Follow EarthBlips on Twitter
Blog Reactions
The Energy Collective: Introduction to climate economics: Why even strong climate action has such a low total cost — one tenth of a penny on the dollar
Greenlight | OnEarth Magazine, from NRDC: What's Happening OnEarth- Tuesday, March 31
Worldchanging: Bright Green: Introduction To Climate Economics: Why Even Strong Climate Action Has Such A Low Total Cost — One Tenth Of A Penny On The Dollar
Introduction to climate economics: Why even strong climate action has such a low total cost — one tenth of a penny on the dollar
The Energy Collective —
... a net cost near zero. [See cost curve for global greenhouse gas reduction measures — click to enlarge.]
Must read IEA report, Part 1: Act now with clean energy or face 6°C warming. Cost is NOT high — media blows the story
How can the world’s leading governments and scientific experts and McKinsey and the traditionally conservative International Energy Agency agree that we can avoid catastrophe for such a small cost?
(more…)
Link to original post
What's Happening OnEarth- Tuesday, March 31
Greenlight | OnEarth Magazine, from NRDC —
... Joe Romm offers an "Introduction to Climate Economics," including the costs of climate action vs. the costs of climate inaction. Turns out, strong climate action is relatively cheap. [ClimateProgress] ...
First impression of Waxman-Markey: A solid bill that boosts the economy, creates green jobs, and puts the country on a path to preserve a livable climate. Grade: B+
The Energy Collective —
... Waxman-Markey seems pretty good. It will jumpstart the crucial transition to a green economy. It keeps the overall impact to U.S. businesses and consumers very low (as any smart climate bill would, see “Introduction to climate economics: Why even strong climate action has such a low total cost — one tenth of a penny on the dollar“). And it has the targets needed for the U.S. to join other countries in ...
Introduction To Climate Economics: Why Even Strong Climate Action Has Such A Low Total Cost — One Tenth Of A Penny On The Dollar
Worldchanging: Bright Green —
... ." And this is without even adding in the various ancillary benefits such as reduced air pollution and averting the huge economic dislocations that are inevitable from peak. Energy efficiency overview: This piece originally appeared in Climate Progress . Photo credit: flickr/ ...
Introduction to Climate Economics
Celsias Expert Articles —
... Introduction to climate economics: Why even strong climate action has such a low total cost one tenth of a penny on the dollar. By Joseph Romm, ClimateProgress.org ...
Joe Romm’s Solution to Climate Change
It's Getting Hot In Here —
... of global GDP: 1.1%, or approximately one trillion dollars per year.
The IPCC, The McKinsey Global Institute, and the conservative International Energy Agency all report that the cost of this strategy will reduce global GDP by less than $1 for every $10,000. Because the huge costs of dealing with climate change will largely be avoided by this strategy, it is a net gain for the global and US economies.
For more detail, see the original posts, here, here, and here.
Posted in global warming ...
Cool Companies, Part 1: How the best businesses boost profits and productivity by reducing greenhouse gas emissions
Natural Path - —
... The myth that reducing greenhouse gas emissions has a high cost for U.S. businesses is one of the greatest impediments to strong climate action. Yet all of the major economic studies of climate understand and model large potential savings (see "Intro to climate economics: Why even strong climate action has such a low total cost — one tenth of a penny on the dollar") — although they haven’t modeled savings as large as the best companies have achieved. That macroeconomic analysis needs to be bolstered by more microeconomic success stories in order to be ...
New book ‘SuperFreakonomics’ pushes global-cooling myths, sheer illogic, and ‘patent nonsense’
Grist - the Latest from Grist —
... I’ll address the other myriad errors and analytical flaws in the chapter in future posts. Their core argument is the same as Lomborg’s, that aerosol-based geo-engineering can substitute for aggressive mitigation, which they repeatedly diss as uneconomic, contrary to virtually all actual independent economic analysis (see “Introduction to climate economics: Why even strong climate action has such a low total cost—one tenth of a penny on the dollar“). They leave the impression Caldeira shares that view. This is what he really ...
