Uncertainties about climate change and its economic impact make energy policy a challenge for governments, an economics expert said during a special lecture Wednesday afternoon.

Robert S. Pindyck, a professor of economics and finance at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, spoke to ASU students and faculty about his climate change policy as part of the 2008-2009 lecture series “Transforming the Energy Economy: Economic Policies for the New Administration.”

Arizona Public Service, the Global Institute of Sustainability, and the W. P. Carey School of Business sponsored the lecture by Pindyck, who is an associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research.

In his lecture, Pindyck explained his climate-change plan by relating it to the amount of energy that society would give up to keep temperature change low.

There is not much information regarding major temperature changes and their impact, Pindyck said, which is why it is difficult to predict society’s willingness to pay.

Pindyck’s model uses many different economic factors and proposes that the willingness to pay for energy change is about 1 percent; meaning society would be willing to give up 1 percent of what it uses.

“Even if willingness to pay is higher, we won’t spend money [on climate-change policies],” Pindyck said, citing the poor economic situation as the reason.

“Debate among economists is not over whether we should adopt an abatement policy,” Pindyck said, “but whether a stringent policy is needed now, or instead abatement should begin slowly.”

Pindyck’s climate-change policy suggests the latter.

Pindyck said climate change is something that happens slowly, which is why a slow plan could be more beneficial.

“Putting money into climate change won’t stop it, but it will slow it down,” Pindyck said.

Pindyck also said he believes the government should put more money into geoengineering, which would help to relieve the carbon dioxide that has already been produced.

Pindyck’s results report that research should increase its focus on more extreme climate change because there is little to no information available there.

Though climate change is an important issue and will increasingly be more so throughout the next 100 years, Pindyck said, it does not seem to be as urgent as some other issues.

“What are the terrible things that you could imagine happening that could have a huge welfare impact?” Pindyck asked. On his list, climate change is there, but not a priority.

Christa Brelsford, a first-year doctoral student at the School of Sustainability, said she thinks efforts against climate change should be a high priority.

“[Pindyck’s plan] was a good first-order analysis of how much we might want to spend [on climate change],” Brelsford said.

Reach the reporter at abigail.gilmore@asu.edu.