Can You Spare $45T to Curb Global Warming?

The International Energy Agency says the world needs to invest a whopping $45 trillion to reach the goal of reducing carbon-dioxide emissions in half by 2015.

The world needs an extra $45 trillion in clean energy investments to avoid a climate-change tipping point, suggested a report from the International Energy Agency (IEA) on Friday.

The agency concluded that this significant amount of additional investment is required to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 50 percent by 2050. That amount, coming on top of the investments that already would’ve been available, would limit global warming to 2.4 degree centigrade. The benchmark was set by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

The IEA, which advises the United States and 26 other nations, also warned in its report Friday that if no additional measures are undertaken to curb CO2 emissions, the temperature is expected to increase 6 degrees centigrade by 2100. The rising temperature could significantly affect agricultural productions and spark conflicts among countries fighting for natural resources.

Created by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme, IPCC released a landmark report last year that laid out in details the possible causes and effects of climate change (see IPCC Report Forecasts More Trouble Ahead and Can Technology Save the World?).

CO2 emissions will rise 130 percent and oil demand will grow 70 percent by 2050 if the world’s governments do not change their policies to promote clean energy and curb emissions, said Nobuo Tanaka, the IEA’s executive director, in a statement Friday.

The IEA report outlines 17 technology categories that will need the investment boost, including transportation, CO2 capture and storage, solar and wind energy, and energy-efficient appliances. The agency said research-and-development money for these technologies has decreased in recent years, a trend that must be reversed quickly.

One renewable-energy firm, New Energy Finance, believes that the reversal is possible. Overall clean energy investment has grown 60 percent from 2006 to 2007 to reach $148.4 billion, said the London-based firm.

Given the right incentives, the global investments should reach $450 billion per year by 2012, said Michael Liebreich, chairman and CEO of New Energy Finance. 

Comments [3]

  • C Booth 10/4/08 10:31 AM

    $45 Trillion sounds like a lot, but it is less than we would spend doing nothing, and “going to hell in a hand basket”. Take installing solar panels, for example. Actually they are free, because they pay for themselves with the electricity they generate, in 15 to 20 years, and then continue to provide free electricity for another 10 years. Wind turbines are even cheaper, as they pay for themselves in 7 to 8 years. So the problem is not the cost, because we are going to spend more money not fixing the problem, but the problem is educating people to realize what our priorities are and what we need to do to fix the problem, and then just doing it. Isn’t that what Nike says, “Just do it”?

    Reply
  • Brad Arnold 06/9/08 2:17 AM

    “According to Jim Hansen of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, to whom many political and environmental leaders turn on climate-change questions, we must reduce greenhouse gases by 80 percent within 12 years or it will be too late to prevent a climate catastrophe. Hansen thinks this won’t happen because it simply costs too much.”—“Buying Time on Greenhouse Gases,” ScrippsNews.com

    “I’m going to tell you something I probably shouldn’t: we may not be able to stop global warming. We need to begin curbing global greenhouse emissions right now, but more than a decade after the signing of the Kyoto Protocol, the world has utterly failed to do so. Unless the geopolitics of global warming change soon, the Hail Mary pass of geoengineering might become our best shot.”—Bryan Walsh, Time Magazine, 17 March 2008

    Reply
  • Brad Arnold 06/9/08 2:18 AM

    “Few seem to realise that the present IPCC models predict almost unanimously that by 2040 the average summer in Europe will be as hot as the summer of 2003 when over 30,000 died from heat. By then we may cool ourselves with air conditioning and learn to live in a climate no worse than that of Baghdad now. But without extensive irrigation the plants will die and both farming and natural ecosystems will be replaced by scrub and desert. What will there be to eat? The same dire changes will affect the rest of the world and I can envisage Americans migrating into Canada and the Chinese into Siberia but there may be little food for any of them.”—Dr James Lovelock’s lecture to the Royal Society, 29 Oct. ‘07

    Reply
.