Further delay in the implementation of comprehensive international climate policies could substantially increase the short-term costs of climate change mitigation.
Global economic growth would be cut back by up to 7 percent within the first decade after climate policy implementation if the current international stalemate is continued until 2030 – compared to 2 percent if a climate agreement is reached by 2015 already, a study to be published next tuesday by scientists of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) shows. Higher costs would in turn increase the threshold for decision-makers to start the transition to a low-carbon economy. Thus, to keep climate targets within reach it seems to be most relevant to not further postpone mitigation, the researchers conclude.
“The transitional economic repercussions that would result if the switch towards a climate-friendly economy is delayed, are comparable to the costs of the financial crisis the world just experienced,” lead-author Gunnar Luderer says. The later climate policy implementation starts, the faster – hence the more expensive – emissions have to be reduced if states world-wide want to achieve the internationally agreed target of limiting global warming to 2 degrees above pre-industrial levels. A binding global agreement to implement the emissions reductions required to reach this target is currently still under negotiation, while global emissions have continued to rise.
“For the first time, our study quantifies the short-term costs of tiptoeing when confronted with the climate challenge,” Luderer says. “Economists tend to look at how things balance out in the long-term, but decision-makers understandably worry about additional burdens for the people and businesses they are responsible for right now. So increased short-term costs due to delaying climate policy might deter decision-makers from starting the transformation. The initial costs of climate policies thus can be more relevant than the total costs.”
Future energy price increases could be limited
The researchers investigated a number of cost dimensions, including climate policy effects on energy prices. If emissions reductions are delayed beyond 2030, global energy price levels are likely to increase by 80 percent in the short term. Such price increases are of particular concern because of the burden they put on the world’s poor. In the past, comparable energy price increases in developing countries have resulted in massive public opposition and social unrest, like in Indonesia in 1998 after a cutback of fuel subsidies. If an agreement on emissions reductions compatible with the 2 degree target is reached until 2015, short-term energy price increases could be limited to 25 percent.
The Latest on: Climate policy
Mike Bloomberg pledges $4.5 million to cover U.S. commitment to Paris climate pact, rips scandal-scarred EPA chief
on April 22, 2018 at 9:55 am
The EPA under Pruitt has gutted environmental regulations and efforts to combat climate change. Pruitt has also drawn scrutiny for his high spending on travel and possible conflicts of interest in his ties to industry. “His policies are not good for the ... […]
She Tried To Report On Climate Change. Sinclair Told Her To Be More "Balanced."
on April 22, 2018 at 9:53 am
The scientific consensus is that climate change is real and humans are largely to blame ... personal Twitter account that were in violation of Sinclair’s social media policy. “With record unemployment, job creation, lower crime rates and booming ... […]
We can fix this: Don’t be dispirited by Big Oil’s power in the age of Trump — real climate change solutions are in reach
on April 22, 2018 at 2:00 am
The answer is a decisive yes, but it requires clear and ambitions targets and policies to usher in a zero-carbon energy system. Climate science gives us the basic framework: We need to end our dependency on fossil fuels by 2050. By mid-century, we need a ... […]
Why the climate challenge needs congressional action
on April 21, 2018 at 6:50 am
Commitment to reducing emissions must last generations if it is to be successful. And we have seen the dangers of partisanship in the Australian climate policy experience, in which a carbon tax policy adopted in 2011 was promptly dumped in 2014 ... […]
Democrats must embrace shale gas boom to win elections and climate battle
on April 21, 2018 at 5:00 am
Democratic candidates should carry a winning version of this message right into the midterm elections: They must denounce the climate nihilism of the Trump administration, and highlight the stunning clean energy revolution Democratic policies have done ... […]
Building a Climate-Resilient South Asia
on April 20, 2018 at 7:49 pm
Involving civil society, including women-run organizations, will bring greater accountability to climate change policies that will later impact the entire population. And that sense of co-ownership and shared responsibility, Khan added, is critical to ... […]
Guest column: Climate crisis requires bipartisan solutions
on April 20, 2018 at 11:18 am
There is no debating that implementing any climate policy faces stiff headwinds in Congress, a resistance most often attributed to climate-deniers in the Republican Party. But there is movement among Republicans and Conservatives on the issue as evidenced ... […]
Pompeo must study climate change because it's at the root of every national security problem
on April 20, 2018 at 10:42 am
It is easy to call dictators names, drop a bomb, launch a missile. But of the factors that trouble the Middle East, climate is the one that American policy can influence. Ignoring climate change makes real problems worse — and fake problems real. […]
We need a firewall against vested interests in climate policy-making
on April 11, 2018 at 2:53 pm
From Brussels, civil society is leading the EU-level call for a conflict of interest policy at the UN climate talks. With environment ministers now preparing for the UN climate change conference in May, it's time for the EU to back efforts tackling the ... […]
via Google News and Bing News