The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Developing a Social Cost of Carbon for US Regulatory Analysis: A Methodology and Interpretation
Open accessAbstract
The US government recently developed a range of values representing the monetized global damages associated with an incremental increase in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, commonly referred to as the social cost of carbon (SCC). These values are currently used in benefit–cost analyses to assess potential federal regulations. For 2010, the central value of the SCC is $21 per ton of CO2 emissions, with sensitivity analyses to be conducted at $5, $35, and $65 per ton of CO2 (2007 dollars). This article summarizes the methodology and interagency process used to develop these SCC values, offers our own commentary on how the SCC can be used to inform regulatory decisions, and identifies priorities for further research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Tipping elements in the Earth’s climate system
Lenton, T. M., Held, H., Kriegler, E., Hall, J. W., Lucht, W., Rahmstorf, S., & Schellnhuber, H. J. (2008) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0705414105 · Cited by 3,982
On Modeling and Interpreting the Economics of Catastrophic Climate Change
Weitzman, M. L. (2009) · Review of Economics and Statistics · doi:10.1162/rest.91.1.1 · Cited by 1,791 · cited 2×
“The literature generally adopts values forZ in the range of 0.5 to 3, with a clustering around 2 (Arrow 2007; Dasgupta 2007, 2008; Hall and Jones 2007; Nordhaus 2009; Szpiro 1986; Weitzman 2007, 2009).”
BackgroundInfluentialA Review of the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change
Weitzman, M. L. (2007) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/jel.45.3.703 · Cited by 1,024 · cited 2×
“The literature generally adopts values forZ in the range of 0.5 to 3, with a clustering around 2 (Arrow 2007; Dasgupta 2007, 2008; Hall and Jones 2007; Nordhaus 2009; Szpiro 1986; Weitzman 2007, 2009).”
BackgroundInfluential
Cited by
Quantifying Economic Damages from Climate Change
Auffhammer, M. (2018) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.32.4.33 · Cited by 459
Estimating a social cost of carbon for global energy consumption
Rode, A., Carleton, T., Delgado, M., Greenstone, M., Houser, T., Hsiang, S., Hultgren, A., Jina, A., Kopp, R. E., McCusker, K. E., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03883-8 · Cited by 380
Self-citationLearning is inhibited by heat exposure, both internationally and within the United States
Park, R. J., Behrer, A. P., & Goodman, J. (2020) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-020-00959-9 · Cited by 187
Keeler, B. L., Gourevitch, J. D., Polasky, S., Isbell, F., Tessum, C. W., Hill, J. D., & Marshall, J. D. (2016) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.1600219 · Cited by 178
Trade Costs, CO2, and the Environment
Shapiro, J. S. (2016) · American Economic Journal: Economic Policy · doi:10.1257/pol.20150168 · Cited by 116
Metadata
- Authors
- Greenstone, M., Kopits, E., & Wolverton, A.
- Venue
- Review of Environmental Economics and Policy
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 2013-01-01
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 23-46
- ISSN
- 1750-6816 (ISSN-L)
- 1750-6824
- OpenAlex
- W2139816890
- Cited by
- 309
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 79.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Developing a Social Cost of Carbon for US Regulatory Analysis: A Methodology and Interpretation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/reep/res015
- The paper
- Greenstone, M., Kopits, E., & Wolverton, A. (2013). Developing a Social Cost of Carbon for US Regulatory Analysis: A Methodology and Interpretation. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy. https://doi.org/10.1093/reep/res015
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
