Sentences with phrase «social cost of climate change»

Environmental economists have long argued a carbon price is the best way to factor in the social cost of climate change.

It consists of 11 chapters covering the scope of the analysis, decision making under uncertainty, equity issues, intertemporal equity and discounting, applicability of cost and benefit assessments to climate change, social costs of climate change, response options, conceptual issues related to estimating mitigation costs, review of mitigation cost studies, integrated assessment of climate change, and an economic assessment of policy options to address climate change.

Fankhauser, S. and Tol, R. S. J. (1997) The Social Costs of Climate Change: The IPCC Second Assessment Report and Beyond.

To help correct the «world's greatest market failure,» MDBs must do more to internalize the environmental and social costs of climate change into their decision - making including:

Not exact matches

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.

The social cost of carbon is a metric used to evaluate the costs of climate change.

The League of Conservation Voters gives McMorris Rodgers a 4 percent lifetime score out of a possible 100 in their environmental scorecard because she has voted against bills that would have required the federal government to account for the social cost of carbon in administrative actions and required federally funded projects to be resilient to the impacts of climate change.

linking probabilistic simple climate models, complex Earth system models, and econometric analyses of historical weathering and climate impacts to project future risks associated with climate change and improve estimates of the social cost of carbon.

In contrast, EPA's estimate for the total gains from avoided climate change damages as well as other factors (such as reduced macroeconomic volatility from reduced reliance on oil imports), might yield as little as $ 29 billion in the year 2040, in the scenario where the «social cost of carbon» is relatively low.

10/14/17 — As part of its drive to overturn the Obama - era Clean Power Plan, the Environmental Protection Agency recently released significantly lower estimates of the so - called social cost of carbon dioxide, a measure widely used to weigh the value of actions aimed at stopping climate change.

To weigh the costs of climate change, the Obama Administration used something called the social cost of carbon — a per ton estimate pegged most recently at $ 36 designed to price the value of preventing carbon pollution.

But in Issues, analysts have identified a more fundamental problem — the social cost of carbon dioxide is the wrong guide to follow — and they proposed an alternative method that better reflects what is known about long - term effects of climate change and how these effects should be valued by today's decision - makers.

Yet a leading U.S. Senate advocate of legislative action on climate seems to be starting off like a sprinter, perhaps because his legislation is pegged to estimates of the Social Cost of Carbon that don't account for the possibility that climate change will turn out to be catastrophically costly.

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.»

The work of saving nuclear by Environmental Progress will prevent $ 25 billion in economic damages from climate change damage by 2025, based on the US EPA's social cost of carbon.

Social cost of carbon - The value of the climate change impacts from 1 metric ton (~ 2,205 pounds) of carbon emitted today as CO2, aggregated over time and discounted back to the present day; sometimes also expressed as value per metric ton of carbon dioxide.

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.

Gernot Wagner, Ph.D., works closely with EDF's Office of the Chief Economist, participating in projects relating to climate damages and tipping points, the social cost of carbon, empirical modeling of climate change and human activity, and others.

Limited availability of data and a variety of uncertainties relating to future changes in climate, social and economic conditions, and the responses that will be made to address those changes, frustrate precise cost and economic loss inventories.

His March 28 executive order «promoting energy independence and economic growth» rescinded the Obama administration's calculation of the «social cost of carbon» — a metric that had been central to the process of crafting and justifying government rules addressing human - driven climate change.

Until recently, the federal government used an estimate of the social cost of carbon dioxide — one way to calculate the damage caused by climate change — of about US$ 40 / ton.

«Even if we agreed on a particular computer simulation of the monetary damages accruing from climate change over the next few centuries, the calculation of the «social cost of carbon» would vary widely, depending on our choice of parameters that have nothing to do with climate science,» he said.

But the working group assumed that the threats from climate change, based on these computer programs, should be the basis for establishing the social cost of carbon.

The social cost of carbon is a monetary value measuring the alleged climate change damages from each ton of emitted carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

Of course, the fetish for phony precision is not unique to climate - change models but rife in economic analysis, from interest rate settings to social costs of smokinOf course, the fetish for phony precision is not unique to climate - change models but rife in economic analysis, from interest rate settings to social costs of smokinof smoking.

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.

This would help deal with the «externalities» that burning fossil fuels brings, including the social cost of having to adapt to climate change.

Energy and Environment: Repudiate the Paris Climate Agreement Defund the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Overturn or at Least Defund the EPA's Clean Power Plan Repeal the EPA's Purloined Power to Legislate Climate Policy Repeal the EPA's Carbon Dioxide Standards for New Fossil - Fuel Power Plants Oppose Carbon Taxes Prohibit Use of Social Cost of Carbon as a Justification for Regulating Emissions Freeze and Sunset the Renewable Fuel Standard Require all Agencies to Meet Rigorous Scientific Standards Address Unaccountable Environmental Research Programs

• Poles to tropics temperature gradient, average temp of tropics over past 540 Ma; and arguably warming may be net - beneficial overall • Quotes from IPCC AR4 WG1 showing that warming would be beneficial for life, not damaging • Quotes from IPCC AR5 WG3 stating (in effect) that the damage functions used for estimating damages are not supported by evidence • Richard Tol's breakdown of economic impacts of GW by sector • Economic damages of climate change — about the IAMs • McKitrick — Social Cost of Carbon much lower than commonly stated • Bias on impacts of GHG emissions — Figure 1 is a chart showing 15 recent estimates of SCC — Lewis and Curry, 2015, has the lowest uncertainty range.

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.

