A recent White House memo directs federal agencies to overlook the economic impacts of climate change in their regulations unless explicitly mandated by law. This measure, known as the “social cost of carbon,” has been a tool for policy guidance, reflecting the economic implications of climate change.
Historically, the Trump administration valued this metric at approximately $5 per ton, significantly lower than the Obama administration’s estimate of $42. The Biden administration, considering inflation and increased climate impact, raised it to about $200 per ton. David Cash, a former New England Administrator for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, discussed this topic in an interview.
The “social cost of carbon” assesses the economic damages associated with emitting one ton of carbon dioxide. This calculation helps justify regulatory actions by evaluating the costs society faces due to climate change, like wildfires, flooding, or droughts. Regulations protect public health by requiring industries to account for these costs. For more details, see this explanation of carbon cost implications.
Cash criticized the new policy, arguing it essentially denies the financial impact of climate change, which could result in more severe weather events and health issues. Ignoring these realities doesn’t solve the problem and could worsen public health conditions.
Cash compared current regulatory goals to past safety measures like seatbelts, highlighting their economic benefits in reducing harm. Current estimates peg the cost of carbon at $190 per ton, reflecting damages caused by emissions. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reported over $180 billion in climate-related damages last year.
Industries are already factoring climate costs into their operations, with insurance becoming harder to obtain in areas prone to climate impacts. To claim climate change has no cost is deemed “outrageous” by Cash. Despite uncertainties in climate data, ignoring it is not an option, as uncertainties can be addressed through scientific investment.
A social cost of carbon set to zero could weaken regulations, increasing pollution and its associated health risks. Events like the recent wildfires in Canada causing air quality issues in New England highlight the tangible impacts of climate change.
The memo doesn’t currently affect particulate matter regulations, but Cash anticipates a relaxation of standards protecting public health. Public awareness and action are crucial as these policy changes could directly impact community health and safety.
Original Story at insideclimatenews.org