COP 21: unfortunately, a negative GDP growth is an anomaly

Which country is ok to be poorer? to have less?
Less growth, less jobs creation, less GDP, less incomming tax, less citizen, less trade, less economic power, less ressources.
No one. At any price.
A negative GDP is an anomaly in the system. A recession, a crisis, a turmoil.
Something that has to be corrected.
GDP has to grow. Period.

Let's look at the impact of fighting climate change, checking the quotes.
Even if a lot of reports explain that not fighting climamte change will have a huge impact of GDP, taking action on it has a cost too. 
I won't judge if it's a big or a small cost. I'm not qualified to.

I just see that for the first time EVER. World leaders have to take decisions, not war related, that will have a negative impact on GDP.

"Fighting climate change staying under a 2° temperature rise “would entail global consumption losses” of 1 percent to 4 percent in 2030. That range would rise to 2 percent to 6 percent in 2050 and then to as much as 12 percent in 2100 when compared with scenarios that don’t involve fighting climate change". Bloomberg

"According to the impact assessment carried out by the Commission, the investment needed to maintain the level of greenhouse gases at 450 ppmv would cost about 0.5 % of global GDP over the period 2013-2030. Global GDP growth would only fall by 0.19 % per year up to 2030, a fraction of the expected annual GDP growth rate (2.8 %). The Commission also stresses that the global cost needed is overstated, since it does not account for the benefits of combating climate change." European Union

"Estimates based on the likely costs of these methods of emissions reduction show that the annual costs of stabilising at around 550ppm CO2e are likely to be around 1% of global GDP by 2050". Stern Report

"In its review of the latest scientific evidence, Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change earlier this year concluded that ensuring greenhouse gas concentrations do not exceed a level that would offer a 66 percent chance of avoiding global warming of more than 2ºC would mean losses in global consumption of 1-4% in 2030, 2-6% in 2050 and 3-11% in 2100". LSE

"Diverting hundred of billions of dollars from fossil fuels into renewable energy and cutting energy waste would shave just 0.06% off expected annual economic growth rates of 1.6%-3%, the IPCC report concluded." IPCC

"EU plans for a sole binding 40% greenhouse gas reduction target by 2030 will lead to a drop in the continent’s GDP of between 0.1% and 0.45% on current trends, according to an overlooked passage in the impact assessment which accompanies the proposal." IPCC

Popular posts from this blog

La finance islamique, modèle de bon sens à suivre ?

Linchpin de Seth Godin : Le résumé en 20 points d'un livre à lire impérativement (1/2)

Tipadvisor: from pretty useless rating to useful tagging and filtering