The Pros And Mostly Cons Of CO2 Emissions

The Pros And Mostly Cons Of CO2 Emissions

What, quantitatively, is the social cost of carbon dioxide—the economic damage caused by a 1-ton increase in emissions or the benefits of a 1-ton decrease?

Carbon dioxide emissions from fossil-fuel power plants, motor vehicles, and other human sources are the primary driver of global climate change, which threatens people and ecosystems around the world.

A new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine aims to ensure that estimates of the social cost of carbon dioxide used by the US government continue to reflect state-of-the-art science and evidence.

Committee member Robert E. Kopp, an associate professor in the department of earth and planetary sciences at Rutgers University, and associate director of the Rutgers Energy Institute, discusses the topic.

Q: What is the social cost of carbon dioxide?

A: It’s an economic measure of the damage to human welfare from each ton of carbon dioxide we emit.

When you emit a ton of carbon dioxide, you increase the Earth’s average temperature by a tiny fraction of a degree for many centuries to come. That temperature increase has numerous impacts—mostly negative, but some positive—on people and ecosystems.

For example, it slightly increases the probability that people will die from heat-related causes and the probability of crop failure in warm regions, and it also slightly decreases the probability that people will die from cold-related causes.

Many processes besides mortality and crop growth are also temperature-sensitive, and turning up the global thermostat a tiny bit like we do when we emit an extra ton of carbon dioxide causes many small impacts to them. These small impacts affect human welfare, and it’s these welfare effects that the social cost of carbon dioxide attempts to estimate.

Q: How is the social cost of carbon dioxide used?

A: When the US government estimates the costs and benefits of proposed regulations, it uses the social cost of carbon dioxide to translate reductions of carbon dioxide emissions into monetary benefits that can be compared with the costs and non-climate benefits of implementing the regulations.

Currently, the US government’s central estimate of the social cost of carbon dioxide is about $40 per ton. That corresponds to about 30 cents per gallon of gasoline burned or, in New Jersey, to about 1.5 cents per kilowatt hour on the electric bill.

Q: What does the new National Academies report assess?

A: The report describes steps the US government can take, both in the near term and over the longer term, to ensure that the social cost of carbon dioxide estimates represent the best science available over time. It lays out a framework focused on the scientific basis, transparency, and uncertainty quantification of the analysis.

It describes a modular approach for undertaking the four key steps of the social cost of carbon dioxide estimation: the projection of future socioeconomics and emissions, the translation of emissions into climate change, the translation of climate change into damages to human welfare, and the discounting of damages over time.

Q: Why is benefit-cost analysis of climate change useful?

A: Currently, we humans emit about 40 billion tons of carbon dioxide a year, and every ton of carbon dioxide we emit increases average global temperature. The scientific community’s best assessment at the moment is that every trillion tons we emit leads to an increase of about 0.2 to 0.7 degrees Celsius (0.4 to 1.2 degrees Fahrenheit).

To stop additional global warming requires bringing net emissions to zero. That’s why the Paris climate change agreement, reached in December 2015, set a goal of doing so in the second half of this century.

A central economic question is how fast we can achieve net-zero emissions without the costs of the shift outweighing the benefits. That’s one of the reasons why benefit-cost analysis is useful. Theoretically, you could stop additional global warming by bringing global emissions to zero this year, but making the transition that quickly would be extraordinarily costly.

When we’re talking about climate policies, we’re always talking about the trade-offs between the damage we’re doing by emitting carbon dioxide and the costs (and non-climate benefits) of transitioning to a clean energy economy. Benefit-cost analysis helps navigate these trade-offs.

Q: How do you think the use of the social cost of carbon dioxide will fare in the new administration?

A: The US government’s use of the social cost of carbon dioxide estimates began in 2008 in response to a court ruling, and that obligation continues. If the government wants to propose regulations that decrease or increase carbon dioxide emissions, it is required to analyze the economic consequences of doing so.

And, regardless of what happens at the federal level, the social cost of carbon dioxide is also being used in states like California, Minnesota, and New York to inform their efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Q: How does this National Academies report relate to your research?

A: Much of the work of my research group, the Rutgers Earth System Science & Policy Lab, relates to the interface between physical changes in the climate and the economy, and to the characterization of uncertainty in physical changes and economic consequences.

