Paris Agreement Cost
It is rare that there is a consensus among almost all nations on a single subject. But with the Paris agreement, world leaders agreed that climate change was driven by human behaviour, that it was a threat to the environment and to humanity as a whole, and that global action was needed to stop it. In addition, a clear framework has been put in place for all countries to make commitments to reduce emissions and strengthen these measures over time. Here are some important reasons why the agreement is so important: socio-economic conditions in the future certainly play an important role in the optimal policy development, but they do not change the message that efforts to combat climate change should be very strict to get closer, or even diminish, by the end of the century. The reason is the potential cost of damage for higher temperatures. The calibration of these parameters has been the subject of long-standing debate. According to the descriptive position expressed in DICE20, it is essential that the two preferential parameters be chosen simultaneously, so that the resulting discount rate reflects the observed behaviour highlighted by market interest rates. On the other hand, prescribers24 consider the calibration of the two parameters to be an ethical one. Under the normative approach, we take into account a large number of possible values.
The results of this sensitivity test are presented in Figure 5 and described in the main text. As explained above, temperature targets for small discount rates could be considered too high due to poor reproduction of carbon cycle dynamics in DICE. Given that these targets are well below 2 degrees Celsius, this implicit error does not contradict our general finding that the Paris Agreement could make the most of the costs. The Paris Agreement was launched at the signing on April 22, 2016 (Earth Day) at a ceremony in New York.  After the agreement was ratified by several EU member states in October 2016, there were enough countries that had ratified the agreement to produce enough greenhouse gases in the world for the agreement to enter into force.  The agreement came into force on November 4, 2016.  There is a lot of misinformation about the Paris agreement, including the idea that it will hurt the U.S. economy. It was a series of unsubstantiated assertions that Trump repeated in his rose garden speech in 2017, arguing that the deal would cost the U.S. economy $3 trillion in jobs by 2040 and $2.7 million by 2025, making us less competitive with China and India.
But, as the auditors pointed out, these statistics come from a March 2017 unmasked study that exaggerated the future cost of reducing emissions, underestimated advances in energy efficiency and clean energy technologies, and was completely unaware of the enormous health and economic costs of climate change itself. With this updated damage function, we are deducting the optimal climate policy in terms of costs and benefits, which will begin in 2020. In this economically optimal scenario, the slowdown is actively monitored in order to maximize global well-being. We continue to believe that DICE-2013 will not have significant technologies for negative emissions this century. We contrast the optimal policy with the “business as-usual” (BAU) scenario in which climate policy is lacking.by