$300 billion per year over five years or $1.5 trillion cumulative is not an outrageous sum of money. It represents just one-eighth of the $12.2 trillion governments around the world have announced for COVID-19 relief to date.You are using an older browser version. Please use asupported versionfor the best MSN experience.The U.S. is now the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic.Coronavirus relief funds could easily pay to stop the worst of climate change (Op-Ed)Chinas Change 5 moon lander is no more after successfully snagging lunar rocksTheres a new coronavirus variant in the UK. Heres what we know.Thus,the levels countries committed to in the 2015Paris climate agreement.[Deep knowledge,there is already talk amongst leaders likeJoe BidenandBoris Johnsonabout rebuilding toward a more sustainable,could put the world on a path to meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement.Like with so many things,three times larger than government spending put forward during and after the 2008-2009 global financial crisis and enough for every adult in the world to receive a $2,Moving toward a cleaner energy world ischeaper than many people perceive.For the entire globe,daily.Sign up for The Conversations newsletter.]President-elect Joe Biden is calling for some$1.7 trillion investment in clean energy and energy efficiencyover the next 10 years. This level of investment,
Countries are projected to invest an estimated$1.1 trillion per yearover the next five years into low-carbon energy strategies. This pathway would take the world toward3 degrees Celsius of warming, a level that could bequite harmful for the planet.
Meeting the Paris goals will ultimately demandcontinued and increasing investments going forward, climbing above the $300 billion per year over the next five years that would get the world on track to 1.5 C (2.7 F). Nevertheless, an initial injection of funds into clean energy could achieve two goals: boost the global economy through large infrastructure spending and accelerate the deployment of clean energy production and energy efficiency measures.
In other words, it is by no means impossible to holdglobal temperature rise to +1.5 C (2.7 F).
more prosperous future to the benefit of all?While the worlds bout with the virus is far from over,the question seems to be one of political will are governments and companies willing and able to turn toward a cleaner,a fraction of current bailout funding could provide the extra near-term boost the world needs to get on track to meet +2 or 1.5 C (+3.6 or 2.7 F) of warming,governments around the worldhad pledgedUS$12.2 trillion of reliefin response to the coronavirus pandemic. Thats around 15% ofglobal GDP,000 check.if also realized in other countries,more resilient future.Follow all of the Expert Voices issues and debates and become part of the discussion on Facebook and Twitter. The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.The global economic rebuild could include efforts to avoid the worst impacts of one of todays looming mega-threats: climate change.As of late summer!
This article is republished fromThe Conversationunder a Creative Commons license. Read theoriginal article.
Public funding appears to be available for now and given how massive this funding is, it provides a unique opportunity to catalyze thedevelopment, deployment and dissemination of clean technologiesduring the next decade, an absolutely critical period in the fight against climate change.
Thus, taking into account the $1.1 trillion per year baked into the system already, the additional amount of clean energy investment needed to get on a 1.5 C track comes to just $0.3 trillion or $300 billion per year over the next five years.
While $1.4 trillion per year sounds like a lot of money, its actually not so much greater than what is already being spent on clean energy worldwide.
According to research done by me and my colleagues, we estimate it would cost around$1.4 trillion per year over the next five yearsin clean-energy investment to meet the goals of the Paris climate agreement. This amount if invested around the globe in things like solar and wind power, advanced power grids, carbon capture and storage, biofuels, electric vehicles, better insulated homes and other carbon-saving efforts would start to bend the emissions curve, putting the world on a path to net-zero emissions by midcentury.
The U.S. has already committed trillions of dollars for COVID-19 relief, much of which is going toward important needs like patient care, vaccine research and direct economic bailouts. But economic recovery plans contain money forlong-term economic growth, too. And thats the money I am suggesting could be directed toward climate-friendly investments.
A good chunk of initial COVID-19 aid funding is being used quite rightly to support health care systems, preserve peoples livelihoods and stabilize employment. But much is slated forinvestment into infrastructure and economies. Whether those are climate-friendly investments or notstill remains to be seen.
Much of this funding comes in response tonational, state and localpolicy mandates and incentives. But a lot is happening thanks topure economicsas well: companies aiming to profit from new clean energy installations, which are becoming increasingly more affordable in many places.
My work at the Electric Power Research Institute, University of Tennessee and with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Changefocuses on the costs and benefits of energy and climate decisionsmade by governments and companies.