Category:Trucost

From Green Policy
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
 
(9 intermediate revisions by one user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
<addthis />
 +
 +
[[File:Featured.png]]
 +
 +
<big><big>'''Exploring and Accounting for True Costs'''</big></big>
 +
 +
 +
<big><big>[[Time for a Price on Carbon]]</big></big>
 +
 +
 +
[https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/climate-change-cost_us_5b11bc9de4b010565aac04fa <big>'''''The World Is Dangerously Lowballing The Economic Cost Of Climate Change'''''</big>]
 +
 +
''Economic models significantly underestimate climate change risks -- It’s almost impossible to calculate how many trillions of dollars it could cost.''
 +
 +
''Review of Environmental Economics and Policy''
 +
 +
''June 2018''
 +
 +
''Source: London School of Economics''
 +
 +
 +
''The paper's authors, Thomas Stoerk of the Environmental Defense Fund, Gernot Wagner of the Harvard University Center for the Environment and Bob Ward of the ESRC Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy at the London School of Economics and Political Science, draw attention to "mounting evidence that current economic models of the aggregate global impacts of climate change are inadequate in their treatment of uncertainty and grossly underestimate potential future risks."''
 +
 +
''They warn that the "integrated assessment models" used by economists "largely ignore the potential for 'tipping points' beyond which impacts accelerate, become unstoppable, or become irreversible." As a result "they inadequately account for the potential damages from climate change, especially at moderate to high levels of warming," due to rises in global mean temperature of more than 2 Celsius degrees.''
 +
 +
''The authors draw attention to "a major discrepancy between scientific and economic estimates of the impacts of unmanaged future climate change." They state: "These discrepancies between the physical and the economic impact estimates are large, and they matter. However, physical impacts are often not translated into monetary terms and they have largely been ignored by climate economists."''
 +
 +
 +
∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞
 +
 +
 
<big>'''Trucost / TEEB'''</big>
 
<big>'''Trucost / TEEB'''</big>
  
http://www.trucost.com/publications
+
* http://www.trucost.com/publications
  
http://www.teebweb.org/
+
* http://www.teebweb.org/
  
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ 
 
  
'''April 2016'''
+
''A [http://www.trucost.com/_uploads/publishedResearch/TEEB%20Final%20Report%20-%20web%20SPv2.pdf new report by Trucost] on behalf of '''The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB)''' program sponsored by United Nations Environmental Program, examined the money earned by the biggest industries on this planet, and then contrasted them with 100 different types of environmental costs. To make this easier, they turned these 100 categories into 6: '''water use, land use, greenhouse gas emissions, waste pollution, land pollution, and water pollution'''.
  
A [http://www.trucost.com/_uploads/publishedResearch/TEEB%20Final%20Report%20-%20web%20SPv2.pdf new report by Trucost] on behalf of '''The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB)''' program sponsored by United Nations Environmental Program, examined the money earned by the biggest industries on this planet, and then contrasted them with 100 different types of environmental costs. To make this easier, they turned these 100 categories into 6: '''water use, land use, greenhouse gas emissions, waste pollution, land pollution, and water pollution'''.
+
''The report found that '''when you take the externalized costs into effect, essentially NONE of the industries was actually making a profit. The huge profit margins being made by the world’s most profitable industries (oil, meat, tobacco, mining, electronics) is being paid for against the future: we are trading long term sustainability for the benefit of shareholders.'''  
  
The report found that '''when you take the externalized costs into effect, essentially NONE of the industries was actually making a profit. The huge profit margins being made by the world’s most profitable industries (oil, meat, tobacco, mining, electronics) is being paid for against the future: we are trading long term sustainability for the benefit of shareholders.'''
+
''Sometimes the environmental costs vastly outweighed revenue, meaning that these industries would be constantly losing money had they actually been paying for the ecological damage and strain they were causing.
  
Sometimes the environmental costs vastly outweighed revenue, meaning that these industries would be constantly losing money had they actually been paying for the ecological damage and strain they were causing.
+
''In terms of land and water use: almost no companies are actually paying a price remotely comparable for what they are actually taking away from the ecosystems.
  
In terms of land and water use: almost no companies are actually paying a price remotely comparable for what they are actually taking away from the ecosystems.
 
  
  
 
 
 +
 +
 +
 +
[[Category:Externalities]]

Latest revision as of 14:16, 1 May 2019

<addthis />

Featured.png

Exploring and Accounting for True Costs


Time for a Price on Carbon


The World Is Dangerously Lowballing The Economic Cost Of Climate Change

Economic models significantly underestimate climate change risks -- It’s almost impossible to calculate how many trillions of dollars it could cost.

Review of Environmental Economics and Policy

June 2018

Source: London School of Economics


The paper's authors, Thomas Stoerk of the Environmental Defense Fund, Gernot Wagner of the Harvard University Center for the Environment and Bob Ward of the ESRC Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy at the London School of Economics and Political Science, draw attention to "mounting evidence that current economic models of the aggregate global impacts of climate change are inadequate in their treatment of uncertainty and grossly underestimate potential future risks."

They warn that the "integrated assessment models" used by economists "largely ignore the potential for 'tipping points' beyond which impacts accelerate, become unstoppable, or become irreversible." As a result "they inadequately account for the potential damages from climate change, especially at moderate to high levels of warming," due to rises in global mean temperature of more than 2 Celsius degrees.

The authors draw attention to "a major discrepancy between scientific and economic estimates of the impacts of unmanaged future climate change." They state: "These discrepancies between the physical and the economic impact estimates are large, and they matter. However, physical impacts are often not translated into monetary terms and they have largely been ignored by climate economists."


∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞


Trucost / TEEB


A new report by Trucost on behalf of The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) program sponsored by United Nations Environmental Program, examined the money earned by the biggest industries on this planet, and then contrasted them with 100 different types of environmental costs. To make this easier, they turned these 100 categories into 6: water use, land use, greenhouse gas emissions, waste pollution, land pollution, and water pollution.

The report found that when you take the externalized costs into effect, essentially NONE of the industries was actually making a profit. The huge profit margins being made by the world’s most profitable industries (oil, meat, tobacco, mining, electronics) is being paid for against the future: we are trading long term sustainability for the benefit of shareholders.

Sometimes the environmental costs vastly outweighed revenue, meaning that these industries would be constantly losing money had they actually been paying for the ecological damage and strain they were causing.

In terms of land and water use: almost no companies are actually paying a price remotely comparable for what they are actually taking away from the ecosystems.


Pages in category "Trucost"

The following 5 pages are in this category, out of 5 total.

Media in category "Trucost"

The following 6 files are in this category, out of 6 total.

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
GreenPolicy360
Daily Green Stories
About Our Network
Navigate GreenPolicy
Hot Times
Climate Action Plans 360
GreenPolicy360 in Focus
Going Green
Global Green New Deal
Green Education
Relational Eco-Politics
Biodiversity, Protecting Life
New Visions of Security
Strategic Demands
'Planetary Health Pledge'
Global Food Revolution
Earthviews
Countries & Maps
Digital 360
Fact Checking, 'Facts Count'
Data, Intelligence, Science
GreenPolicy360 & Science
Climate Denial / Misinfo
Eco-Education
GreenPolicy Reviews
Envir Legis Info (U.S.)
Envir-Climate Laws (U.S.)
Trump Era Envir Rollbacks
Wiki Ballotpedia (U.S.)
Wiki Politics (U.S.)
Wikimedia Platform
Green News/Dailies
Green News Services (En)
Green Zines (En)
Green Lists @Wikipedia
Climate Action UN News
Climate Agreement / INDCs
Wikipedia on Climate
GrnNews Reddit Daily
Climate Current Metrics
Climate Historic Studies
Climate Change - MIT
Climate Change - NASA
Copernicus Programme
Our World in Data
Worldometer
EcoInternet Search Engine
Ecosia Search Engine
Identify Nature's Species
Meta
Tools