US stuck on climate bill – but benefits outweigh costs

US politicians are running around in circles (which direction depends which party they support) arguing whether or not they should pass climate change legislation. Lots of rows about how much will it cost, and who that cost will hit hardest.

A new paper from NYU’s Institute for Policy Integrity takes a slightly different approach – its trying to work out what the benefits may be.
I know it might be considered old-fashioned but a cost-benefit analysis is how most business decisions are made, so it could be handy when arguing about the cost of action.

WSJ’s Environmental Capital takes a look at the numbers and reports that for every dollar spent on the bill $2.27 will be provided in benefits – and that’s without counting subsidiary benefits like clean air and the knock-on health impact of that.

They do admit that the costs they’re referring to are global, not US specific. But, given that our consumables come from around the world, short term impact on the ability to grow food in Bangladesh is bound to have an impact on the medium to long term cost of food in Boston. And that’s not even considering the financial costs of relief efforts, refugee management and the likely cost of fighting to gain access to fuel sources, clean water and fuel.