September, 16 2014, 01:30pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Jake Thompson, 202-289-2387, jthompson@nrdc.org
Sharyn Stein, 202-572-3396, sstein@edf.org
Derek Sylvan, 212-998-6085, derek.sylvan@nyu.edu
Climate Change Expected to Raise U.S. Wildfire Costs by $10 Billion- $60 Billion per Year in Just Four Decades
Groups issue report of first-ever cost estimates for climate change-magnified wildfires, and urge inclusion in national “social cost of carbon” estimates of the economic impacts of carbon pollution
WASHINGTON
Climate change could take a serious toll on the U.S. economy by expanding by 50 percent the area that wildfires burn --and raising projected damages by tens of billions of dollars a year by 2050, according to a new economic study released today.
The study, "Flammable Planet: Wildfires and the Social Cost of Carbon"--by the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), the Institute for Policy Integrity at NYU School of Law (Policy Integrity), and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)--provides the first estimate of the future economic costs of wildfires that will be magnified by climate change.
The study shows that wildfires already cost the U.S. between $20 billion and $125 billion a year. With climate change that number could climb drastically, adding an additional $10 billion to $60 billion per year to the cost of wildfires within just four decades. In today's economy, that's about $80 to $500 per household.
"Climate change is here now and its toll on our health and economy is rising every day," said Laurie Johnson, chief economist at NRDC. "Wildfires that already destroy millions of acres of forests and thousands of homes will cause much more damage if we don't take strong steps to reduce the carbon pollution driving climate change. We're losing time but not solutions to this grave threat, and we must act now."
President Obama has taken steps to do just that, using his authority under the Clean Air Act to propose carbon pollution limits on power plants built in the future and the first-ever limits on carbon pollution from plants operating now.
The standards, set to be in place by 2015, will address nearly 40 percent of the nation's carbon pollution.
This pollution imposes economic costs by damaging public health and driving destructive climate change. Working together, the White House and key federal agencies have put a dollar value on those damages, a figure known as the "social cost of carbon." The administration's best estimate is $40 per ton of carbon pollution.
The social cost of carbon incorporates economic costs of factors such as climate impacts on health and agriculture, but omits many extreme weather events including wildfires. Today's new report shows that wildfires should be incorporated as well.
Given the future outlook for wildfires, that makes sense. Scientists predict that climate change will intensify, and with it wildfires will become more frequent and intense, and fire seasons will get longer. Acres burned could surge by 50 to 100 percent in four decades, some studies suggest, with the heaviest damage in America's Western states.
"It's clear that climate change-driven wildfires pose a serious economic risk, and should eventually be part of the administration's assessment of the cost of carbon pollution. Wildfire risks are yet one more reason we must address climate change now, as we're putting future generations in jeopardy the longer we delay," said Richard Revesz, director of the Institute for Policy Integrity.
The social cost of carbon is a powerful tool that has guided development of the carbon pollution standards for new and existing power plants, and for standards to improve vehicle fuel efficiency. Recently, the Government Accountability Office, the independent investigative arm of Congress, endorsed the administration's methodology in a report that also noted some experts contend that the dollar figure may be low because it leaves out the cost of damages from factors such as certain catastrophic events.
"Increasing bills for wildfire damage are just one example of how much climate inaction will cost us," said Gernot Wagner, Lead Senior Economist at EDF. "The public has to pick up the tab after the weather disasters that we'll see more frequently because of climate change. We need to fully assess climate risks so we can make good public policy decisions."
Earlier this year, NRDC, EDF and Policy Integrity launched the Cost of Carbon Pollution project to focus on the social cost of carbon and how it is used to develop federal standards. Their first report addressed costs missing from the administration's current calculation: "Omitted Damages: What's Missing from the Social Cost of Carbon."
The new report, authored by Peter Howard, an economics fellow at Policy Integrity, analyzed the types of damage from wildfires such as loss of timber, health effects, loss of ecological services, and costs for fire prevention, suppression and rehabilitation, both in the U.S. and globally. The report is the first of a series planned to put dollar figures on damages partially and fully left out of the social cost of carbon.
To read the "Flammable Planet" report, click here: https://costofcarbon.org/files/Flammable_Planet__Wildfires_and_Social_Cost_of_Carbon.pdf
To read the "Omitted Damages" report, click here: https://costofcarbon.org/reports/entry/omitted-damages-whats-missing-from-the-social-cost-of-carbon
For more on the Cost of Carbon Pollution project, click here: https://costofcarbon.org/
NRDC works to safeguard the earth--its people, its plants and animals, and the natural systems on which all life depends. We combine the power of more than three million members and online activists with the expertise of some 700 scientists, lawyers, and policy advocates across the globe to ensure the rights of all people to the air, the water, and the wild.
