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).
-
-
Vastauksena käyttäjille @dwallacewells ja @RichardTol
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
2 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 1 tykkäys -
The $600tr is discounted; compare net worth of the 21st century with Nordhaus (although he has higher discount, so total lower) of $4491tr, that means global warming cost is 13.4% of total GDP Certainly above peer-reviewed finds from IPCC (update of IPCC) https://www.nber.org/reporter/2017number3/nordhaus.html …pic.twitter.com/w6s7gecqkd
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @BjornLomborg ja @RichardTol
In this paper (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0071-9 …) Burke et al estimated a cost to global GDP of 4C of 30%+ (compared with a projected global GDP without the impacts of climate change).
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 1 tykkäys -
Projections vary significantly, and of course it depends what your baseline is. But I think it's fair to say that the research is moving pretty rapidly in the direction of higher economic costs to climate change, even if so much of that projection is governed by uncertainties.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystä -
And of course it's also an open question just how fair it is to use economic models like these as a single metric for considering global impacts, since, for instance, real estate flooded in Bangladesh counts much less than real estate flooded in Miami.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystä -
But I agree with you, I think, that judged from the vantage of the present even a global economy pummeled by terrible warming would have produced significant growth compared to today's.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystä -
Compared to an economy that had grown without doing battle with the forces of climate change, however, the impacts would look enormous. Along the way we would be enduring slower growth year to year, with all the political fallout that produces.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystä -
In parts of the world, it's possible the prospects for any economic growth would be effectively zeroed out.
2 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystä -
Anyway, DM your address—I'd love to send you my book in full. Probably a fair amount to talk about...
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystä
Vastauksena käyttäjille @dwallacewells ja @RichardTol
Great, I DM'ed you — let's talk offsite :)
1.14 - 25. helmik. 2019
0 vastausta
0 uudelleentwiittausta
0 tykkäystä
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.