- cross-posted to:
- collapse@lemmit.online
- climate@slrpnk.net
- cross-posted to:
- collapse@lemmit.online
- climate@slrpnk.net
A 1C increase in global temperature leads to a 12% decline in world gross domestic product, researchers have found
The economic damage wrought by climate change is six times worse than previously thought, with global heating set to shrink wealth at a rate consistent with the level of financial losses of a continuing permanent war, research has found.
A 1C increase in global temperature leads to a 12% decline in world gross domestic product (GDP), the researchers found, a far higher estimate than that of previous analyses. The world has already warmed by more than 1C (1.8F) since pre-industrial times and many climate scientists predict a 3C (5.4F) rise will occur by the end of this century due to the ongoing burning of fossil fuels, a scenario that the new working paper, yet to be peer-reviewed, states will come with an enormous economic cost.
A 3C temperature increase will cause “precipitous declines in output, capital and consumption that exceed 50% by 2100” the paper states. This economic loss is so severe that it is “comparable to the economic damage caused by fighting a war domestically and permanently”, it adds.
You must log in or register to comment.
Won’t someone think of the economy! /s
I mean, if it convinces people to actually do something about the climate? Yeah, let’s crow about it.
A lot of the remaining resistance to fighting against climate change is made based on a “it’s too expensive” or “companies would lose too much profit” argument. If we can tell them they’d lose more if they don’t help? They might do something.
I mean, if that gets it done, that’d be great. Unfortunately the dinosaurs with billions of dollars don’t give a shit about the long term when they can increase their wealth right now.
I have a pet conspirarcy theory about that … the singular reason they’re raping the economy (meaning us) is that they need to be high enough up the ladder to be picked for a seat on the Mars/moon shuttles to their new homes. Otherwise they risk having to stay down here and drown/starve/roast to death with the rest of us.
There is no way they will make another orb comfortable to be on within their lifetimes.
They won’t have yachts, five-star hotels, fine dining. There would be, what, hundreds of people at most? They won’t have the small armies of staff. They will have to do their fair share of the labor. They would be trapped in a single frigid biodome eating goo from tubes and leaving only briefly in a spacesuit to wipe down solar panels outside.
Anyone planning to escape climate change by fleeing the planet is so astronomically wrong. It is far cheaper and easier to fix this climate than it is to terraform Mars.
scenario that the new working paper, yet to be peer-reviewed, states will come with an enormous economic cost. A 3C temperature increase will cause “precipitous declines in output, capital and consumption that exceed 50% by 2100” the paper states.
Is this journalism?
