5 Comments

Can readily appreciate point 4, the time value of impact, when it comes to the timing of GHG emissions reductions and even removal.

Just wondering if there might be a clearer metaphor one might substitute for this? "2050 goals are great, like a local sushi restaurant in the U.S. with 4.1 out of 5 stars. But 2023 goals are better, like the best sushi restaurant in Tokyo, only known by locals." Maybe it's just me, maybe even likely so, but this was a head-scratcher.

Expand full comment
author

Aron, thanks for the note! The former is good; the latter is much better. :)

Expand full comment

Aha! Now understanding the (perhaps obvious?) meaning behind your comparison. Thanks, Dr. Wedding.

This explanation – and addition to the post – really helped alleviate the confusion: "(That is, one is good, but the other is much better!)"

I'm the type of person who loves local, family-owned joints. And travels overseas only rarely. So from a purely personal perspective, the intended superiority of the latter was lost on me. :)

Expand full comment

Unrelated: thinking that Matt Levine, who writes extensively about ESG in his "Money Stuff" column for Bloomberg (free signup link for anyone who hasn't already subscribed: https://www.bloomberg.com/account/newsletters/money-stuff), would enjoy seeing your point 3!

BTW, that link to Dr. Schumacher's piece is currently a 'file' link; perhaps it can be updated to a web-accessible one? Spotted this LinkedIn comment by them, if that's at all helpful.

https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7028997865326673920?commentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Acomment%3A%28activity%3A7028997865326673920%2C7029066607846989826%29

Expand full comment
author

Good catch! I updated the link to that second reading.

Expand full comment