![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ny_quantТолько сливки.
McKinsey:
Capital spending on physical assets for energy and land-use systems in the net-zero transition between 2021 and 2050 would amount to about $275 trillion, or $9.2 trillion per year on average, an annual increase of as much as $3.5 trillion from today. To put this increase in comparative terms, the $3.5 trillion is approximately equivalent, in 2020, to half of global corporate profits, one-quarter of total tax revenue, and 7 percent of household spending.
The transition could result in a gain of about 200 million and a loss of about 185 million direct and indirect jobs globally by 2050.
Our estimates exceed to a meaningful degree the $3 trillion to $4.5 trillion of annual spending for the net-zero transition that others have estimated.
Deloitte:
Over the past 50 years the US has suffered a total of $1.4 trillion dollars due to weather, climate and water hazards.
In 2021 alone there were 20 separate billion dollar weather and climate disasters in the US.
With average warming of 3°C by century end, failing to take sufficient action could result in economic losses to the US of $14.5 trillion in present-value dollars over the next 50 years.
Wood MacKenzie:
Our analysis suggests that much of the lasting economic benefits will materialise beyond our forecast horizon of 2050. (!!!)
Collating third-party results on climate damage impacts, we estimate that avoiding a higher temperature increase could boost global GDP, on aggregate, by 1.6% in 2050. At the same time, however, the actions required to successfully mitigate global warming to 1.5°C could knock 3.6% off GDP in 2050.
Все тут грамотные, цифры говорят сами за себя, анализировать тут в общем нечего. Если это не коллективное безумие, то я не знаю что.
McKinsey:
Capital spending on physical assets for energy and land-use systems in the net-zero transition between 2021 and 2050 would amount to about $275 trillion, or $9.2 trillion per year on average, an annual increase of as much as $3.5 trillion from today. To put this increase in comparative terms, the $3.5 trillion is approximately equivalent, in 2020, to half of global corporate profits, one-quarter of total tax revenue, and 7 percent of household spending.
The transition could result in a gain of about 200 million and a loss of about 185 million direct and indirect jobs globally by 2050.
Our estimates exceed to a meaningful degree the $3 trillion to $4.5 trillion of annual spending for the net-zero transition that others have estimated.
Deloitte:
Over the past 50 years the US has suffered a total of $1.4 trillion dollars due to weather, climate and water hazards.
In 2021 alone there were 20 separate billion dollar weather and climate disasters in the US.
With average warming of 3°C by century end, failing to take sufficient action could result in economic losses to the US of $14.5 trillion in present-value dollars over the next 50 years.
Wood MacKenzie:
Our analysis suggests that much of the lasting economic benefits will materialise beyond our forecast horizon of 2050. (!!!)
Collating third-party results on climate damage impacts, we estimate that avoiding a higher temperature increase could boost global GDP, on aggregate, by 1.6% in 2050. At the same time, however, the actions required to successfully mitigate global warming to 1.5°C could knock 3.6% off GDP in 2050.
Все тут грамотные, цифры говорят сами за себя, анализировать тут в общем нечего. Если это не коллективное безумие, то я не знаю что.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2022-01-31 11:35 pm (UTC)Цены для населения поднимутся только с апреля, тут лимит есть и пока ожидается +50%. Стройматериалы за последние 4 года хорошо больше 50%, бетон, как я понял, уже пошёл на взлёт, поскольку у них электричество составляет значительную часть цены. Естественно, все хотят, чтобы правительство что-то сделало, налоги снизило, например. Деньги в тумбочке. У нас говорится, по крайней мере, что зелёнка это 25%, если не ошибаюсь, в ценах. С другой стороны, друг говорит, что у молодёжи мозги так промыты, что они с удовольствием заплатят и двойную цену. Правда, это дети с хорошей работой, которые могут себе позволить, очень сомневаюсь, что большинство так же думает, но точно не знаю.
no subject
Date: 2022-02-01 05:10 am (UTC)