Or take for instance, the federal court ruling last week that halted a proposed coal mining operation in Colorado stating that the «social costs» of contributions the mine would make to worsening impacts of climate change in the future were not taken into consideration.

And if you believe, as do many conservatives, that government intervention in markets and in social arrangements should be kept to a minimum, you can find factual support for your views in the long - term unpredictability of regional climate behavior, the significant economic and social costs associated with shifting to more expensive energy sources, and the historical failure of government efforts to steer large - scale social and economic change.

Nevertheless, since these social cost of carbon figures are used by other federal agencies, they provide a glimpse at one way the Interior Department could consider the impacts of climate change when managing coal on behalf of the American people.

This question is especially important in light of a recent federal court ruling, which blocked plans to expand a coal mine in Colorado because of the failure of the federal coal leasing program to properly consider the federal government's social cost of carbon figures and climate change impacts.

Social cost of carbon figures increase each year, as increased carbon pollution further exacerbates climate change impacts, and the Interagency Working Group provides those figures at 5 year intervals.

Because the social cost of carbon increases each year, calculations of how much climate change damages are expected because of the emissions from this coal should take into account when the coal is likely to be burned.

Costs are defined in a variety of ways and under a variety of assumptions that affect their value ► Cost types include: ► administrative costs of planning, management, monitoring, audits, accounting, reporting, clerical activities, etc. associated with a project or program; ► damage costs to ecosystems, economies and people due to negative effects from climate change; ► implementation costs of changing existing rules and regulation, capacity building efforts, information, training and education, etc. to put a policy into place; ► private costs are carried by individuals, companies or other private entities that undertake the action, where ► social costs include additionally the external costs on the environment and on society as a wCosts are defined in a variety of ways and under a variety of assumptions that affect their value ► Cost types include: ► administrative costs of planning, management, monitoring, audits, accounting, reporting, clerical activities, etc. associated with a project or program; ► damage costs to ecosystems, economies and people due to negative effects from climate change; ► implementation costs of changing existing rules and regulation, capacity building efforts, information, training and education, etc. to put a policy into place; ► private costs are carried by individuals, companies or other private entities that undertake the action, where ► social costs include additionally the external costs on the environment and on society as a wcosts of planning, management, monitoring, audits, accounting, reporting, clerical activities, etc. associated with a project or program; ► damage costs to ecosystems, economies and people due to negative effects from climate change; ► implementation costs of changing existing rules and regulation, capacity building efforts, information, training and education, etc. to put a policy into place; ► private costs are carried by individuals, companies or other private entities that undertake the action, where ► social costs include additionally the external costs on the environment and on society as a wcosts to ecosystems, economies and people due to negative effects from climate change; ► implementation costs of changing existing rules and regulation, capacity building efforts, information, training and education, etc. to put a policy into place; ► private costs are carried by individuals, companies or other private entities that undertake the action, where ► social costs include additionally the external costs on the environment and on society as a wcosts of changing existing rules and regulation, capacity building efforts, information, training and education, etc. to put a policy into place; ► private costs are carried by individuals, companies or other private entities that undertake the action, where ► social costs include additionally the external costs on the environment and on society as a wcosts are carried by individuals, companies or other private entities that undertake the action, where ► social costs include additionally the external costs on the environment and on society as a wcosts include additionally the external costs on the environment and on society as a wcosts on the environment and on society as a whole.

From our collective experience as physical and social scientists working at the intersection of climate change and society, we argue it is time for a shift in the objectives and implementation of climate change assessments — from making what amounts to a general case for «action,» to characterizing specific risks to help people develop, select, carry out, and monitor specific actions that ultimately have greater benefits than costs.

To do so, federal agencies use figures from the government's Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Carbon, which are estimates of some of the climate change damages suffered by society, expressed as a dollar figure per metric ton of CO2.

The social cost of carbon is the discounted monetary value of future climate change damages due to additional CO2 emissions (for example, the costs of adverse agricultural effects, protecting against rising sea levels, health impacts, species loss, risks of extreme warming scenarios, and so on).

This lower discount rate translates into a considerable increase in the social cost of carbon emissions, and hence even greater impetus to mitigate climate change.

Teng estimates there would be a further cost of 160 yuan per tonne, on top of the 260 yuan calculated in the study, if the long - term social impact of climate change from coal burning were considered.

Social cost estimates of climate change are too low, according to some scientists at Stanford University.

I hold, therefore, that the net social costs of wind power have been slight, and far outweighed by the benefits, especially if you consider slowing climate change as one of the benefits.

Is the Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) metric a good tool for use in making government decisions related to climate change and fossil fuel development?

The notoriously anti-science House Science Committee has hit a new low, voting on Thursday to approve a spending bill amendment that «would prohibit defense spending on climate change research and the social cost of carbon analysis.»

He is a lead author of Economic Risks of Climate Change: An American Prospectus (Columbia University Press, 2015) and of the U.S. Global Change Research Program's 2017 Climate Science Special Report, a member of the National Academies» Committee on Assessing Approaches to Updating the Social Cost of Carbon, and a contributing author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's 2014 Fifth Assessment Report.

Radhika is a predoctoral fellow at the Energy Policy Institute of Chicago (EPIC) working on the Social Cost of Carbon project which is aimed at providing a global assessment of climate change impacts.

The social cost of carbon includes, for example, changes in net agricultural productivity and human health, property damage from increased flood risk, energy system costs, and the value of ecosystem services lost because of climate change.

«Here in Washington, D.C., one of the hottest debates around the Barack Obama administration's fight against climate change is perhaps the most important number you've never heard of: The social cost of carbon (SCC).»