Tornado Alley (PROG)

[fuagf]

hookrider, Ditching Paris deal will have huge costs, won’t create jobs, economists say

.. is there a genuinely and widely respected economist, country leader or large energy company CEO who agrees with Trump's stated rationale for quitting the agreement?
.. so far i haven't found one .. Trump looks trapped by his fraudulent, economic jingoistic campaign rhetoric, and by his own badly flawed, asshole thinking processes ..

[IMAGE:] Vehicles are seen during rush hour on the 405 freeway in Los Angeles on Oct. 3, 2007. | REUTERS

World / Science & Health

AP, AFP-JIJI

Jun 1, 2017

WASHINGTON – U.S. President Donald Trump has declared that abandoning the Paris climate agreement would be a victory for the American economy.

Many economists have big doubts.

They say the agreement would likely help create about as many jobs in renewable energy as it might cost in polluting industries. Should the United States pull out of the pact and seek to protect old-school jobs in coal and oil, it would risk losing the chance to lead the world in developing environmentally friendly technology — and generate the jobs that come with it. What is more, over the haul, climate change itself threatens to impose huge costs on the economy.

“Withdrawing from the Paris agreement is hardly going to create jobs in the U.S.,” said Cary Coglianese, professor at the University of Pennsylvania and editor of the book “Does Regulation Kill Jobs?” “While specific environmental regulations can sometimes lead to job losses, they also can and do lead to job gains — with the result being roughly a wash.”

The Paris agreement has drawn surprising support from major companies, from oil giants like Exxon Mobil and Royal Dutch Shell to other corporate giants like Walmart and Apple.

“We need a framework like that to address the challenge of climate change, the risk of climate change,” Darren Woods, CEO of Exxon Mobil, said Wednesday.

Likewise, Shell CEO Ben van Beurden told NPR earlier this month that talk of leaving the Paris accord risked creating the “unpredictability” that makes business decisions harder.

Coca-Cola and General Electric have pledged to reduce their carbon footprints by 25 percent and 20 percent by 2020. Apple boasts of running its U.S. operations on 100 percent renewable energy.

“We believe climate change is real, and the science is well accepted,” GE’s CEO Jeff Immelt said last month.

Agribusiness giant Monsanto says it is “committed” to helping “farmers adapt to and mitigate climate change.”

Even energy-sector heavyweights — those who seemingly have the most to lose from tougher environmental rules — are joining the trend started by the Paris Agreement, which aims to keep global warming “well below” 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels.

Oil giant Chevron “supports continuing with the Paris Agreement, as it offers a first step toward a global framework,” spokeswoman Melissa Ritchie said.

Exxon Mobil recently implored the White House not to exit the climate treaty in order to respond effectively to climate “risks.”

Just a few years ago, the U.S. business world was using all its weight to impede climate talks, notably leading to the collapse of a 2009 summit in Copenhagen.

But many companies now find their image at stake in the United States, where opinion polls indicate the public are concerned by global warming and want to remain in the Paris agreement.

While growing environmental awareness has played a role, corporate America’s conversion is not solely the result of do-gooder impulses.

“The companies are increasing their commitments in the climate area irrespective of (Trump’s) decision, because it saves them money, it reduces their risks and most importantly, it’s a massive market opportunity,” said Kevin Moss of the World Resources Institute.

The bottom line has indeed shifted for businesses. Major investors are exiting fossil fuels, and companies are facing increasing pressure to adapt their growth models to a world without carbon.

“Our customers, partners and countries are demanding technology that generates power while reducing emissions, improving energy efficiency and reducing cost,” said GE’s Immelt.

As a sign of the times, Exxon shareholders on Wednesday voted to force the company to factor in tougher climate policies on emissions and disclose how they may affect company revenues.

Trump also has pledged to revive the coal industry but given the boom in natural gas, which produces 50 percent less carbon dioxide and is far cheaper than coal, most experts say that will be difficult to accomplish on a large scale.

The Paris accord to voluntarily cut emissions of greenhouse gases became one of former President Barack Obama’s signature achievements. But Trump campaigned on a promise to nix the deal, saying it would mean stricter environmental policies that would hobble the economy and cost jobs.

Economists say that leaving the Paris deal and easing efforts to control emissions would hardly deliver a big payoff in jobs. A 2001 study by Eli Berman and Linda Bui, both then at Boston University, found “no evidence that local air quality regulation substantially reduced employment” when Los Angeles imposed stricter environmental restrictions.

“There’s no doubt that regulations have costs, but they are not the primary driver of employment,” said Michael Greenstone, an economist at the University of Chicago.

Polluting industries such as oil and coal are highly automated and are unlikely to embark on a major hiring spree even if the United States dropped out of the Paris agreement, experts say.

“The potential number of jobs you can create in fossil fuels is limited, while the potential number of jobs in green technologies — in principle the sky is the limit,” said Bart van Ark, chief economist at the Conference Board, a business research group.

Already, the United States employs more people in solar energy (nearly 374,000) than in coal (a little over 160,000), according to the U.S. Department of Energy.

“The perception that we have to decide between creating jobs or tackling climate change is a false choice,” said Dean Garfield, president of the tech trade group ITI. “Our clean energy industry is growing and employing millions of Americans in good-paying jobs in both red and blue states as it powers more of our businesses and communities. It is not too late to for the president to stay the course and work with the tech industry to ensure that more clean energy jobs continue to go to Americans and that U.S. leadership in innovation is second to none.”

Many big companies say they must make long-term investment decisions based on the assumption that most countries will stiffen environmental standards. Accordingly, they are increasingly investing more in green technology.

“The business sector is moving ahead anyway,” van Ark said. “Businesses that are into this are into it for the long haul. Not just for four years, the term of a president.”

Immelt wrote to GE employees in a blog post in March: “Our customers, partners and countries are demanding technology that generates power while reducing emissions, improving energy efficiency and reducing cost.”

Economists also warn that climate change could inflict a devastating impact on the global economy. Drought and water shortages could sap growth. Rising sea levels could swamp low-lying cities and farmland. A 2015 report by Stanford University’s Marshall Burke and the University of California, Berkeley’s Sol Hsiang and Ted Miguel found the climate change could slash 20 percent from global economic output by 2100 — more than five times previous estimates.

“Global climate change is a threat to the economy,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics. “Anything that we do that works to curtail global warming is an economic plus.” Anything that delays the fight against climate change is “an economic negative.”

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/06/01/world/science-health-world/ditching-paris-deal-will-huge-costs-wont-create-jobs-economists-say/#.WTHby9wlGM8

See also your first reply:

How to tell like it is:
https://www.aol.com/article/entertainment/2017/06/01/john-legend-mark-cuban-celebrities-respond-trump-paris-climate-change-accord/22121828/
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=131850959