Build, Baby, Build To Fight Climate Change

The climate is getting hotter, and people are contributing to the change. What should we do about it? Many people think they’re fighting climate change and keeping the environment pristine by prohibiting development on huge chunks of land in California and otherwise making it prohibitively costly to build there.

They’re wrong. Building restrictions in California and other temperate areas make building new housing in the greenest, most climate-friendly places prohibitively costly and push people to the browner, less climate-friendly, carbon-spewing south.

Enter Bryan Caplan’s new book Build, Baby, Build, which I reviewed for AIER here. Caplan explains the optimistic economics and ethics- and pessimistic politics- of building regulation and shows just how many social problems can be addressed if not altogether alleviated simply by letting people build more housing. With respect to climate change and the environment, he explains research by the economists Edward Glaeser and Matthew Kahn showing how restrictions on building in California and the Northeast have raised housing prices and encouraged migration to less climate-friendly areas. I write this from my Sweet Home Alabama, which has a lot going for it but would be practically uninhabitable without air conditioning from about April until October.

In graduate school, I applied for a job in San Jose, California. I remember looking at the weather and being shocked: it now shows lows of 42 in December and January and highs of 82 in July and August. Birmingham, meanwhile, has lows of 36 and 33 in December and January and highs of 91 in July and August. Birmingham has five months–May, June, July, August, and September–with high temperatures greater than or equal to the hottest part of the year in San Jose. The median sale price of a single-family home in Birmingham? $189,450. Compare that to $1.7 million in San Jose. Yes, San Jose is expensive even for California, but the median single-family home sale price in Oakland is over $1 million. Even our very nice, centrally-located, well-insulated five-bedroom home built in 2018 is worth about a third of San Jose’s median sale price.

Yes, San Jose looks like a very nice place to live, and its gentle climate means people’s lives are gentler on the environment. The heavily regulated California housing market, however, means many people are priced out of places where their environmental footprint is smallest and pushed into places where their environmental footprint is largest. A browner, warmer planet is the unintended consequence of California regulators’ demand for low-density “green” housing.

If you’re looking for a great introduction to the environmental issues Caplan discusses, Kahn (one of the authors he discusses) did the world a huge favor by writing Fundamentals of Environmental Economics and publishing it on Amazon for $1 a little over a decade ago. It’s the perfect gift for Mother’s Day, Father’s Day, birthdays, and other gift-giving occasions, and it’s both cheaper (and greener) than a greeting card. It might even make people understand that cities like San Francisco need more housing much more than recycling bins.

 


Art Carden is Professor of Economics & Medical Properties Trust Fellow at Samford University.


READER COMMENTS

MarkW
Nov 20 2024 at 5:15pm

Building restrictions in California are, indeed, preventing more people from moving to places that have the very lowest heating and cooling energy requirements.  But building restrictions in New York and Boston are having the opposite effect (keeping more people from moving to places with high energy demands), while large numbers of people moving to Florida, Texas, and other southern states with relatively unrestricted building and lower energy requirements is helping (Texas and Florida don’t require as little climate control energy as coastal California, but they’re fairly close and much better than northern states, since winter heating is much more energy intensive than summer cooling).  It is a something of a mystery to me that results like this do not get more attention, but I suppose it is because they are politically inconvenient to both sides in the US (the left does not want to think that living in southern states is inherently more friendly to the environment, while the right doesn’t really want to think about the issue at all).

Scott Sumner
Nov 20 2024 at 6:43pm

Good point, but does that account for commuting?  Don’t people in Texas drive more miles than in NYC?

MarkW
Nov 21 2024 at 11:06am

No, the analysis I linked is just about heating/cooling needs, but the differences are pretty stark.  Minneapolis (worst case) requires about 4 1/2 times the heating and cooling of San Diego (best case).  That said, I don’t know if the life of a Manhattanite who lives in a small apartment and commutes by subway is more or less energy intense than someone who lives in a southern California suburb.  But in the New York metro area, only about 8 of 20M people live in NY City — so even there, a whole lot of suburban commuting is going on.  And most northern metros have a much lower share of residents in the core city (for Chicago it’s less than 30%, while for Detroit, it’s below 15%).

Thomas L Hutcheson
Nov 27 2024 at 12:55pm

Reforming land use regulations would increase the responsiveness of a taxation of net emissions of CO2.  On the margin it reduces the tax rate needed to achieve any given CO2 concentration goal.

Comments are closed.

RECENT POST

In Revolution, Martin Anderson’s 1988 book about the Reagan revolution and about Marty’s role in things, Marty tells an interesting story about illegal immigration. On July 6, 1981, the Task Force on Immigration and Refugee Policy met in the White House. Marty was there. The Attorney General, William French Smith, ...

Read More

Recent referenda on the minimum wage produced some striking results: The California proposal to raise the minimum wage to $18 an hour in steps by 2026 narrowly failed, 51%-49%. Opponents and backers amassed a combined $1.8 million war chest for the issue — the lowest amount of all the propositions on Californians...

Read More

The climate is getting hotter, and people are contributing to the change. What should we do about it? Many people think they’re fighting climate change and keeping the environment pristine by prohibiting development on huge chunks of land in California and otherwise making it prohibitively costly to build there. ...

Read More