Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Monday August 26 2019, @06:05AM   Printer-friendly

Prevailing economic research anticipates the burden of climate change falling on hot or poor nations. Some predict that cooler or wealthier economies will be unaffected or even see benefits from higher temperatures.

However, a new study co-authored by researchers from the University of Cambridge suggests that virtually all countries—whether rich or poor, hot or cold—will suffer economically by 2100 if the current trajectory of carbon emissions is maintained.

In fact, the research published today by the National Bureau of Economic Research suggests that—on average—richer, colder countries would lose as much income to climate change as poorer, hotter nations.

Under a "business as usual" emissions scenario, average global temperatures are projected to rise over four degrees Celsius by the end of the century. This would cause the United States to lose 10.5% of its GDP by 2100—a substantial economic hit, say researchers.

Canada, which some claim will benefit economically from temperature increase, would lose over 13% of its income by 2100. The research shows that keeping to the Paris Agreement limits the losses of both North American nations to under 2% of GDP.

Researchers say that 7% of global GDP is likely to vanish by the end of the century unless "action is taken". Japan, India and New Zealand lose 10% of their income. Switzerland is likely to have an economy that is 12% smaller by 2100. Russia would be shorn of 9% of its GDP, with the UK down by 4%.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 26 2019, @02:27PM (4 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 26 2019, @02:27PM (#885645)

    Will not bother all economies however, only the richest.

    So if you want fewer refugees, fix the climate.

  • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 26 2019, @02:49PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 26 2019, @02:49PM (#885655)

    Interesting logic. Turn your country into a poor shithole, so economic migrants look elsewhere.

    • (Score: 2) by meustrus on Monday August 26 2019, @03:45PM

      by meustrus (4961) on Monday August 26 2019, @03:45PM (#885681)

      Hm, interesting logic. Electric generators running on free sunbeams on every rooftop = poor shithole. I guess only rich countries can afford to mine, transport, burn, and clean up after centralized industrial power like coal.

      --
      If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 26 2019, @05:34PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 26 2019, @05:34PM (#885724)

    Build the moat! Build the moat! Build the moat!

  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday August 26 2019, @07:08PM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 26 2019, @07:08PM (#885769) Journal

    Yes, that. The poorest of nations, where people don't see $100 worth of cash money in a year, aren't going to see "economies" crashing. Their concerns are, feeding their kids, patching thatch roofs after a storm, and maybe having enough to barter for a little tobacco, and a bottle of alcohol from the fellow tribesmen who produces them. Economy? WTF do they care about Wall Street crashing, or any other stock exchange?