TY - JOUR
T1 - Comprehensive evidence implies a higher social cost of CO2
AU - Rennert, Kevin
AU - Errickson, Frank
AU - Prest, Brian C.
AU - Rennels, Lisa
AU - Newell, Richard G.
AU - Pizer, William
AU - Kingdon, Cora
AU - Wingenroth, Jordan
AU - Cooke, Roger
AU - Parthum, Bryan
AU - Smith, David
AU - Cromar, Kevin
AU - Diaz, Delavane
AU - Moore, Frances C.
AU - Müller, Ulrich K.
AU - Plevin, Richard J.
AU - Raftery, Adrian E.
AU - Ševčíková, Hana
AU - Sheets, Hannah
AU - Stock, James H.
AU - Tan, