Your feedback is important to us!
We invite all our readers to share with us their views and comments about this article.
Disclaimer: Comments submitted by third parties on this site are the sole responsibility of the individual(s) whose content is submitted. The Daily Star accepts no responsibility for the content of comment(s), including, without limitation, any error, omission or inaccuracy therein. Please note that your email address will NOT appear on the site.
Alert: If you are facing problems with posting comments, please note that you must verify your email with Disqus prior to posting a comment. follow this link to make sure your account meets the requirements. (http://bit.ly/vDisqus)
That report famously valued the damage caused by global warming at 5-20 percent of GDP – a major disruption "on a scale similar to those associated with the great wars and the economic depression of the first half of the 20th century".Tackling climate change, we are told, would carry a much lower cost. Indeed, politicians of all stripes have reiterated the Stern Review's finding that global warming can be curtailed by policies costing just 1 percent of world GDP.The third installment of the IPCC report showed that strong climate policies would be more expensive than claimed as well – costing upward of 4 percent of GDP in 2030, 6 percent in 2050, and 11 percent by 2100 .Climate change has been portrayed as a huge catastrophe costing as much as 20 percent of world GDP, though brave politicians could counter it at a cost of just 1 percent of GDP. The reality is just the opposite: We now know that the damage cost will be perhaps 2 percent of world GDP, whereas climate policies can end up costing more than 11 percent of GDP.
Geoengineering as part of the response to climate change
Was 2016 the best year ever?
Prioritize public-health spending, based on sound evidence
FOLLOW THIS ARTICLE