Economics of Global Warming

global-temperature-rise

  • The Global Temperature has increased by +1.2°C average since the pre-industrial era (1850–1900).
    The last 10 years have been the warmest on record. 2023 became the warmest year ever recorded, exceeding previous records by a large margin. “Virtually certain” human activity caused nearly 100% of the warming (IPCC).
  • Co2 Growth – Pre-industrial CO₂ levels: ~280 ppm. Today: ~420+ ppm (highest in at least 2–3 million years). Rising at ~2.5 ppm per year.

🌍 Economics of Global Warming

Market Failure: Climate change is a negative externality. Social costs (damage, health, flooding) exceed private costs → overuse of fossil fuels.

Key Facts:

  • Temps +1.2°C since pre-industrial.
  • CO₂ > 420 ppm.
  • Damages: 5–20% of GDP (Stern). Action now: ~1% of GDP per year.

Economic Impacts:

  • Lower crop yields & productivity.
  • Higher insurance & disaster costs. Flooding & coastal damage.

Policies:

  • Carbon tax.
  • Cap-and-trade.
  • Regulation & standards.
  • Subsidies for renewables.
  • Adaptation (flood defences, resilient crops).

Core Message: Early action is cheaper than long-term damage, but difficult to implement.

Global Warming as a Market Failure

Global warming is fundamentally an externality problem. When firms and consumers burn fossil fuels, they emit CO₂ and other greenhouse gases.

  • Private cost: the cost of fuel, equipment, production.
  • Social cost: includes climate damage — extreme weather, sea-level rise, biodiversity loss, health costs.
  • Because these external costs are not priced, the market over-produces carbon-intensive goods → allocative inefficiency.
negative-externality-id
Negative externality
  • In standard diagrams, the MSC (marginal social cost) lies above MPC (marginal private cost).
  • Market equilibrium output is too high (Q₁ > Q2).
  • Welfare loss occurs because the last units consumed create more social harm than private benefit.

Why Global Warming Is Economically Difficult to Solve

  • Long time lags – Costs occur today (carbon taxes, regulation), but benefits arrive decades later.
  • Global public good – A stable climate is non-excludable and non-rival. Countries have incentives to free-ride on others’ emissions reductions.
  • Uncertainty and risk – Difficult to estimate the precise economic damages. High uncertainty pushes economists to use precautionary principle.
  • Political economy Fossil-fuel industries lobby to delay action; consumers dislike upfront energy costs; voters discount the future heavily.
  • Voters don’t want higher prices Global backlash to high energy prices and carbon taxes – especially atger 2023/24 inflation surge
  • People dislike change, e.g. hard to persuade people to give up gas boilers and replace with heat pumps
  • Renewable energy harder to integrate into electric systems. A country like UK struggles to get energy dependency from solar and wind, because it is not as reliable. Therefore, fossil fuels set marginal cost of electricity in 99% of occassions

energy-transition-cost-obr

UK energy transition to net zero will cost until 2040, according to OBR.

Economic Costs of Climate Change

Economists estimate damages through integrated assessment models (Nordhaus, Stern Review, etc.).

  • e.g. Stern Review – If we do nothing, global warming could reduce global GDP by at least 5% per year, and possibly up to 20% or more in the worst scenarios.
  • Mitigation ≈ 1% of GDP per year Doing nothing could cost ≥ 5–20% of GDP per year. But, problem that many costs and benefits are in the future.

Key impacts of Global Warming

Direct economic damages

  • Lower agricultural yields (heat stress, droughts).
  • Damage to infrastructure from storms and floods.
  • Reduced labour productivity (heat reduces working hours outdoors).
  • Increased health costs (air pollution, heatwaves).

insurance-premiums-homes-us

  • Higher insurance premiums; some regions become uninsurable.
  • Macro impacts Lower GDP growth — possibly 5%+ of global GDP per year in severe scenarios.
  • Greater inequality: poor, hot countries suffer disproportionately.

Economic Policies to Reduce Emissions

1. Carbon Tax

tax-negative-externality-pigovian-tax

Internalises the externality by raising the price of carbon-intensive goods.

Encourages substitution to renewables, efficiency, innovation.
Can be revenue-neutral if revenue is recycled to reduce other taxes or compensate low-income households.

2. Regulation

  • Bans on petrol cars (phase-out dates).
  • Efficiency standards for appliances and buildings.
  • Renewable energy mandates.

3. Subsidies for Clean Technology

  • Solar/wind investment support.
  • R&D funding for batteries, carbon capture, hydrogen.
  • Helps overcome the positive externalities of innovation.

4. Behavioural economics

  • Nudges: default green tariffs, information campaigns.
  • Salience of energy consumption can reduce use.

Equity and Distributional Issues

Climate economics involves fairness between:

  • Generations (future vs present).
  • Countries (developed vs developing).
  • Households (carbon taxes hit poorer groups harder unless compensated).
  • Developing countries argue rich nations should finance their transition because they accumulated most historical emissions (“common but differentiated responsibility”).
  • Some countries with low lying land, near sea more at risk from rising sea levels.

The Economics of Adaptation

A more positive case for global warming is that economies and people will adapt.

  • Flood defences
  • Heat-resistant crops, especially through use of GM
  • Farmers grow different foods, e.g. you can start to grow grapes and make wine in the UK
  • Air-conditioning making use of solar power energy will reduce impact
  • Relocation of housing/industry
  • Adaptation reduces damage but cannot fully offset risks.
  • Fertility rates falling, future populations may be smaller, make it easier to deal with.

Innovation and the Green Economy

Climate action can stimulate:

global-solar-capacity-installed

  • New industries (renewables, heat pumps, EVs).
  • Job creation in installation, maintenance.
  • Reduced dependence on imported fossil fuels → better energy security.
  • Learning curves mean costs fall quickly (e.g., solar PV has fallen ~90% since 2010).

 

Evaluation Points

  • Global coordination essential; unilateral action has limited effect. But, in polarised world, harder to get global co-operation
  • Carbon leakage: emissions move abroad if regulations differ. E.g. High carbon taxes in UK have caused manufacturing to shift abroad.
  • Technological uncertainty: breakthroughs (fusion, cheap storage, carbon capture) could lower transition costs.
  • Political resistance: voters dislike fuel taxes (gilets jaunes in France, backlash in UK).
  • Real free-rider problem. Why should UK reduce emissions, when China and the US don’t care?

Related

About The Author

Item added to cart.
0 items - £0.00