<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Sightline InstituteContra Cost-Benefit - Sightline Institute</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.sightline.org/2008/08/26/contra-cost-benefit/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.sightline.org/2008/08/26/contra-cost-benefit/</link>
	<description>News and Views for a Sustainable Northwest</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2024 15:54:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language></language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>daily</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.3</generator>
	
		<item>
		<title>Contra Cost-Benefit</title>
		<link><![CDATA[https://www.sightline.org/2008/08/26/contra-cost-benefit/]]></link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 20:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<description><![CDATA[How costly is putting a price on the priceless? | Via Yglesias, here&#8217;s a very intriguing&nbsp;article arguing that cost-benefit analysis doesn&#8217;t actually make much sense for some environmental issues. (It&#8217;s authored by by Frank Ackerman and Lisa Heinzerling.) I&#8217;m not sure I&#8217;m persuaded by every element in their argument but, it does&nbsp;makes some extremely important points. For example, on the much-debated subject of &#8220;discounting&#8221;: Second, the use of discounting systematically and improperly downgrades the importance of environmental regulation. While discounting...]]></description>
					</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
