Mish: Don’t Worry, It Will Only Cost $131 Trillion To Address Climate Change
Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,
The UN is out with another climate change fearmongering report. Let’s take a look…
Image clip from WSJ video, arrow and question added by Mish
Time is Running Out
The UN is out with another fearmongering report on climate change. It’s labeled the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6).
Observed Warming and its Causes
Human activities, principally through emissions of greenhouse gases, have unequivocally caused global warming, with global surface temperature reaching 1.1°C above 1850–1900 in 2011–2020. Global greenhouse gas emissions have continued to increase, with unequal historical and ongoing contributions arising from unsustainable energy use, land use and land-use change, lifestyles and patterns of consumption and production across regions, between and within countries, and among individuals (high confidence).
Widespread and rapid changes in the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere and biosphere have occurred. Human-caused climate change is already affecting many weather and climate extremes in every region across the globe. This has led to widespread adverse impacts and related losses and damages to nature and people (high confidence). Vulnerable communities who have historically contributed the least to current climate change are disproportionately affected (high confidence).
Current Mitigation Progress, Gaps and Challenges
Policies and laws addressing mitigation have consistently expanded since AR5. Global GHG emissions in 2030 implied by nationally determined contributions (NDCs) announced by October 2021 make it likely that warming will exceed 1.5°C during the 21st century and make it harder to limit warming below 2°C. There are gaps between projected emissions from implemented policies and those from NDCs and finance flows fall short of the levels needed to meet climate goals across all sectors and regions. (high confidence)
Continued greenhouse gas emissions will lead to increasing global warming, with the best estimate of reaching 1.5°C in the near term in considered scenarios and modelled pathways. Every increment of global warming will intensify multiple and concurrent hazards (high confidence).
Likelihood and Risks of Unavoidable, Irreversible or Abrupt Changes
Some future changes are unavoidable and/or irreversible but can be limited by deep, rapid and sustained global greenhouse gas emissions reduction. The likelihood of abrupt and/or irreversible changes increases with higher global warming levels. Similarly, the probability of low-likelihood outcomes associated with potentially very large adverse impacts increases with higher global warming levels. (high confidence)
Adaptation options that are feasible and effective today will become constrained and less effective with increasing global warming. With increasing global warming, losses and damages will increase and additional human and natural systems will reach adaptation limits.
[Mish Comment: At that point there is high confidence that we all die.]
Overshoot: Exceeding a Warming Level and Returning
If warming exceeds a specified level such as 1.5°C, it could gradually be reduced again by achieving and sustaining net negative global CO2 emissions. This would require additional deployment of carbon dioxide removal, compared to pathways without overshoot, leading to greater feasibility and sustainability concerns. Overshoot entails adverse impacts, some irreversible, and additional risks for human and natural systems, all growing with the magnitude and duration of overshoot. (high confidence)
[Mish Comment: Damn. I was hoping that once we concluded that everyone would die we would throw up our hands and accept fate, but no such luck. To keep the fearmongering perpetually alive, it seems we can come back from the brink of extinction via additional measures.]
Urgency of Near-Term Integrated Climate Action
Climate change is a threat to human well-being and planetary health (very high confidence). There is a rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a liveable and sustainable future for all (very high confidence). Climate resilient development integrates adaptation and mitigation to advance sustainable development for all, and is enabled by increased international cooperation including improved access to adequate financial resources, particularly for vulnerable regions, sectors and groups, and inclusive governance and coordinated policies (high confidence). The choices and actions implemented in this decade will have impacts now and for thousands of years (high confidence).
[Mish Comment: Wait a second. Can we come back from this or not? I note “very high confidence” that the window of a livable future is rapidly closing.]
Expect More Extremes
Rapidly Narrowing Window
How Much Will It Cost?
A few years ago, the estimate was $98 trillion. Now it’s $131 Trillion. In a few years it will be $200 trillion.
Of course, all government estimates overstate the benefits and understate the costs, typically by a factor of 5 to 10.
So figure the cost would be $1,000 trillion to $2,000 trillion or so.
Annual CO2 Emissions
Absolutely Brilliant Speech by British Satirist, Konstantine Kisin
Brilliant speech addressed to our ‘woke’ youth fighting #climatechange by Konstantine Kisin. pic.twitter.com/mFS8w0t2ip
— Brandon Taylor Moore (@LetsGoBrando45) January 14, 2023
Is Kisin’s Video For You?
