Sentences with phrase «higher costs of climate change»

If we make the switch and rely on renewable sources of energy like the sun, we can save billions of dollars by avoiding not only the costs of replacing these plants, but also the increasingly higher costs of climate change in areas like healthcare expenses and damage from extreme weather.

While not all states are pursuing climate policies, Carbon Brief analysis showed that those concerned about the potential high cost of climate change represent 40 % of total US emissions.

Another Brit, Nicholas Stern, an economist who wrote a seminal report on the high costs of climate change in 2006, is similarly concerned.

The Obama administration said that the CPP would have net economic benefits of about $ 26 to $ 45 billion, based, in part, on avoiding the high cost of climate change impacts.

Not exact matches

Now Tata is pointing to unrealistically low prices of Chinese steel as a factor behind the closure of Port Talbot plant, alongside high energy prices and the extra cost of climate change policies.

But these do not affect the key point: the effects of climate change, for example, will cause massive adjustment costs so higher GDP may well not feed through to higher living standards.

That's why we have to look at the balance in terms of what is cheaper: Can we reduce emissions of greenhouse gases today so that we can stabilize the earth's climate, rather than adapt to the impacts of climate change and incur much higher costs over a period of time?

«Higher temperatures and changes in precipitation result in pressure on yields from important crops in much of the world,» says IFPRI agricultural economist Gerald Nelson, an author of the report, «Climate Change, Agriculture, and Food Security: Impacts and Costs of Adaptation to 2050».

But factoring in climate change will boost wheat prices by at least 170 percent and rice by a minimum of 113 percent; the cost of maize will be at least 148 percent higher than at the turn of the century by mid-century.

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.»

High confidence in the reliability of fire prediction is lacking today, even as Western drought and the effects of climate change drive up the total acres burned nationwide and also the average size of each fire, ballooning the number of on - call U.S. Forest Service firefighters and the total costs to battle the flames.

At the same time, farmers face unprecedented challenges of climate change, high oil prices driving demand for biofuels, and rising costs of land and water.

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.

Some places in Europe (like in Germany and Eastern Europe) will have even greater flooding worries in the next couple of decades, and higher budget costs, due to climate change.

The high - income countries should help to finance the costs of climate - change mitigation in low - income countries as the high - income countries have promised to do;

It's slow to build and slow to get regulatory approval and has high capital costs, so these things alone mean its hard to see it dealing with dangerous climate change problem within the time constraints of the next 30 — 40 years.

Carbon dioxide removal addresses the root cause of climate change — high concentrations of the greenhouse gas in the atmosphere — and generally have well - understood benefits and risks, but current technologies would take decades to achieve moderate results and be cost - prohibitive at scales large enough to have a sizeable impact.

Some economists, scientists, and planners look at the historical record and conclude that our ingenuity will get us through any coming climate change, and that the immediate cost of preventing — or at least slowing — any man - made change is unacceptably high.

In addition to raising doubts about climate science and about the need to slow climate change by reducing emissions, the company site omits any discussion of the costly consequences of climate change, choosing instead to focus exclusively on high - end estimates of the costs of reducing emissions.

Given the uncertainties surrounding the science of climate change, the minuscule impact of the suggested remedies, and the high cost of proposed regulations, now is a good time to step back from precipitous actions and exaggerated rhetoric.

Older people are at much higher risk of dying during extreme heat events.136, 50,241,233 Pre-existing health conditions also make older adults susceptible to cardiac and respiratory impacts of air pollution25 and to more severe consequences from infectious diseases; 257 limited mobility among older adults can also increase flood - related health risks.258 Limited resources and an already high burden of chronic health conditions, including heart disease, obesity, and diabetes, will place the poor at higher risk of health impacts from climate change than higher income groups.25, 50 Potential increases in food cost and limited availability of some foods will exacerbate current dietary inequalities and have significant health ramifications for the poorer segments of our population (Ch.

[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.

And even with strong international climate policies, more rapid decarbonization (the rate of decrease in emissions per unit of GDP) will require higher costs and major policy change.

The loss of financial capital can be a lot higher and faster than the GDP losses [used to model the costs of climate change in the study].

Weitzman pointed out that, when we consider the full range of possible outcomes from climate change, the outlying possibilities on the high - cost side of the range of possible outcomes do not go quickly to zero, which implies far greater risks — and a far greater likelihood of damages — than conventional analyses would suggest.

The global cost of natural disasters is getting higher as the number of extreme weather events increases due to climate change.

