Global Warming 101: Costs. by William Yeatman, February 04, 2009 7:21 Am
If we open or counter with…
1. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, annual global greenhouse gas emissions need to be reduced by 30.3 gigatons a year by 2050 to reduce emissions by 50 percent by 2050.
To “save” 1 gigaton of CO2-equivalent per year:
Someone would have to pay for all those new nuclear power plants and wind turbines. The International Energy Agency estimates that halving global emissions by 2050 would cost $45 trillion. That is $45 trillion above the cost of fossil fuel energy that would not be spent to create wealth.
Global Warming 101: Costs. by William Yeatman, February 04, 2009 @ 7:21 am
2. Climbing temperatures over the next 40 years will boost the cost of timber, water and crops, cause twice the wildfire damage that occurs now, exacerbate health issues and require expensive shoring-up to avoid damage to Tacoma, Willapa Bay and other low-lying areas.Those are the top-level conclusions reached in "Impacts of Climate Change on Washington's Economy," a 118-page, $100,000 study prepared by researchers from
The study concluded that: Increased carbon dioxide will mean bigger trees, while higher temperatures increase the incidence of wildfire. The number of acres burned will increase by 50 percent by 2020 and by 100 percent by 2040, so the annual cost of fighting wildfires may exceed $75 million by 2020 -- 50 percent higher than the current expenditures. That cost will double by 2040.
Lost timber sales, lost recreational and tourism opportunities, and health problems stemming from fires could be "many times higher" than the cost of fire control, Doppelt said.
The warming could cause unquantified public health costs through an increased spread of West Nile virus and increasing incidence of asthma, which already costs the state $400 million a year, and through heat-related illnesses and mortality.
Winters will bring more rain and less snow in the mountains, leading to a reduction in the snowpack essential for the summer water supply in Seattle and numerous other parts of the state. The cost of offsetting that decline through conservation measures could exceed $8 million per year by the 2020s and double that by the 2040s. Communities such as Spokane, Wenatchee and Walla Walla also will face increased costs for drinking water.
Puget Sound is likely to rise between 1 and 5 inches per decade, affecting mainly the land adjacent to the south part of Puget Sound. A 2-foot sea level rise would inundate 56 square miles of the state, affecting at least 44,000 people -- larger than the current population of Olympia. These rises could trigger costly upgrades to shoreline protection and to bridges and culverts.
Sea-level increases also will affect low-lying agricultural areas such as Willapa Bay and the Skagit River delta. Ports within reach of tidewater will feel the effects, as will the outer coast area because of increased erosion and increased vulnerability to storm surges and high tides.
Farmers will have longer growing seasons, but they'll face reduced water supplies, increased water demands, and changes in pests, weeds and crop diseases. Destructive codling moths are now reproducing three times per season, up from twice, because of the increased warmth.
Whatcom and Yakima counties may experience up to a $6 million decline in dairy revenue by the 2040s because higher temperatures adversely affect dairy cows. The average annual crop loss in the Yakima basin because of water shortages and drought could rise from a historic average of $13 million to $79 million by midcentury.
Wine grapes in Eastern Washington will be pushed to the upper limit of their temperature tolerance range, meaning they'll have to move uphill or to other regions. Cooler areas, such as Western Washington, may become more suitable for grapes.
Global warming to cost us
Millions will be spent on higher prices, fixes, study says
By DAN RICHMAN
P-I REPORTER
3. Already, people - mainly the poor - are paying the price of global warming as a result of droughts, flooding, wildfires and intensified hurricanes. But if we continue business as usual, the costs will rise dramatically. The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) has issued a report titled
“The Cost of Climate Change; What We’ll Pay if Global Warming Continues Unchecked”.
The report’s executive summary states the problem succinctly:
“Global warming comes with a big price tag for every country around the world. The 80 percent reduction in U.S. emissions that will be needed to lead international action to stop climate change may not come cheaply, but the cost of failing to act will be much greater. New research shows that if present trends continue, the total cost of global warming will be as high as 3.6 percent of gross domestic product (GDP). Four global warming impacts alone-hurricane damage, real estate losses, energy costs, and water costs-will come with a price tag of 1.8 percent of U.S. GDP, or almost $1.9 trillion annually (in today’s dollars) by 2100. We know how to avert most of these damages through strong national and international action to reduce the emissions that cause global warming. But we must act now. The longer we wait the more painful- and expensive-the consequences will be.”
Global Warming Costs will Rise Dramatically with Business as Usual, October 29th, 2008
Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate
/ Expect them to open or counter with…
Making energy more expensive would be catastrophic for the developing world, for which access to affordable energy is a precondition for economic growth, the most important driver of human well-being. Costly emissions reductions policies would rob the world’s poorest people of opportunities to escape poverty.
Alarmists claim that rising temperatures threaten human welfare—but reducing emissions from energy production also threatens human welfare, especially in the developing world, since doing so limits economic growth.
Global Warming 101: Costs. by William Yeatman, February 04, 2009 @ 7:21 am
There is not dollar amount attached to this report and it is focused on a local economy…Washington state.A reduction in 80% carbon reduction would destroy the ability of the US to compete globally and would effect the poor in that matter of lost economic opportunity. / Our response……
According to the U.S. Department of Energy, annual global greenhouse gas emissions need to be reduced by 30.3 gigatons a year by 2050 to reduce emissions by 50 percent by 2050 alternatives are few.
It is an example of the cost that true are local. If the reports holds true for the state what does it mean for the nation or the world.
The poor will suffer due to droughts, flooding, fires, lost of land and animals which if not reduced will cause million to parish.