If you think that you, president Biden, Gretta, Al Gore, or anyone in government will do anything that matters about climate change, the video is for you.
If you think that you, president Biden, Gretta, Al Gore, or anyone in government will not do anything that matters about climate change, the video is also for you.
It’s less than seven minutes long. Play it.
Play the video then think about the path of China and India while noting the whole continent of Africa is not even on the scale.
Note that the population of India will soon to surpass China. What happens when India tries to improve the standard of living for all its citizens?
I have been accused of being a climate denier. Mercy. Actually, I am a climate realist.
Climate change is real and constant and has been ever since the earth formed.
The debate is over how much is manmade and even more importantly, what to do about it, whether it’s manmade or not.
Regarding what percentage is manmade, I don’t know, nor does anyone else. But let’s say you disagree.
Then OK, I agree with you. Let’s assume recent climate change is 100% manmade. So what do we do about it?
That has been my line of questioning for a long time. I just have never been able to express my line of thinking as clearly as Kisin in the above video.
A Big Green Mess in Germany With Coal a Stunning 31 Percent of Electricity
Assume there is a problem, then if there is a solution, it will not be the like of Gretta, AOC, Al Gore, president Biden, or the Green Party hypocrites who will fix it.
Look no further than the Big Green Mess in Germany for what happens when politicians are faced with the decision to heat homes cheaply or cut back on CO2.
The EU plans to tax other nations for not addressing climate change, while Germany bulldozes a town to increase the size of a coal mine. It’s also lignite coal, the dirtiest kind.
Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck, a Green who is Germany’s economy and climate minister, defended the agreement as “a good decision for climate protection” that fulfills many of the environmentalists’ demands and saves five other villages from demolition.
World’s Largest Tax Scheme
For discussion of the EU’s hypocritical carbon tax scheme, please see EU Imposes the World’s Largest Carbon Tax Scheme.
Meanwhile, the US is marching down an idiotic path towards electric vehicle mandates with no plan on where to get the minerals for the batteries. Nor does president Biden have an reasonable plan for the infrastructure needed.
Fed Chair Warns President Biden “We will not be a climate policymaker”
Preposterous ideas have gotten so out of hand that Fed Chair Warns President Biden “We will not be a climate policymaker”
“Without explicit congressional legislation, it would be inappropriate for us to use our monetary policy or supervisory tools to promote a greener economy or to achieve other climate-based goals. We are not, and will not be, a climate policymaker,” said Jerome Powell.
I am not one who often praises the Fed, but that paragraph deserves a standing ovation.
The hype is constant and has been consistently wrong. In 2019 I noted Ocasio-Cortez Says World Will End in 12 Years: Here’s What to Do About It
The world will still be here in 2050.
On October 29, 2022, I noted UN Seeks $4 to 6 Trillion Per Year to Address Climate
Yeah right. Politicians are going to give Africa, India, and third world countries trillions of dollars and tax the hell out of them if they don’t comply.
The Hope of Fusion vs the Pomp of Politicians and Climate Activists
If there is a climate problem, science will find the answer, not politicians or activists.
For discussion, please see The Hope of Fusion vs the Pomp of Politicians and Climate Activists
What Are You Doing?
On a personal level, the single best thing you can do for the environment is to not have kids.
I did my part. What is India doing? Africa? You?
WWIII is perhaps another solution, but one I do not advocate. For discussion, please see Deficit Hawk Hypocrites and Warmongers Unite, Apparently Hoping to Start WWIII
* * *
Like these reports? I hope so, and if you do, please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.
Wed, 03/22/2023 – 05:00
Zero Hedge’s mission is to widen the scope of financial, economic and political information available to the professional investing public, to skeptically examine and, where necessary, attack the flaccid institution that financial journalism has become, to liberate oppressed knowledge, to provide analysis uninhibited by political constraint and to facilitate information’s unending quest for freedom. Visit https://www.zerohedge.com
This post has been republished with implied permission from a publicly-available RSS feed found on Zero Hedge. The views expressed by the original author(s) do not necessarily reflect the opinions or views of The Libertarian Hub, its owners or administrators. Any images included in the original article belong to and are the sole responsibility of the original author/website. The Libertarian Hub makes no claims of ownership of any imported photos/images and shall not be held liable for any unintended copyright infringement. Submit a DCMA takedown request.