A study establishes the economic impact of melting arctic permafrost at $ 70 billion!

April 24, 2019 by Steve Hanley

---

Dmitry Yumashev and a team of researchers from Lancaster University have studied the effects of melting ice sheets in the Arctic and concluded that an increase in the amount of carbon dioxide and methane from melting permafrost, associated with increased absorption of sunlight The lack of sea ice that reflects sunlight away from the Earth's surface will increase the cost of global warming by $ 70 trillion . This represents ten times more economic benefits than easier access to mineral resources in the Arctic and lower shipping costs around the world could draw from it.

The study entitledConsequences for climate policy of non-linear decline of Arctic terrestrial permafrost and other elements of the cryosphere, "Was published April 23 in the newspaper Nature Communications. In the introduction, Yumashev et al. say,

"The Arctic is warming twice as fast as the global average, resulting in reduced sea ice, snow and glaciers and permafrost degradation compared to the 1979-2005 average." These changes can further accelerate global warming. a variety of climate feedbacks.

"Carbon from melting permafrost released into the atmosphere results in carbon permafrost feedback (PCF). Decreased sea ice and terrestrial snow cover increase solar absorption at high latitudes, causing surface albedo feedback (SAF). Both feedbacks amplify the anthropogenic signal. "

The study is the first of its kind

The authors tell The Guardian their study is the first to calculate the economic impact of permafrost melting and albedo reduction – a measure of the amount of light that reflects a surface without being absorbed – based on the most advanced computer models of this material. which is likely to occur in the Arctic the temperatures rise. It shows how destabilized natural systems will exacerbate the problem of human-made emissions, making it more difficult and costly to solve.

Here is an overview of their methodology. They used what is known of current stocks of organic matter frozen in the ground up to 3 meters deep at multiple points in the Arctic. These data were analyzed by the world's most advanced simulation software in the United States and by the British Met Office to predict the amount of gas released at different levels of warming. They then applied previous economic impact models to estimate the likely costs.

A lack of urgency persists

"It's discouraging that we have this in front of us," says Yumashev. "Even at temperatures of 1.5 to 2 ° C, permafrost thaw has impacts and costs. But they are considerably lower for these scenarios compared to the status quo. We have the technology and the political tools to limit the warming, but we are not going fast enough. This lack of urgency is precisely what the protesters of the Extinction Rebellion, Greta Thunberg, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Bernie Sanders are talking about.

The good news in this study is that the effects of melting permafrost and the absence of sea ice should be somewhat lower than previously predicted. "We still have a time bomb, but it may not be as big as we once thought," says Yumashev. However, this is not a reason to be complacent. Even at the bottom of the scale, the damage is enormous, the study involves a considerable degree of uncertainty and the costs of several other potential tipping points have yet to be calculated.

Donald Trump, the greatest narcissist in history, says he will not spend billions of dollars to protect himself from the harmful effects of junk food science – as if he would spend a penny of his fortune to help other than himself. But if these researchers are right, the economic cost of climate change will eventually total hundreds of billions of dollars. Today, an ounce of prevention could save huge sums of money in the future, not to mention the possible reduction in human suffering and loss of life that will come from an extremely warmer planet.

Studies continue to accumulate, but most countries continue their usual path, jeopardizing the very existence of the human race and all that lives on Earth to preserve the hegemony of the companies of fossil fuels. If there is no record of the limited time humanity has on our planet after our death, maybe the species that will inhabit the Earth in a few million years will shrug and ask for to William Shakespeare to explain the madness that led to our disappearance. . "Lord, what are these fools of these mortals," writes the bard.

Keywords: Arctic, carbon dioxide, cost of climate change, melting Arctic ice, permafrost