The Texas Public Policy Foundation filed an amicus brief supporting the Missouri state coalition’s preliminary injunction motion seeking to enjoin the Biden social cost of carbon rule. Research compiled by TPPF experts Dr. Vance Ginn, Dr. Brent Bennett, and Dr. EJ Antoni demonstrates that “the models that are used to quantify the social cost of carbon fail to properly account for human adaptation, which renders them so inaccurate as to make them useless for evaluating public policy,” according to the brief.

“Regulatory policy based on social cost of carbon emissions is arbitrary to its core and should have no place in federal policy,” said TPPF Chief Economist Vance Ginn. “It is a form of social engineering based on a subjective determination of government bureaucrats rather than the profit-loss system in the productive private sector with a legal system that penalizes bad actors.”

“The use of the social cost of carbon in regulatory analysis cannot be reconciled with sound cost-benefit principles,” said Dr. Brent Bennett, policy director for TPPF’s Life:Powered campaign. “It attempts to equate highly uncertain benefits of emissions reductions in the distant future with the very real costs of achieving those reductions in the present. Regulators should abandon using faulty economics to justify emissions regulations and instead focus on cost-effective adaptation methods to deal with the mild and manageable warming that is most likely to occur.”

“Economic models commonly project only a decade into the future because the number of things we know we don’t know increases too quickly for the models to provide any reliable estimates. And even those projections over a decade are imprecise,” said TPPF economist Dr. EJ Antoni. “Modeling that cannot accurately predict inflation and employment numbers for next month certainly cannot predict economic values for the next century, and beyond.”