You must log in or register to comment.
Imagine how cheap it could’ve been if we started 50 years ago.
tn = trillion (1012), so € 1 500 000 000 000
That averages out to an easy 55 billion a country. I’m sure this will happen.
Or does this include private investments?
And in the same time they will save (also in the article) 2.8 trillion (or 100 billion on average per country) in fossil fuel imports and 2.5 trillion (or 90 billion per country) in prevented damages.
So I’d call this a great bargain…
Now, we only need to explain them the obvious: Who starts early will get a higher share of the savings.
I first thought in long scale, then it would be 1.5 * 1018. That would be a bit too much though.
That’s 1/4 of the total tax revenue of EU member states.
If that’s what it takes, it’s already too late.That almost certainly is including private investment, which makes it a lot more possible. Especially with a lot of it replacing old fossil fuel infrastructure.
It doesn’t ewven need to when (by the article linked) those investments are one side of a plan that also includes saving 2.8 trillion in fossil fuel exports in the same time, while also projecting +2.4 trillion in damages if no climate action is taken.
And that’s not even a new thing. We know that taking climate action now will actually save us money, short and long term. But it will also decrease the money paid by lobbyists to politicians and media and the profits of fossil fuel companies, so we will get headlines like these and a lot of political narratives to discourage us.
deleted by creator
