)Marshall Burkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15436297075698378164noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-55772091818792611002017-06-28T16:54:24.336-07:002017-06-28T16:54:24.336-07:00sol, i was going to say the same. anyone who did R...sol, i was going to say the same. anyone who did R2R2R in the past few months is decidedly NOT a half-assed runner.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05093280480617055607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3813701770708442620.post-25496596595963207722017-06-28T15:04:21.466-07:002017-06-28T15:04:21.466-07:00Okay, my turn to rant. This post is full of lies! ...Okay, my turn to rant. This post is full of lies! Marshall is anything BUT "a lazy, mildly-fit runner." solhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00936469103707728475noreply@blogger.com