A study conducted by Dartmouth College shows the devastating economic effects major polluting countries like the U.S. have on the entire planet. According to the study, published in the journal Climate Change on Tuesday, the U.S. leads the world in emission-based gross domestic product losses for 143 countries between the years of 1990 and 2014, totaling $1.9 trillion. China was not far behind with worldwide GDP losses totaling just under $1.9 trillion. Grist noted that the two countries alone account for nearly one-third of GDP losses caused by emissions. The study authors themselves see this data as useful information to help countries impacted by large polluters like the U.S. pursue climate liability claims.
“Greenhouse gases emitted in one country cause warming in another, and that warming can depress economic growth,” assistant professor Justin Mankin, who teaches geography and served as a senior researcher for the study, said in a press release. “This research provides legally valuable estimates of the financial damages individual nations have suffered due to other countries’ climate-changing activities.” In addition to potentially costing the U.S. substantial sums in climate change litigation, U.S. emissions are also hurting the country domestically. Stanford University found that air pollution alone led to a 5% drop in the country’s GDP in the year 2014, accounting for a loss of $790 billion. That’s just $10 billion shy of the figure U.N. climate scientists believe is necessary to spend on combatting climate change and giving the world a fighting chance against it.
The study is yet another damning illustration of the inequality climate change causes on a global scale, too. “Irrespective of the accounting, warm countries have warmed and lost income because of it, while colder countries have warmed but enjoyed economic gains,” Mankin concluded. “The responsibility for the warming rests primarily with a handful of major emitters, and this warming has resulted in the enrichment of a few wealthy countries at the expense of the poorest people in the world.” The White House seems content to continue down this failed path, however—even if the majority of voters are wanting to see more climate leadership from Joe Biden and Democrats. There is no better example of this than a recent Washington Post story on the Biden administration’s willingness to compromise its climate goals in order to court Sen. Joe Manchin.
According to The Washington Post, the Biden administration has been more willing to potentially approve projects like ConocoPhillips’ Willow oil extraction plan in Alaska or the Manchin favorite Mountain Valley Pipeline in Virginia and West Virginia, because staffers think they can somehow get Manchin onboard with a climate spending package that’s stalled because of him. University of California, Santa Cruz energy policy expert David Victor claimed adding those emissions-heavy projects were totally worth it if it means getting a climate package through Congress. “It’s going to send a much clearer signal to low-carbon industries about where and how they can build,” Victor explained.
I know we’re in desperate times but I just don’t see how they call for going backward in order to see even a smidge of progress. If Manchin, considered one of the most conservative Democrats in the Senate, really cares about what’s hurting his constituents, shouldn’t he look immediately toward economic relief? Going backward with added emissions—and unneeded GDP loss from fossil fuels—is no way to lead with the future of this country in mind.