Sentences with phrase «economic cost of climate change»

Cantwell, Collins Release GAO Report Showing Climate Change Will Cost the Government Trillions of Dollars: This year alone, the economic cost of climate change to the U.S. will exceed $ 300 billion (Office of Sen. Maria Cantwell, Oct. 23, 2017)

In both cases, there is substantial uncertainty about the things we most care about and in fact, in the case of climate change, Martin Weitzman's Dismal Theorem concludes that calculations of the expected economic cost of climate change are dominated by the mathematical details of the low - probability / catastrophic - consequence tail of the probability distribution.

Now they're being used by the new IMPACT2C project, which is looking to provide new estimates for the impact and economic cost of climate change in Europe if global warming is limited to the international goal of no more than 2 degrees Celsius, relative to Western European pre-industrial levels.

CDKN: Dr. Govinda Nepal, IDS - Nepal, reflects at the half way point of a project in Nepal which is calculating the economic cost of climate change in key sectors on what the team has learnt so far Which climate risk screening tool is the most appropriate for Nepal?

When the urban heat island effect was taken into account, they found that the economic cost of climate change for these cities would be 2.6 times higher than previously thought.

According to this meta - study (a fancy name for a literature review), there seems to be a systematic tendency to downplay the economic costs of climate change policies:

On Tuesday, a coalition — including former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and former Secretary of the Treasury and Goldman Sachs alum Henry Paulson — released a study on the economic costs of climate change.

The cost of environmental damage, which is based on Sir Nicholas Stern's review on the economic costs of climate change, will continue to rise every year until it reaches a mark of # 59.60 a tonne by 2050.

The economic costs of climate change to Southeast Asia could be 60 percent more than forecast six years ago, the Asian Development Bank announced yesterday, revising its 2009 figure.

Joydeep Gupta, editor of indiaclimatedialogue.net and a co-author on the report, said: «Given that India is ranked the second most vulnerable to the economic costs of climate change, only a strong global deal can generate the finance to avert disaster.

A wide range of benefits will flow from a concerted effort to alter our energy economy now, including sustainable energy job growth, reductions in the health and economic costs of climate change, and the restoration of ecosystems and revitalisation of ecosystem services.

The project will provide headline and sectoral estimates of the impacts and economic costs of climate change for [continue reading...]

The scope of this chapter, with a focus on food crops, pastures and livestock, industrial crops and biofuels, forestry (commercial forests), aquaculture and fisheries, and small - holder and subsistence agriculturalists and artisanal fishers, is to: examine current climate sensitivities / vulnerabilities; consider future trends in climate, global and regional food security, forestry and fisheries production; review key future impacts of climate change in food crops pasture and livestock production, industrial crops and biofuels, forestry, fisheries, and small - holder and subsistence agriculture; assess the effectiveness of adaptation in offsetting damages and identify adaptation options, including planned adaptation to climate change; examine the social and economic costs of climate change in those sectors; and, explore the implications of responding to climate change for sustainable development.

Economic costs of climate change policies are defined as opportunity costs — in this case what must be sacrificed or changed in order to reduce emissions.

The economic costs of climate change are already being felt, and some of the world's poorest nations are bearing the heaviest burden.

In any case, more published research is needed on the economic costs of climate change.

There is no telling just how high the economic costs of climate change could be.

Prof Wadhams is co-author of the controversial Nature paper which calculated the potential economic costs of climate change based on a scenario of 50 Gigatonnes (Gt) of methane being released this century from melting permafrost at the East Siberia Arctic Shelf (ESAS), a vast region of shallow - water covered continental crust.

We have enough experience already with the devastating human and economic costs of climate change to know that we have to start living within our carbon means.