(212) 727-2700LATEST NEWS
State of Emergency Declared After Cargo Ship Destroys Baltimore Bridge
Maryland Congressman Jamie Raskin said he was "deeply concerned for the safety and well-being of everyone affected by the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore."
Mar 26, 2024
This is a developing story... Please check back for possible updates...
A state of emergency was declared in Maryland early Tuesday morning after a large cargo ship slammed into the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore leading to its total collapse and sending a still unverified number of vehicles and people into the Patapsco River.
As the Baltimore Sunreports:
In a Tuesday morning news conference, just a few hours after the incident, Baltimore Fire Department Chief James Wallace said authorities are "still very much in an active search and rescue posture" noting they are searching for "upwards of seven individuals" and that sonar has detected the presence of vehicles in the water. There is no indication that the event was intentional, Wallace said.
"This is a tragedy that you could never imagine … It looked like something out of an action movie," Mayor Brandon Scott said.
The terrifying footage of the bridge's collapse—which CNN correspondent Omar Jimenez commented was "almost unbelievable" to watch—is circulating widely on news channels and social media:
This video is almost unbelievable. The Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore literally collapsed this morning after it was struck by this large ship. pic.twitter.com/rYuy4U2r7H
— Omar Jimenez (@OmarJimenez) March 26, 2024
U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said Tuesday that he had spoken with Mayor Scott and well as Maryland Governor Wes Moore and was helping to coordinate federal assistance.
"Rescue efforts remain underway and drivers in the Baltimore area should follow local responder guidance on detours and response," said Buttigieg.
Moore said in a statement he had declared a state of emergency and that work was underway to "quickly deploy federal resources" to the area.
"We are thankful for the brave men and women who are carrying out efforts to rescue those involved and pray for everyone's safety," said Moore. "We will remain in close contact with federal, state, and local entities that are carrying out rescue efforts as we continue to assess and respond to this tragedy."
Kevin Cartwright of the Baltimore Fire Department told CNN that the number of missing people may be higher than reported in other outlets. "Unfortunately," said Cartwright, "we understand that there were up to 20 individuals who may be in the Patapsco River right now as well as multiple vehicles."
Early reporting indicated that no crew members aboard the container ship, which sails under a Singapore flag, were injured or missing. A local harbor pilot was also said to be on board at the time of the crash.
"Deeply concerned for the safety and well-being of everyone affected by the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore," said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) following the accident. "I'm profoundly thankful to first responders on the scene and will track rescue efforts by local, state, and federal authorities."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Grave 'Threat to Journalists' Remains as UK Court Delays Assange Extradition Ruling
"The Biden administration should take the opportunity to drop this dangerous case once and for all," said the executive director of the Freedom of the Press Foundation.
Mar 26, 2024
The United Kingdom's High Court ruled Tuesday that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange cannot immediately be extradited to the United States and gave the Biden administration three weeks to provide "assurances" that the publisher's First Amendment rights will be protected and that he won't face the death penalty.
If the U.S. does not provide the requested assurances, Assange will be allowed to pursue a limited appeal of his extradition. Should the U.S. submit assurances by the April 16 deadline, a hearing will be held on May 20 to determine whether they are "satisfactory."
Assange, whose health has deteriorated badly during his five years in a high-security London jail, faces 17 counts of violating the Espionage Act and a possible 175-year prison sentence in the U.S. for publishing classified information—a common journalistic practice. WikiLeaks disclosures exposed grave U.S. and U.K. war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Press freedom and human rights groups say the extradition of Assange to the U.S. would set a dangerous precedent and pose a dire threat to journalism everywhere.
Trevor Timm, executive director of the Freedom of the Press Foundation, said in a statement Tuesday that "we are glad Julian Assange is not getting extradited today."
"But this legal battle is far from over, and the threat to journalists and the news media from the Espionage Act charges against Assange remains," said Timm. "Assange's conviction in American courts would create a dangerous precedent that the U.S. government can and will use against reporters of all stripes who expose its wrongdoing or embarrass it. The Biden administration should take the opportunity to drop this dangerous case once and for all."
"It's long past time for the U.S. Justice Department to abandon the Espionage Act charges and resolve this case."
The U.S., which has been aggressively pursuing Assange's extradition for years, previously provided the U.K. government with assurances that Assange would not be held at a supermax prison that's notorious for its inhumane treatment of inmates.