In 2015, I and collaborators at the University of California, Berkeley and the Rhodium Group, wrote Economic Risks of Climate Change: An American Prospectus. Based on how people in the past have responded to variability in the climate, this book estimated the potential future economic damages climate change could cause in the United States. Now, joined also by collaborators at the University of Chicago, we’ve launched a new consortium, the Climate Impact Lab, that’s pursuing similar analyses at a global scale.

Source: Rutgers University

Related Books:

enafarzh-CNzh-TWnltlfrdehiiditjakomsfaptruesswsvthtrurvi

LATEST VIDEOS

Blue Ocean Event : Game Over?
by Just Have a Think
A Blue Ocean Event, or Ice-Free Arctic, is the source of almost fever pitch speculation in the climate science world.…
Climate Change - The Facts by Sir David Attenborough
by David Attenborough, BBC
After one of the hottest years on record, Sir David Attenborough looks at the science of climate change and potential…
Why it’s time to think about human extinction
by Kerwin Rae
After listening to this ep with Dr David Suzuki, you’ll never be the same again. The environmentalist, activist,…
Record Temperatures 20-25C Above Norm in far North
by Paul Beckwith
The Northwest Territories of Canada had March temperatures above 20C for the first time (hit 21.6C or 71F); breaking…
Why New CO₂ Capture Technology Is Not The Magic Bullet Against Climate Change
Why New CO₂ Capture Technology Is Not The Magic Bullet Against Climate Change
by Chris Hawes
According to a recent major UN report, if we are to limit temperature rise to 1.5 °C and prevent the most catastrophic…
Why Climate Change Will Dull Autumn Leaf Displays
Why Climate Change Will Dull Autumn Leaf Displays
by Matthew Brookhouse
Every autumn we are treated to one of nature’s finest seasonal annual transitions: leaf colour change and fall.
Climate denial isn’t stopping climate action.
by David Wallace-Wells
Climate change denial draws headlines. But is it actually an obstacle to climate action? A great majority of Americans…
Energy Storage: How to store renewable energy?
by Total
Under your bed, in the attic even on your mobile phone, it seems there's never enough storage. It turns out it's also…

LATEST ARTICLES

Crops at risk from changing climate
Crops at risk from changing climate
by Tim Radford
Global warming could bring yet more challenges to a hungry world. New studies have identified precise ways in which a…
Seeing The Planet Break Down In Climate Crisis Is Depressing – How To Turn Your Pain Into Action
Seeing The Planet In Climate Crisis Is Depressing – Turn Your Pain Into Action
by Cameron Brick
Environmentalism can feel like a drag. People trying to reduce their environmental impact often feel stressed and…
Global Inequality Is 25% Higher Than It Would Have Been In A Climate-stable World
by Nicholas Beuret
Those least responsible for global warming will suffer the most. Poorer countries – those that have contributed far…
Jason Kenney's Victory Means We'll All Pay The Price For Fossil Fuel Emissions
Jason Kenney's Victory In Alberta Means We'll All Pay The Price For Fossil Fuel Emissions
by D.T. Cochrane
Jason Kenney has led the United Conservative Party to victory in Alberta. There were manyobjectionablecomponents to the…
How Can Trees Really Cool Our Cities Down?
How Can Trees Really Cool Our Cities Down?
by Roland Ennos, University of Hull
In cities around the world, trees are often planted to help control temperatures and mitigate the effects of the “urban…
Beto O’Rourke Releases $5 Trillion Climate Change Proposal
Beto O’Rourke Releases $5 Trillion Climate Change Proposal
by Global Warming & Climate Change
But Varshini Prakash, executive director of the Sunrise Movement, a youth-led activist group that has advocated for the…
Should The Sahara Desert Be Turned Into A Huge Solar Farm?
Should The Sahara Desert Be Turned Into A Huge Solar Farm?
by Amin Al-Habaibeh
Whenever I visit the Sahara I am struck by how sunny and hot it is and how clear the sky can be.
How Retreating From The Sea Level Rise Will Affect Our Health?
How Retreating From The Sea Level Rise Will Affect Our Health?
by Jackson Holtz
Managed retreat in the face of sea level rise will be a mixed bag, researchers predict.