A report on the impacts of climate change on human health published by the European Commission Joint Research Council also shows that coastal flooding and high sea - level rise scenarios could have significant negative effects on mental health, in addition to high economic costs.

The risk in developing countries is mis - allocation of resources to high cost infrastructure for adaptation to climate change that may never happen.

These questions are organized according to the most frequent arguments made against climate change policies which are claims that climate change policies: (a) will impose unacceptable costs on a national economy or specific industries or prevent nations from pursuing other national priorities, (b) should not be adopted because of scientific uncertainty about climate change impacts, or (c) are both unfair and ineffective as long as high emitting nations such as China or India do not adopt meaningful ghg emissions reduction policies.

However, the costs of coping with health risks linked to severe climate change are often higher than the costs of curbing heat - trapping emissions in the first place.

Rural poverty in parts of Asia could be exacerbated due to negative impacts from climate change on rice production, and a general increase in food prices and the cost of living [high confidence].

The IEA has also estimated that by 2050 the cost of tackling climate change without CCS could be 70 % higher than with it.

-- Muller believes humans are changing climate with CO2 emissions — humans have been responsible for «most» of a 0.4 C warming since 1957, almost none of the warming before then — IPCC is in trouble due to sloppy science, exaggerated predictions; chairman will have to resign — the «Climategate» mails were not «hacked» — they were «leaked» by an insider — due to «hide the decline» deception, Muller will not read any future papers by Michael Mann — there has been no increase in hurricanes or tornadoes due to global warming — automobiles are insignificant in overall picture — China is the major CO2 producer, considerably more than USA today — # 1 priority for China is growth of economy — global warming is not considered important — China CO2 efficiency (GDP per ton CO2) is around one - fourth of USA today, has much room for improvement — China growth will make per capita CO2 emissions at same level as USA today by year 2040 — if it is «not profitable» it is «not sustainable» — US energy future depends on shale gas for automobiles; hydrogen will not be a factor — nor will electric cars, due to high cost — Muller is upbeat on nuclear (this was recorded pre-Fukushima)-- there has been no warming in the USA — Muller was not convinced of Hansen's GISS temperature record; hopes BEST will provide a better record.

The U.S. Congress begins a summer of important debates on the future of American energy policy — debates that the Group of Eight industrialized nations can help shape at their summit in Germany this week by focusing on the devastating impact high energy costs and climate change have on the world's most vulnerable populations.

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

We also explained that for over 30 years, proponents of action on climate change mostly focused on responding to the arguments made by opponents of climate change that government action on climate change was unjustifiable due to scientific uncertainty and high costs of proposed climate policies.

Alaska is home to 40 % (229 of 566) of the federally recognized tribes in the United States.171 The small number of jobs, high cost of living, and rapid social change make rural, predominantly Native, communities highly vulnerable to climate change through impacts on traditional hunting and fishing and cultural connection to the land and sea.

The cost of climate change is uncertain to a factor of 10 or more and could be as high as ∼ $ 1000 / tCO2 [235], [240].

However, the social cost of carbon (SCC) is higher (by about 15 %) under uncertainty than in the certainty - equivalent case because of asymmetry in the impacts of uncertainty on the damages from climate change.

Climate change — inducing greenhouse gas emissions have real impacts, and the cost of inaction is high.

* The International Energy Agency recently found that the costs of avoiding dangerous climate change may be three times higher than those estimated by the IPCC in 2007.

