TBO.com - TBO is Tampa Bay Online

Wait On Warming Could Be Costly

ADVERTISEMENT

By DAVID ROYSE, The Associated Press

Published: November 29, 2007

TALLAHASSEE - Trying to counter claims about the cost of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, an environmental group presented a study Wednesday hoping to show that it could be more expensive if Florida doesn't try to stop global warming.

Researchers at Tufts University in Massachusetts say their analysis showed that if global temperatures continue to rise at certain projected levels, Florida's tourist economy would be hurt, millions of dollars in coastal real estate and infrastructure would be lost and improvements to the electric system to handle higher temperatures would also increase.

The study, by Elizabeth Stanton and Frank Ackerman, was paid for by Environmental Defense, an advocacy group that is pushing for policy changes that would reduce carbon-based emissions, arguing that would slow temperature increases around the world.

"Doing nothing on climate change is the expensive, shortsighted choice," the report said.

Opponents Question Benefit

The study comes as opponents of some curbs on emissions claim that the cost of reducing them outweighs what they say is an uncertain benefit. It also follows a call by Gov. Charlie Crist for dramatic reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in Florida.

Ackerman, an economist, said dividing Florida's options into trying to do something about climate change and thereby wrecking the economy or not taking action to avoid economic problems was a "false choice."

He argued that the loss of beaches from higher sea level alone could cut state income by 2.4 percent by the year 2100 if nothing is done.

A number of business groups have said that reductions in emissions in Florida at the level Crist has proposed would come at enormous cost.

For example, the Florida Chamber of Commerce has expressed interest in working with Crist at trying to lower emissions, but recently released a report warning that the cost of drastic changes could be very high.

"All policies that significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions will entail costs to the Florida economy," the Chamber said in a recent report. "These costs will appear as reductions in economic welfare, consumption, gross state product, and employment."

House Speaker Marco Rubio, R-West Miami, has urged caution on trying to find solutions to temperature change, and said government requirements could end up raising utility costs significantly, for very little benefit.

Ackerman acknowledged that his study didn't try to reconcile the two results - that is, taking into account supposed economic benefits of mitigation and then reducing it by the possible costs. But, he said, his analysis was likely a conservative estimate of the costs of not reducing emissions.

Ackerman also conceded that estimates of how much tourism might drop off are based on guesses of how much people might cut back on vacationing here. But he said it was logical to assume that if beaches are affected - maybe gone in some cases - people would visit less.

A Litany Of Loss

Other effects would be seen though, Ackerman said. Higher temperatures would raise air conditioning use, and that means building more power plants, which cost money. Also, the electric grid is less efficient in hotter temperatures.

There would also be a cost of losing infrastructure and real estate along the coast if sea levels rise as much as some projections, the report said. It notes that there are two nuclear reactors, nearly 300 shopping centers, and hundreds of schools, hotels, churches and homes in areas that could be subject to more than 2 feet of sea level rise by 2100 if nothing is done.

Share this:

Loading Comments...

Email Print

ADVERTISEMENT