Dealing with Climate Change---Not Only Good Ethics, But Good Business

[Fantine]

Almost done with "What Happened" and a few chapters into "Climate of Hope." It's interesting reading Michael Bloomberg's take on climate. He cites a 2006 review of the economics of climate change. Unchecked climate change will cost the world 5-20% of global GDP, but the cost of confronting the problem would run about 1%. Coastal storm damage could grow to $35 billion annually (we've already exceeded that in the U.S. this year..). Agriculture could face yield losses of 10% (for every 1 degree in higher temperatures, wheat yields decrease by 7%). Power demand caused by rising temperatures can cause ratepayers $12 billion more annually. This is why NYC and other cities around the world and in the U.S. aren't paying any attention to Trump's leaving the Paris Accord. NY has already met the Paris Accord goals--because it's good business and good for prosperity. The 10th richest man in the world could teach the president a thing or two.Climate of Hope: How Cities, Businesses, and Citizens Can Save the Planet by Michael R. Bloomberg

 

[Hammster]

Almost done with "What Happened" and a few chapters into "Climate of Hope." It's interesting reading Michael Bloomberg's take on climate. He cites a 2006 review of the economics of climate change. Unchecked climate change will cost the world 5-20% of global GDP, but the cost of confronting the problem would run about 1%. Coastal storm damage could grow to $35 billion annually (we've already exceeded that in the U.S. this year..). Agriculture could face yield losses of 10% (for every 1 degree in higher temperatures, wheat yields decrease by 7%). Power demand caused by rising temperatures can cause ratepayers $12 billion more annually. This is why NYC and other cities around the world and in the U.S. aren't paying any attention to Trump's leaving the Paris Accord. NY has already met the Paris Accord goals--because it's good business and good for prosperity. The 10th richest man in the world could teach the president a thing or two.Climate of Hope: How Cities, Businesses, and Citizens Can Save the Planet by Michael R. Bloomberg

If private businesses find it to be good business, then that’s good. Let the market dictate.

 

[AvilaSurfer]

I deal with climate change all the time. Climate changes......I dress accordingly.

 

[Saucy]

I think looking at it from an economic standpoint alone, it has done nothing but create restrictions and regulations that have hurt this economy. The trillions of dollars of growth we've seen alone in Trump's presidency can be attributed to the cuts of many of the regulations that have hurt businesses.

It's funny, when it's an active year, that's climate change. When it's a slow year, that's climate change. When the weather is cooler than average, it doesn't mean anything. When it's warmer than average, that's proof of climate change.

The Paris accord was bad for America and bad for businesses. It made sure America would spend trillions over the next few decades to fight something they can't even prove is happening.

 

[AvilaSurfer]

Well, ya gotta keep the Climate Change narrative going, to keep all those alarmists employed.

 

[Fantine]

With Scott Pruitt dismantling the EPA and working against these economic and environmental gains we could realize our country won't be everything it can be.

There are men (and government leaders) with foresight and vision like Michael Bloomberg who realize the immediate benefits of dealing with climate change proactively and whose cities reap the benefits....

And you have people like former Atty. General of Oklahoma Scott Pruitt who was busy suing the EPA while the topography of his state became a piece of Swiss cheese and 3.0 magnitude + earthquakes went from 100 in 2013 to 623 in 2017--96 in the past 30 days. Someone whose judgment is so bad that even in a notorious government environment of climate denial and fracking supporters, he stood out while the government banned fracking in the most affected areas.

BTW, how did "free market" forces help the Trump real-estate business over the years? He left Puerto Rico alone $33 million in the hole with a failed hotel project---and the country is littered with corpses of small businesses that failed because of his defaults.

Just last week, Pruitt ended subsidies for wind and solar energy to help support coal! Even pro-energy types thought it was a wacky decision....Coal is in trouble because natural gas is cheap--and cleaner (not that I think the "cleaner" part matters to bottom line types.)

We live in a mangled environment of manipulated markets---so why single out urban U.S. governments who are manipulating things to OUR profit and OUR advantage?

 

[Fantine]

Nine months have passed since Trump took office---and many of us have a gray hair for every single day that's passed. And so at this point his leadership (and I use the word advisedly) is responsible for what's been happening economically. The stock market has been pretty much stagnant for the past few months after the big gains earlier in the year. Only 90,000 jobs were created last month--far less than predicted---because of disastrous hurricanes caused by ocean temperatures that are two degrees higher than previously.

Deregulation might--or might not--help stock prices....and we, who will be breathing dirtier air and drinking less potable water and purchasing more dangerous products....won't be reaping the benefits...

Yes, some of us are investors, but what we gain will be small in comparison to what we lose.

 

[AvilaSurfer]

The EPA is one of the most bloated and unnecessary entities in all of government. The faster it's dismantled, the better.

 

[iluvatar5150]

If private businesses find it to be good business, then that’s good. Let the market dictate.

How does the market correct for the externalities of pollution?

The trillions of dollars of growth we've seen alone in Trump's presidency can be attributed to the cuts of many of the regulations that have hurt businesses .

lol what? What "trillions of dollars of growth?" US GDP is about $17 trillion/yr with an annual growth rate of around 2%, or about $300 billion.

 

[Hammster]

How does the market correct for the externalities of pollution?

The question is nonsense since there’s no correction necessary.

 

[iluvatar5150]

The question is nonsense since there’s no correction necessary.

Huh? Do you know what an externality is?

 

[Hammster]

Huh? Do you know what an externality is?

Yes. Why?

 

[iluvatar5150]

Yes. Why?

Because your post doesn't make any sense. Pollution ( of which agw is a form) is a textbook case of an externality, which is a distortion of a market, not something for which the market can compensate.

Your suggestion that the market should take care of it would suggest that you didn't understand that.... unless I'm misunderstanding your initial comment.

 

[Allandavid]

Well, ya gotta keep the Climate Change narrative going, to keep all those alarmists employed.

Just keep telling yourself that...as the hurricanes and the wildfires become more severe with each passing year.....

 

[camille70]

Well, ya gotta keep the Climate Change narrative going, to keep all those alarmists employed.

Ireland may get hit by a hurricane shortly. The waters there shouldn't even be warm enough to allow one to develop.

 

[elliott95]

We are not in a position to control the climate.

 

[Nithavela]

We are not in a position to control the climate.

Not anymore, you ain't. Nothing to do except laugh and watch the destruction.

 

[Allandavid]

We are not in a position to control the climate.

We have been for some time now...

 

[elliott95]

Not anymore, you ain't. Nothing to do except laugh and watch the destruction.

People are resilient and resourceful. There are many things that we can do to enhance the environments we live in. Just like we can protect against earthquakes, there are building codes and zoning laws that can be put into place to protect people and property from vulnerable areas.
Laughing at destruction is inhumane, and is the result of people living a hellish existence where hope is no longer part of their lexicon.

 

[elliott95]

We have been for some time now...

We have been ...what... for some time now?