ONLY ZERO CARBON ONLY ZERO CARBON ONLY ZERO CARBON ON LY ZERO CARBON ONLY ZERO CARBON ONLY ZERO
Zero Carbon Science to Zero Carbon Response
Cost of carbon
2014 Stanford Counting the Costs of Climate Change K. Arrow et al Department of Economics, Stanford University
The Cost of Carbon Pollution website The Cost of Carbon Project is a joint project of Environmental Defense Fund, the Institute for Policy Integrity, and Natural Resources Defense Council.
Carbon Tax Center website
April 2014 Nature Costs of carbon emissions are being underestimated, but current estimates are still valuable for setting mitigation policy, say Richard L. Revesz and colleagues. warming: Improve economic models of climate change Richard L. Revesz,
The surest fastest way to de-carbonize
- Fossil fuel energy has huge economic costs
- Mitigation of climate change has huge economic benefits -
NOT A COST !
is to terminate fossil fuel subsidies and
charge large polluters the full cost of pollution,
a (carbon price or tax).
UNEP in 2015 reports (4th report The Coming Financial Climate) that the world financial system must be overhauled in order to mitigate global climate chage and make the switch to sustainable development. (Climate News Net Article on the report)
In its 2015 energy subsidy review the IMF calculated world energy subsidies at over US$5 Trillion a year. In 2013 the IMF estimated world fossil fuel subsidies at US$1.9 Trillion a year, calling this an underestimate.
2014 World Bank Smart Policies Deliver
Economic, Health and Climate Benefits
The large economic benefit.In 2014 the World Bank published a ground breaking report on climate smart economic development report, which found with careful design, development projects that improve communities, save lives, and increase GDP can also fight climate change.
The Grantham Economic Institute's 2014 economic study Endogenous growth, convexity of damages and climate risk found that the current climate economic models result in 'gross under-assessment of the risks of unmanaged climate change'. This research finds that for the 2.0C limit in 2015 the carbon price would be $32-103 t.CO2 and increases in 2 decades to $82-260 t.CO2.The socio-environmental cost of carbon is at least ten times the estimates of governments and the IPCC AR5."We estimate that the social cost of carbon is not $37, as previously estimated, but $220," Moore and Diaz Stanford's School of Earth Sciences Jan 2015 Nature.PRICING CARBON VIDEO The Wesleyan Conference November 2010An excellent over view of the complicated way that our standard economics treats climate change The Economics of Global Climate Change 2009 Global Development And Environment Institute Tufts University
2010 Stockholm Environment Institute, USA Social cost of carbon by Frank Ackerman and Elizabeth A. Stanton. Good background here and a good critique of the how computer models by experts greatly underestimate the cost and lowball carbon pricing. The 2006 UK government's commissioned Stern Commission Economics of Climate Change remains is a leading published case for putting a price on carbon and the application of ethics in doing so.
The Economic Imperative to Act An August 2015 a Citibank report show that mitigating climate change is the only economic option that makes sense.The cost of progressing to a low carbon economy at $190.2 trillion is cheaper than an ‘Inaction’ fossil fuel scenario at $192 trillion. Climate damage costs of 1.5°C by 2100 and our heading today of 4.5°C warming scenarios are $50 trillion. Even a 2.5°C warming costs $30 trillion less than a business-as-usual high global warming scenario.The IPCC 2014 AR5 has documented that global climate change will be extremely costly in economic terms. Climate change will result in net costs into the future, aggregated across the globe and discounted to today; these costs will grow over time They run from US$-10 to US$+350 per tonne of carbon. Peer-reviewed estimates have a mean value of US$43 per tonne of carbon with a standard deviation of US$83 per tonne IPCC AR4 WG2
Even so IPCC AR5 misrepresented the cost benefit estimates badly. First the AR5 ignores the enormous economic benefit of rebuilding the world for zero carbon and it other benefits. It makes mitigation a cost and one that increases with time. This is economic nonsense.
'...mitigation scenarios that reach atmospheric concentrations of about 450 ppm CO2eq by 2100 entail losses in global consumption—not including benefits of reduced climate change as well as co-benefits of 1 % to 4 % (median: 1.7 %) in 2030, 2 % to 6 % (median: 3.4 %) in 2050, and 3 % to 11 % (median: 4.8 %) in 2100 relative to consumption in baseline scenarios that grows anywhere from 300 % to more than 900 % over the century.' (IPCC AR5 WG3 SPM p. 15)
In 2009 Canada's National Round Table on Environment and Economy issued a study ACHIEVING 2050:
A CARBON PRICING POLICY FOR CANADA finding that research suggests that economy-wide carbon prices will need to rise to $108 per tonne of CO2e by 2020 and upward of $300 per tonne of CO2e by 2050 to drive the behavioural change and technology deployment underlying the achievement of deep reductions.