Webster, M., A.P. Sokolov, J.M. Reilly, C.E. Forest, S. Paltsev, A. Schlosser, C. Wang, D. Kicklighter, M. Sarofim, J. Melillo, R.G. Prinn and H.D. Jacoby
(2009)
Joint Program Report Series, September, 53 p.
Morris, J., V. Srikrishnan, M. Webster and J. Reilly
(2018)
Energy Journal, 39(1), 10.5547/01956574.39.1.jmor
Reilly, J., S. Paltsev, K. Strzepek, N.E. Selin, Y. Cai, K.-M. Nam, E. Monier, S. Dutkiewicz, J. Scott, M. Webster and A. Sokolov (2012)
Joint Program Report Series, 21 pages
Morris, J., M. Webster and J. Reilly (2014)
Joint Program Report Series, 28 p.
Reilly, J., S. Paltsev, K. Strzepek, N.E. Selin, Y. Cai, K-M. Nam, E. Monier, S. Dutkiewicz, J. Scott, M. Webster and A. Sokolov
(2012)
Climatic Change, Volume 117, Issue 3, pp 561–573
Sokolov, A.P., P.H. Stone, C.E. Forest, R.G. Prinn, M.C. Sarofim, M. Webster, S. Paltsev, C.A. Schlosser, D. Kicklighter, S. Dutkiewicz, J. Reilly, C. Wang, B. Felzer, J. Melillo, H.D. Jacoby (2009)
Joint Program Report Series, 44 pages
U.S. Climate Change Science Program, contributing authors: E. Parsons, V. Burkett, K. Fisher-Vanden, D. Keith, L. Mearns, H. Pitcher, C. Rosenzweig and M. Webster (2007)
Sub-Report 2.1b of Synthesis and Assessment Product 2.1 - U.S. Climate Change Science Program, Department of Energy, Office of Biological & Environmental Research, Washington DC
Webster, M.D. (2000)
Ph.D. Thesis, MIT Engineering Systems Division
Webster, M.D., and A.P. Sokolov (2000)
Climatic Change, 46(4):417-446
Parpas, P. and M. Webster (2013)
Automatica, 49(6): 1663–1671
Webster, M., A.P. Sokolov, J.M. Reilly, C.E. Forest, S. Paltsev, A. Schlosser, C. Wang, D. Kicklighter, M. Sarofim, J. Melillo, R.G. Prinn and H.D. Jacoby
(2009)
Joint Program Report Series, September, 53 p.
Morris, J., V. Srikrishnan, M. Webster and J. Reilly
(2018)
Energy Journal, 39(1), 10.5547/01956574.39.1.jmor
Reilly, J., S. Paltsev, K. Strzepek, N.E. Selin, Y. Cai, K.-M. Nam, E. Monier, S. Dutkiewicz, J. Scott, M. Webster and A. Sokolov (2012)
Joint Program Report Series, 21 pages
An analysis by MIT researchers shows that when electric power companies are planning to invest in new generating facilities but face the possibility of future limits on carbon emissions, they can reduce their long-term economic risk by having at least 20% of the new generation come from non-carbon systems such as solar and wind. Coal or natural gas plants are less expensive initially, but they might have to be shut down prematurely if a carbon cap is put in place in the coming decades. Non-carbon systems are more costly to build, but they’re relatively inexpensive to operate, so companies will continue to run them, even if there’s no restriction on carbon emissions. The researchers’ novel method of incorporating expectations about future emissions policies into the decision-making process identifies an investment strategy that can as much as halve cumulative costs to the US economy, potentially saving more than $100 billion over the long term.
A forthcoming book by MIT Joint Program sponsor representative David Hone, Putting the Genie Back: Solving the Climate and Energy Dilemma, draws on MIT Joint Program research on climate probability and uncertainty.