Human rights groups have said such assurances from the U.S. government are "inherently unreliable" and should not be taken seriously by British authorities.
"While the U.S. has allegedly assured the U.K. that it will not violate Assange's rights, we know from past cases that such 'guarantees' are deeply flawed—and the diplomatic assurances so far in the Assange case are riddled with loopholes," noted Simon Crowther, legal adviser at Amnesty International.
"The U.S. must stop its politically motivated prosecution of Assange, which puts Assange and media freedom at risk worldwide," Crowther said Tuesday. "In trying to imprison him, the U.S. is sending an unambiguous warning to publishers and journalists everywhere that they too could be targeted and that it is not safe for them to receive and publish classified material—even if doing so is in the public interest."
Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, echoed that message, saying in a statement that "prosecuting Assange for the publication of classified information would have profound implications for press freedom, because publishing classified information is what journalists and news organizations often need to do in order to expose wrongdoing by government."
"It's long past time for the U.S. Justice Department to abandon the Espionage Act charges and resolve this case," said Jaffer.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Sanders Rips 'Absurd' US Claim That Israel Is Not Violating International Law
"The State Department's position makes a mockery of U.S. law and assurances provided to Congress," said Sen. Bernie Sanders.
Mar 26, 2024
Sen. Bernie Sanders on Monday said the U.S. State Department's determination that Israel is not violating international law with its assault on the Gaza Strip is "absurd on its face," pointing to the mass death, destruction, and starvation that Israeli forces have inflicted on the territory's population over the past six months.
"Thirty-two thousand Palestinians in Gaza have been killed and almost 75,000 injured, two-thirds of whom are women and children," Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a statement. "Some 60% of the housing units have been damaged or destroyed, and almost all medical facilities have been made inoperable. Today, hundreds of thousands of Palestinian children are facing starvation because [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu won't let in sufficient humanitarian aid, while thousands of trucks are waiting to get into Gaza."
"The State Department's position," said Sanders, "makes a mockery of U.S. law and assurances provided to Congress."
The senator's statement came after State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller told reporters during a press briefing earlier Monday that the Biden administration has not found Israel "to be in violation of international humanitarian law, either when it comes to the conduct of the war or when it comes to the provision of humanitarian assistance."
Miller was responding to a question about assurances the administration has received from the Israeli government that its use of American weaponry has complied with international law and that it has permitted U.S. humanitarian aid to enter Gaza, where the entire population is facing acute hunger.
Under a new Biden administration policy known as NSM-20, recipients of American military aid are required to provide the U.S. government with "credible and reliable" written assurances that they are using such assistance "in a manner consistent with all applicable international and domestic law and policy."
Late last week, a group of U.S. senators—including Sanders—warned the Biden administration that deeming Israeli assurances credible would "be inconsistent with the letter and spirit of NSM-20" and "establish an unacceptable precedent" for the application of the policy "in other situations around the world."
"Until Biden is ready to impose real policy consequences on Netanyahu's government, the famine will continue."
It is a violation of U.S. law to continue sending military assistance to a country that is obstructing the delivery of American humanitarian aid. Last month, far-right Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich blocked a U.S.-funded flour shipment from entering the Gaza Strip, and Israeli forces have repeatedly fired on convoys attempting to deliver aid to desperate Gazans.
Prominent human rights groups have been calling on the U.S. to impose an arms embargo on Israel for months, pointing to documented examples of the Israeli military using American weaponry to commit atrocities in Gaza.
But the Biden administration has refused to even apply concrete restrictions on American military aid. Over the weekend, U.S. President Joe Biden signed into law a measure that approves $3.8 billion in unconditional military assistance for the Israeli government and imposes a one-year ban on funding for the primary humanitarian aid organization in Gaza.
Jeremy Konyndyk, the president of Refugees International and a former USAID official, said Monday that Israel's assurances to the U.S. are "not remotely credible" and argued the Biden administration is undermining efforts to combat the worsening humanitarian crisis in Gaza by accepting the Israeli government's claims.
The U.S., he said, is "talking a big game about fighting the famine that its bombs and diplomatic cover have helped create." Resorting to "gimmicky" efforts such as airdrops and temporary ports while a U.S. ally obstructs humanitarian aid "is not how you fight a famine," Konyndyk argued.
"Fundamentally Biden must choose: between continuing to enable Netanyahu, or ending the famine. There's no way to split the difference," said Konyndyk. "Until Biden is ready to impose real policy consequences on Netanyahu's government, the famine will continue."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular