in which the Economist abandons Bill Nordhaus and goes full Greta Thunberghttps://twitter.com/TheEconomist/status/1099435455253229568 …
-
Projections vary enormously, but have been getting much, much worse over just the last few years, as the models evolve. That $600tn figure is extrapolated from an estimated $551tn at 3.7C from this report, which the IPCC endorsed in October: https://tyndall.ac.uk/sites/default/files/publications/briefing_note_risks_warren_r1-1.pdf …
Dear David (if I may), thanks for ref+explanation for $600tr. I know ref, but no explanation for its calculation (just says "under review") Is the $660tr the total cost of climate impacts over 21st century, or is it cost per year? (neither clear in ref or IPCC)pic.twitter.com/hTJ3UFuiSR
-
-
My read was that it was a total figure for all climate damages this century in 1.5, 2, and 3.7C scenarios. But worth looking into more... (And very good to be in touch, Bjorn, I admire your work tremendously).
-
Thank you, and good to be in touch Yes, makes the most sense that it is the cost across the century That makes it straight-forward into Nordhaus/general territory, where he finds 2.5°C at ~$45tr (https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.20170046 … — likely slightly lower bc a slightly higher discount rate)pic.twitter.com/xaQju1tp3P
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.