Not exact matches

Among the factors that could cause actual results to differ materially are the following: (1) worldwide economic, political, and capital markets conditions and other factors beyond the Company's control, including natural and other disasters or climate change affecting the operations of the Company or its customers and suppliers; (2) the Company's credit ratings and its cost of capital; (3) competitive conditions and customer preferences; (4) foreign currency exchange rates and fluctuations in those rates; (5) the timing and market acceptance of new product offerings; (6) the availability and cost of purchased components, compounds, raw materials and energy (including oil and natural gas and their derivatives) due to shortages, increased demand or supply interruptions (including those caused by natural and other disasters and other events); (7) the impact of acquisitions, strategic alliances, divestitures, and other unusual events resulting from portfolio management actions and other evolving business strategies, and possible organizational restructuring; (8) generating fewer productivity improvements than estimated; (9) unanticipated problems or delays with the phased implementation of a global enterprise resource planning (ERP) system, or security breaches and other disruptions to the Company's information technology infrastructure; (10) financial market risks that may affect the Company's funding obligations under defined benefit pension and postretirement plans; and (11) legal proceedings, including significant developments that could occur in the legal and regulatory proceedings described in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10 - K for the year ended Dec. 31, 2017, and any subsequent quarterly reports on Form 10 - Q (the «Reports»).

Most Canadians believe action should be taken on climate change, and of all the options available, carbon pricing comes with the lowest economic costs

Water shortages are being felt around the world yet impacts vary in different places, said Gleick, adding that the human, economic, and environmental costs of doing nothing, especially in the face of climate change and environmental security threats, are high and require «new thinking.»

In a further setback to reducing U.S. carbon emissions, the U.S Environmental Protection Agency has proposed lowering the U.S. government's «social cost» of carbon, or the estimated cost of sea - level rise, lower crop yields, and other climate - change related economic damages, from $ 42 per ton by 2020 to a low of $ 1 per ton.

They did so by adding the extra emissions to an existing model used in the UK government's 2006 Stern Review, designed to assess the economic cost of coping with climate change between now and 2200.

Yet at this forum, an on - campus debate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology over whether the university should divest the fossil fuel holdings within its $ 11 billion endowment, might not have happened if market forces properly priced the economic and environmental costs of climate change, a theme that Anthony Cortese, the event moderator, alluded to at the outset.

However, DiPerna cites new momentum among mainstream investors to take climate change issues into account, with new and strong interest by investors in reckoning with the fact that both the risks and costs of extreme weather events will continue to rise, with significant implications for economic stability.

Those who argue that reducing emissions will be too expensive ignore the costs of climate change - economic studies have consistently shown that mitigation is several times less costly than trying to adapt to climate change (Figure 7).

A separate, unpublished and preliminary economic analysis carried out by the team estimates that implementing large - scale cryogenic systems into coal - fired plants would see an overall reduction in costs to society of 38 percent through a sharp cut in associated health - care and climate - change costs.

About 500 scientists from 67 countries were gathering at the conference with the title «Counting the true costs of climate change» to push climate impact research to the next level by better integrating socio - economic factors.

«The prevailing economic climate has accelerated the forecasted structural change of the hotel market as consumers have chosen low - cost, quality accommodation rather than overpriced full - service and mid-market establishments.»

Are we sure there will be proportionate benefits from whatever climate change can be purchased at the cost of slowing economic growth and spending trillions?

Cost / probability weighting of risks and benefits is well - understood and is often raised in issues where economic and environmental interests are at contrary purposes, but for some odd reason it gets little attention in climate change.

Meanwhile, the opposition Labour Party has pledged to factor the cost of climate change into all future economic projections, should the party be voted back into office.

I think there's an interesting parallel between this issue and global warming — for many Americans (and most of Washington), climate change has been treated as an economic issue — where costs and benefits need to be balanced.

Until the free market is made to bear the true cost of fossil fuels, including all of the «externalities» (e.g. degradation of the commons including the immediate environment, climate change, medical costs that we all bear through insurance premiums) there will be no economic incentive to revamp transportation energy distribution.

The main reason I cover climate change issues so relentlessly is because any meaningful solution to this problem will cost big bucks and the current economic environment will not allow us to spend that kind of money.

Dorothy Atwood, one of the course participants, notes that «the reality of increasingly dangerous climate change — the rising temperatures and sea levels; the droughts, floods and stronger storms; the acidic oceans; the increasing forest fires; the expanding health dangers; the economic costs of floods, drought, hurricanes and sunken coastal cities — are very real to us and demand our personal and group response because it makes both environmental and economic sense to change the way we live and solve these problems.»

