Some in Congress have reacted strongly to the Obama administration’s recent increase of the estimated value of the “social cost of carbon.” House proposals range from re-examining the process used to develop the estimate to barring the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from using the figure in developing regulations.
The social cost of carbon is one of many economic tools devised by experts and regulators to better weigh the relative costs and benefits of proposed government actions.
In its most basic sense, the social cost of carbon is the estimated economic cost of the impacts caused to society by climate change. In other words, it’s an attempt to estimate the costs associated with rising sea levels, more frequent and intense heat waves, and other climate-related consequences from increased emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.
In announcing his climate action plan, President Obama highlighted a vital technology for reducing emissions: carbon capture and storage. I recently had the opportunity to tour a first-of-its-kind CCS operation at an Air Products plant in Port Arthur, Texas.
Air Products has integrated state-of-the-art CO2 capture technology into an existing hydrogen plant. Despite being the most abundant element in the universe, hydrogen must be separated from other compounds, and CO2 is a byproduct of the separation process. On our tour of the Port Arthur project, we viewed the capture equipment that separates CO2 from a gas stream before compressing it for transportation via pipeline. Each year, about one million tons of CO2 will be captured and transported for underground storage, rather than being released into the atmosphere.
The project is a milestone for several reasons.
One in three. That’s how many U.S. households are occupied by renters. It is a population of 94.5 million people living in 38.8 million homes in cities, suburbs, and small towns across the country.
This growing population is taking advantage of benefits like easier mobility, minimal maintenance responsibilities, and the financial flexibility offered by renting. But if renters want to save energy – and save money in the process – there aren’t many places to turn for advice and ideas tailored to their needs.
A new C2ES report, "Weathering the Storm: Building Business Resilience to Climate Change," examines how major global companies are beginning to assess and address the growing business risks associated with increased extreme weather and other impacts of climate change. Here’s what we found:
Leading companies are taking proactive steps to better anticipate extreme weather and climate changes, and to more quickly recover after their effects — where they see opportunities to become more efficient, reduce costs, or provide greater value to customers. Generally speaking, these companies follow a four-step process.
From the record-breaking Black Forest wildfire in Colorado to record-low water levels for the Great Lakes, extreme weather events seem to be more the norm of late than the exception. Earlier this month, NOAA ranked 2012 as the United States’ second most costly year for damages from extreme weather events.
The increasing financial risks associated with extreme weather have not been lost on the business community. Companies have always had to navigate a changing business environment. But now they face a changing physical environment, as climate change leads to higher sea levels and more frequent and intense heat waves, droughts, wildfires, and downpours.
A new C2ES report released today, "Weathering the Storm: Building Business Resilience to Climate Change," takes a comprehensive look at how major global companies view these rising risks and what they are beginning to do to better understand and manage them.