@noahqk True! we wrote a paper about this a few years ago , and so did one other group . In case anyone wants to get in the weeds here it is: https://t.co/TzE6Q00qlw https://t.co/99gXqPoH68
363 followers
88,582 followers
@coxypm @KenCaldeira @trawlsvt1 My point is that the choice of GWP time horizon is in fact an implicit discount rate. There is a literature on this, e.g.: https://t.co/4vtp0BX2Go and https://t.co/EVB8yPo8kX
2,079 followers
12. In more technical terms, I think the damage function is convex and the right discount rate is low. One path towards a better exchange rate could be to use GWP at a longer horizon, say 300 years instead of 100 years. https://t.co/H4DPaWRe1i
2,064 followers
@MilesKing10 @casparhenderson @MikeBernersLee No. Has any published LCA used GWP*? This paper on metrics, published in late 2019, after GWP* was first proposed (~June 2018?), doesn't mention it (https://t.co/o7nacD39z2). It says: https://t.co/cU0564ttIa