Celestial Green Ventures Updates:
The devastating social and environmental impacts of climate change are the stuff of social media legend. Images of displaced families, ravaged rainforests and stranded animals have been posted and re-posted to the point of being iconic, whilst perhaps unsurprisingly the financial repercussions have largely been pushed to the background. However, although the human costs are clearly and correctly the immediate priority, it doesn’t pay to ignore the cold, hard cash of global warming, as a new report reveals that acting on climate change could save trillions of dollars – as long as we act now.
Starved polar bear perished due to record sea-ice melt, says expert #Environment http://t.co/buUSZfvR1L pic.twitter.com/FuZ80Te1Ik
— EnvironmentUK (@UK_Environment) August 25, 2015
$50 trillion dollar savings
A report published by Citibank this month revealed the huge financial benefits to a low-carbon future – you can download the full report here. The report predicts that climate damage costs could be up to $50 trillion higher if ‘business-as-usual’ continues, thanks to the resulting 4.5°C temperature increase, in comparison to those costs relating to a 1.5°C warming, limited by taking immediate action. Reducing the temperature increase this drastically would involve the cooperation of business and governments to limit or balance their environmental impact, but, as the effects of climate change are proving, investing now in sustainable practices makes clear financial sense.
.@Citibank concludes low #carbon investment inaction will cost $72 trillion by 2060 http://t.co/f5qAShH0m0 via @carbonbrief @Climate_Action_
— Climate-KIC (@ClimateKIC) August 20, 2015
Taking action making sense
For businesses, the financial advantages of embracing low-carbon approaches ahead of the curve involve both savings and a potential increase in income. Extreme weather, a direct result of climate change, can have a huge economic impact: a Carbon Disclosure Project report found that 44% of the 2000 companies surveyed had ‘suffered a disruption in production from rainfall or drought and 31% had experienced higher production costs.’ A global temperature rise of 4°C could lead to costs of insurance against flooding in Great Britain to rise by 21%, and rising sea levels could drive up land prices. As consumers increasingly become aware of these dangers, studies show that the majority are willing to pay extra for products or services with a positive environmental impact, and the visibility of this has become a key factor in consumers’ decision-making.
Climate economist Nicholas Stern
All this is on top of associated non-economic loss and damages, which, as a UNFCCC report on the topic (available here) points out, are almost impossible to accurately quantify, as ‘formal economic metrics of loss and damage are likely to significantly undervalue many of the goods and services threatened by climate change.’ These could include loss of life, health, territory, heritage, biodiversity – many of which form part of the planet’s Natural Capital. A plan to address these losses – the neatly-titled Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage associated with Climate Change Impacts – was only drafted last year, and the Executive Committee will have its first meeting in Bonn from 24-26 September. Celestial Green Ventures’ Trocano Araretama REDD+ project in the Amazon rainforest encapsulates the principle of Natural Capital protection, and generates combined carbon, biodiversity and social benefits that are evaluated as Natural Capital Credits. Find out more about how your business could get involved by visiting this page.
The false perception that sustainability is at loggerheads with financial success threatens the progress of December’s Paris COP21 talks
COP21 to invest in global future
The initial financial outlay involved in clean energy or carbon mitigation are easily justified in context of the related savings – even in 2012, climate change was costing the world more than $1.2 trillion, and a huge 1.6% of global GDP annually. When faced with statistics like these, it’s hard not to see the reluctance of certain countries to commit to climate action as a case of willful ignorance. Earlier this month, Polish prime minister Andrzej Duda complained that planned EU emissions cuts would be costly and “bad for Poland”. Such attitudes, argues vocal climate economist Professor Nicholas Stern, are founded on out-of-date knowledge: “To portray [climate action and the economy] as in conflict is to misunderstand economic development and the opportunities that we now have to move to the low-carbon economy.” Stern is one of many who are concerned that this false perception of sustainability being at loggerheads with financial success threatens the progress of December’s Paris COP21 talks.
With low-carbon alternatives often offering better value for money, as well as limiting long-term costs and being in demand by consumers, investing in tackling climate change is already becoming the norm for many businesses. Hopefully COP21 will see this becoming a priority for governments too, and becoming the start of collaborations that are both responsible and financially rewarding.
Image: Nicholas Stern. By World Economic Forum [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
The post The Real Cost of Climate Change appeared first on Celestial Green Ventures.