There is an urgent need to scale up financial flows, particularly financial support to developing countries; to create positive incentives for actions; to finance the incremental costs of cleaner and low - carbon technologies; to make more efficient use of funds directed toward climate change; to realize the full potential of appropriate market mechanisms that can provide pricing signals and economic incentives to the private sector; to promote public sector investment; to create enabling environments that promote private investment that is commercially viable; to develop innovative approaches; and to lower costs by creating appropriate incentives for and reducing and eliminating obstacles to technology transfer relevant to both mitigation and adaptation.

Governmental policies of export and import restrictions, hoarding, subsidies, panic buying, and infrastructure standards of food storage and transport, as well as investor speculation, currency valuations, individual national inflation rates, weather and climate change, the evolving monoculture genetics, rising input costs, and global macro economic health all impact food security.

Whereas, if left unaddressed, the consequences of a changing climate have the potential to adversely impact all Americans, hitting vulnerable populations hardest, harming productivity in key economic sectors such as construction, agriculture, and tourism, saddling future generations with costly economic and environmental burdens, and imposing additional costs on State and Federal budgets that will further add to the long - term fiscal challenges that we face as a Nation;

A failure to act to reduce the impacts of climate change could cost Europe dear in lives lost and economic damage, according to a European Commission study.

Another report by the German Institute of Economic Research concluded that «If climate policy measures are not introduced, global climate change damages amounting to up to 20 trillion US dollars can be expected in the year 2100... The costs of an active climate protection policy implemented today would reach globally around 430 billion US dollars in 2050 and around 3 trillion US dollars in 2100.»

The consensus scientific and economic opinion is that the consequences of failing to address climate change will dwarf the costs of the current financial unrest.

Of course, it is a tremendously complex calculation - lumping all the complexity of an economic cost and benefits calculation on top of the complexity of the climate - but to me this information is essential to work out priorities between competing policies, both among climate change policies and between CC and other sources of human happinesOf course, it is a tremendously complex calculation - lumping all the complexity of an economic cost and benefits calculation on top of the complexity of the climate - but to me this information is essential to work out priorities between competing policies, both among climate change policies and between CC and other sources of human happinesof an economic cost and benefits calculation on top of the complexity of the climate - but to me this information is essential to work out priorities between competing policies, both among climate change policies and between CC and other sources of human happinesof the complexity of the climate - but to me this information is essential to work out priorities between competing policies, both among climate change policies and between CC and other sources of human happinesof the climate - but to me this information is essential to work out priorities between competing policies, both among climate change policies and between CC and other sources of human happinesof human happiness.

CDR helps enable a cost - effective transition to a decarbonized economy: Today, environmental advocates claim that prolonged use of fossil fuels is mutually exclusive with preventing climate change, and fossil fuel advocates bash renewables as not ready for «prime time» — i.e. unable to deliver the economic / development benefits of inexpensive fossil energy.

Activities supported by the five regional commissions include, among others, the creation of strategies to integrate climate change consideration into development plans, the assessment of the economic impacts of climate change, and the evaluation of the costs of mitigation and adaptation.

The economic costs of natural disasters related to global warming are adding up; some of the largest effects of these catastrophes can be felt in the United States, where politics and policies are not keeping pace with the physical realities of climate change.

The two architects of the social cost of carbon, Michael Greenstone, who was on the White House Council of Economic Advisers early in Obama's first term, and Cass R. Sunstein, at the Office of Management and Budget, wrote a Times op - ed in December in defense of the measurement headlined «Donald Trump Should Know: This Is What Climate Change Costs Us.»

[i] Also, many cost - benefit analyses use high discount rates to estimate the future costs of climate change, which is questionable both on ethical grounds and because it assumes economic growth can continue indefinitely.

To pursue a 2oC pathway to address the risks of climate change, the need for efficiency gains is likely to ramp up significantly, meaning that capturing the most cost - effective efficiency gains will become even more important in order to spare society an unnecessary economic burden associated with high - cost options to reduce emissions.