by Average incomes will fall by almost a fifth within the next 26 years as a result of the climate crisis, according to a new study which shows that damage costs are six times higher than the price of limiting global warming to 2C.
Rising temperatures, heavier rainfall and more frequent and more severe extreme weather are expected to cost $38tn (£30tn) every year by mid-century, the research, published in the journal Nature, shows in the most comprehensive analysis of its kind ever. done.
The huge toll – far higher than previous estimates – is already locked in the world economy in the years to come as a result of the huge emissions pumped into the Earth’s atmosphere by gas, oil, coal and trees to burn
Related: Climate change and the cost of living: everything is going up | Jess Harwood
This will impose huge losses on almost every country in the world, but the countries least responsible for climate disruption will be disproportionately affected, further reducing inequality.
The paper says that the average permanent loss of income worldwide will be 19% by 2049. In the United States and Europe the decline is about 11%, and in Africa and South Asia it is 22%, with individual countries much more higher than this.
“It’s terrible,” said Leonie Wenz, a scientist at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and one of the authors of the study. “I’m used to my work not having a nice societal outcome, but I was surprised by how big the damages were. The disparity aspect was really shocking.”
The study also looked at the second half of this century, where human actions can now make a big difference. If business as usual continues, the authors project average income losses of more than 60% by 2100. But if emissions fall to net zero by mid-century, then income reductions will stabilize mid-century at around 20%.
The economic win predicted by the paper is more than twice that of any previous analysis.
Behind that difference is a more sophisticated methodology. While most previous studies have only considered damages related to temperature rise at the national level, the paper also included the impacts of rainfall and extremes using 40 years of data from 1,600 sub-national regions. This is important because weather is a local rather than a national phenomenon. The study also considered how impacts persist for months and years, rather than just a short-term hit.
Previous projections were optimistic that most northern hemisphere economies would continue to grow. In contrast, the new paper says countries such as Germany (-11%), France (-13%), the US (-11%) and the UK (-7%) will lose out even by mid-century . The countries in the regions are already warm, including Botswana (-25%), Mali (-25%), Iraq (-30%), Qatar (-31%), Pakistan (-26 %) and Brazil (-21%) will suffer the worst. ).
Maximilian Kotz, author of the study, said: “Strong declines in income are predicted for most regions, including North America and Europe, with South Asia and Africa suffering the most. These are the cause of the impact of climate change on various aspects relevant to economic growth such as agricultural results, labor productivity or infrastructure.”
Although the newly painted scenario is much worse than anything that came before it, the authors admit that it is still conservative and incomplete. Many major climate impacts have not yet been incorporated into their analysis, including heat waves, sea level rise, tropical cyclones, tipping points, and damage to natural ecosystems and human health. The authors said these factors will be added to future models.
“We are providing a more comprehensive picture but this is not the final picture,” Wenz said. “There’s probably a lower limit.”
The authors said the study showed that stronger adaptation strategies are needed, especially in the poorest and most vulnerable countries, to cope with the changes up to 2050 that are already locked in the climate system.
It also proved that reducing emissions was much cheaper than doing nothing and had a more severe impact. By 2050, he calculated mitigation costs – for example, from phasing out fossil fuels and replacing them with renewable energy – as six trillion international dollars, which is less than a sixth of the median damage costs of that year $38 tn.
Anders Levermann, head of the Complexity Science research department at the Potsdam Institute, said: “It is up to us to decide: a structural change towards renewable energy systems is necessary for our security and it will save us money. If we stay on the path we are currently on there will be disastrous consequences. The temperature of the planet can only be stabilized if we stop burning oil, gas and coal.”