(11/15/07) «Ban the Bulb: Worldwide Shift from Incandescents to Compact Fluorescents Could Close 270 Coal - Fired Power Plants» (5/9/07) «Massive Diversion of U.S. Grain to Fuel Cars is Raising World Food Prices» (3/21/07) «Distillery Demand for Grain to Fuel Cars Vastly Understated: World May Be Facing Highest Grain Prices in History» (1/4/07) «Santa Claus is Chinese OR Why China is Rising and the United States is Declining» (12/14/06) «Exploding U.S. Grain Demand for Automotive Fuel Threatens World Food Security and Political Stability» (11/3/06) «The Earth is Shrinking: Advancing Deserts and Rising Seas Squeezing Civilization» (11/15/06) «U.S. Population Reaches 300 Million, Heading for 400 Million: No Cause for Celebration» (10/4/06) «Supermarkets and Service Stations Now Competing for Grain» (7/13/06) «Let's Raise Gas Taxes and Lower Income Taxes» (5/12/06) «Wind Energy Demand Booming: Cost Dropping Below Conventional Sources Marks Key Milestone in U.S. Shift to Renewable Energy» (3/22/06) «Learning From China: Why the Western Economic Model Will not Work for the World» (3/9/05) «China Replacing the United States and World's Leading Consumer» (2/16/05)» Foreign Policy Damaging U.S. Economy» (10/27/04) «A Short Path to Oil Independence» (10/13/04) «World Food Security Deteriorating: Food Crunch In 2005 Now Likely» (05/05/04) «World Food Prices Rising: Decades of Environmental Neglect Shrinking Harvests in Key Countries» (04/28/04) «Saudis Have U.S. Over a Barrel: Shifting Terms of Trade Between Grain and Oil» (4/14/04) «Europe Leading World Into Age of Wind Energy» (4/8/04) «China's Shrinking Grain Harvest: How Its Growing Grain Imports Will Affect World Food Prices» (3/10/04) «U.S. Leading World Away From Cigarettes» (2/18/04) «Troubling New Flows of Environmental Refugees» (1/28/04) «Wakeup Call on the Food Front» (12/16/03) «Coal: U.S. Promotes While Canada and Europe Move Beyond» (12/3/03) «World Facing Fourth Consecutive Grain Harvest Shortfall» (9/17/03) «Record Temperatures Shrinking World Grain Harvest» (8/27/03) «China Losing War with Advancing Deserts» (8/4/03) «Wind Power Set to Become World's Leading Energy Source» (6/25/03) «World Creating Food Bubble Economy Based on Unsustainable Use of Water» (3/13/03) «Global Temperature Near Record for 2002: Takes Toll in Deadly Heat Waves, Withered Harvests, & Melting Ice» (12/11/02) «Rising Temperatures & Falling Water Tables Raising Food Prices» (8/21/02) «Water Deficits Growing in Many Countries» (8/6/02) «World Turning to Bicycle for Mobility and Exercise» (7/17/02) «New York: Garbage Capital of the World» (4/17/02) «Earth's Ice Melting Faster Than Projected» (3/12/02) «World's Rangelands Deteriorating Under Mounting Pressure» (2/5/02) «World Wind Generating Capacity Jumps 31 Percent in 2001» (1/8/02) «This Year May be Second Warmest on Record» (12/18/01) «World Grain Harvest Falling Short by 54 Million Tons: Water Shortages Contributing to Shortfall» (11/21/01) «Rising Sea Level Forcing Evacuation of Island Country» (11/15/01) «Worsening Water Shortages Threaten China's Food Security» (10/4/01) «Wind Power: The Missing Link in the Bush Energy Plan» (5/31/01) «Dust Bowl Threatening China's Future» (5/23/01) «Paving the Planet: Cars and Crops Competing for Land» (2/14/01) «Obesity Epidemic Threatens Health in Exercise - Deprived Societies» (12/19/00) «HIV Epidemic Restructuring Africa's Population» (10/31/00) «Fish Farming May Overtake Cattle Ranching As a Food Source» (10/3/00) «OPEC Has World Over a Barrel Again» (9/8/00) «Climate Change Has World Skating on Thin Ice» (8/29/00) «The Rise and Fall of the Global Climate Coalition» (7/25/00) «HIV Epidemic Undermining sub-Saharan Africa» (7/18/00) «Population Growth and Hydrological Poverty» (6/21/00) «U.S. Farmers Double Cropping Corn And Wind Energy» (6/7/00) «World Kicking the Cigarette Habit» (5/10/00) «Falling Water Tables in China» (5/2/00) Top of page

The high costs for the US economy of mitigating climate change have been cited by the Bush administration as one of the reasons for rejecting US ratification of the Kyoto Protocol.

Stern reckons that a high - carbon growth future would kill itself, firstly from high hydrocarbon costs and then because of climate change.

Prof MacKay stressed the importance of CCS, endorsing other analyses that indicate that the costs of tackling climate change are much higher without the technology.

Decades of delay in addressing climate change is costly: • Adaptation costs are already higher today because of delay, and will be worse tomorrow.

The essence of the declaration is a recognition by financial institutions from around the globe that anthropogenic climate change is real, the cost of inaction will be extremely high, financial institutions must take greater action and integrate climate change into their everyday decision - making, and governments need to do more, namely set ambitious, long - term targets for emissions reduction.

Critics blame the kind of short - sightedness that sent Brookman to the exit and often results in too much focus on present high electric rates instead of long - term electricity costs paired with climate change benefits.

Fires, floods and hurricanes are already costing the federal government tens of billions of dollars a year and climate change will drive those costs ever higher in coming years, a new federal study warns.