Trump rejects discovery of climate report says: "I do not believe it"

President Donald Trump on Monday rejected the main finding of an alarming report on the economic costs of climate change issued by his own administration.

But economists said the National Climate Assessment warned of hundreds of billions The total cost of global warming a year is quite heavy.

Look back last year with hurricanes Harvey, Maria and Irma, they said. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, these three storms in 2017 caused at least $ 265 billion in damage, according to the climate report, unveiled Friday. It has been announced that natural disasters are worsening in the United States as a result of global warming.

According to the report, extreme warming phenomena "have already become more frequent, intense, generalized or long-lasting". The report notes that recent years have shattered US records for bad weather, costing nearly $ 400 billion since 2015.

"The potential Losses in some sectors could reach hundreds of billions of dollars a year from here the end of the century, "says the report. He added that if heat capture gas emissions remain at current levels, labor costs in outdoor industries during heatwaves could cost $ 155 billion in losses. salary per year by 2090.

The President said that he had read part of the report "good" but not the part about the devastating economic impact. "I do not believe it," said Trump, adding that if "all places on the planet are dirty, it's not so good."

In 2015, almost every country in the world committed to reducing or slowing carbon growth. emissions of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas.

"We are there already," said Gary Yohe, an economist at Wesleyan University, who edited the national report, which was written by 13 federal and external scientific agencies. "Climate change is currently having a significant impact on our economy: Harvey, Florence, Michael, Maria."

Yohe said, "It's devastating in some places, but for the whole country? No. "

The economist Ray Kopp, vice president of the think tank Resources for the Future and not part of the evaluation, said the economic and scientific data presented in the report were absolutely credible

"I believe this is going to be a devastating loss without any other action," Kopp said Monday. "It's definitely something you would like to avoid."

A little earlier, the White House had downplayed the report. Spokeswoman Lindsay Walters said in an email that the report "is largely based on the most extreme scenario, contradicting well established trends on the premise that, despite strong economic growth likely increase greenhouse gas emissions, technology and innovation will be limited and a rapidly expanding population. "

Throughout the report in 29 chapters, scientists present three scenarios that badessments of the The first is the scenario of the status quo, which, according to scientists, is closest to the current situation.It is the worst case of the three scenarios.Another would consider a modest reduction of the gases. trapping heat and a third a severe reduction in carbon dioxide pollution.

For example, the $ 155 billion in additional labor costs by the end of the century fall within the competence of the enterprise. usual scenario. Modest reductions in carbon pollution would reduce that to $ 75 billion a year, says the report.

The report speaks of economic losses of hundreds of billions of dollars in many places. In a chart, it shows the worst-case scenario of economic costs reaching 10 percent of gross domestic product when the Earth is about 12 degrees higher than it is now, with no specific date.

Yohe said it was regrettable. some media jumped on this figure by 10% because it was a rare case of hyperbole in the report.

"The figure of 10% is not implausible as a possible future for 2100," Yohe said. "It's just not very likely."

Kopp, on the other hand, estimated that the figure of 10% seemed credible.

"It's probably the best estimate," Kopp said. "He could be bigger. It could be smaller. "