Message not getting through, page-106

  1. 12,825 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 582
    This is from a Warmist Paper and before you start I reject some of the statements and conclusions. Even so, as you can see the warmist are claiming costs of 1200 Billion:

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/07/...e-target-no-more-expensive-than-fossil-fuels/

    Addressing climate change will require substantial new investment in low-carbon energy and energy efficiency – but no more than what is currently spent on today’s fossil-dominated energy system, according to new research from IIASA and partners.
    To limit climate change to 2° Celsius, low-carbon energy options will need additional investments of about US $800 billion a year globally from now to mid-century, according to a new study published in the journal Climate Change Economics. But much of that capital could come from shifting subsidies and investments away from fossil fuels and associated technologies. Worldwide, fossil subsidies currently amount to around $500 billion per year.
    “We know that if we want to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, we need to drastically transform our energy system,” says IIASA researcher David McCollum, who led the study. “This is a comprehensive analysis to show how much investment capital is needed to successfully make that transition.”
    The study, part of a larger EU research project examining the implications and implementation needs of climate policies consistent with the internationally agreed 2° C target, compared the results from six separate global energy-economic models, each with regional- and country-level detail. The authors examined future scenarios for energy investment based on a variety of factors, including technology progress, efficiency potential, economics, regional socio-economic development, and climate policy.
    Investments in clean energy currently total around $200 to 250 billion per year, and reference scenarios show that with climate policies currently on the books, this is likely to grow to around $400 billion. However, the amount needed to limit climate change to the 2° target amounts to around $1200 billion, the study shows.

    OR this one, 2 Trillion per year:

    http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/newsandeventspggrp/imperialcollege/newssummary/news_19-9-2013-11-35-32

    A new report from Imperial College London looks at what measures are required to reduce CO2 emissions and limit the extent of man-made climate change.
    Human activities like shipping, construction and industry are increasing the concentration of CO2 entering the atmosphere, which research has overwhelmingly shown is heating the planet and changing our climate.
    Many studies, including those by the International Energy Agency, suggest that global CO2 emissions are set to pass 50 Giga-tonnes per year by 2050 if there is no further action by governments to reduce them over the coming years.
    Now researchers at Imperial have considered what technologies and interventions are required to limit these global CO2 emissions from human activity to 15 Giga-tonnes per year by 2050, a level that many studies show could help to limit global warming to around two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.
    Their report concludes that reaching this target will cost $2 trillion per year by 2050, which is about one per cent of the world's GDP in 2050, and considerably less than this if fossil fuel prices increase with time.
 
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.