SPRING WISRD MAGAZINE, VOL 6, ISSUE 2

Spending Money to Save Money (And the Planet): ACost-Benefit Analysis of Climate Policy

By Dani Barret t

Anthropogenic climate change, or climate change induced by human act ivity, will impact weather pat terns, biodiversity, and global and domest ic economies in the next century. These ramificat ions will be ?significant?and ?increase over t ime,?according to a study by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Mult i-billion and -tr illion dollar industr ies such as energy, agr iculture, and real estate that account for much of the United States?economy stand to be severely compromised if the delicate balance of the global climate is disrupted. To halt climate change, the USwould need to reduce CO2 emissions by 80 percent , r ight now. As out lined in the United Nat ions? Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), ?urgent?climate act ion is needed immediately to stave off the worst consequences of anthropogenic climate change and warming, and the United States is posit ioned to be a global leader in fight ing climate change. Under the Trump administrat ion, however, we?ve seen very lit t le federally backed movement towards these goals and even regression. In the past four years, former President Trump sponsored the rollbacks of 104 environmental policies, including withdrawal from the 2015 Par is Accord (which President Biden has rejoined). So as President Joe Biden enters his

fourth month in office, the United States? and the wor ld? are watching how the new administrat ion has tackled the climate cr isis. Biden was elected on promises of bold climate act ion including decarbonizat ion, phasing out fracking, natural gas, and fossil fuels, and a shift to 100% clean energy by 2035. These goals are ambit ious and will undoubtedly be expensive, but they?ll save money, industr ies, and lives in the long run. Here?s why. Aggressive climate act ion comes with a hefty pr ice tag, making it unpopular amongst conservat ives who avoid big federal spending bills and tax increases in certain tax brackets. They claim that climate policy and investment in green energy will cut jobs and waste funds that could be spent ?cleaning up after ? climate change. One problem with this logic is that studies show that by wait ing to see the worst of climate change, we?ll Consider asset depreciat ion of a car. The longer you wait to sell it , the less return you?ll get on your investment . The longer we wait to address climate change, the slimmer the chances that we?ll be able to salvage our economy, our industr ies, and ourselves. Just four consequences of climate change? property damage from hurr icanes, losses in real estate, and lose money, but we can save that money if we get out ahead of it .

12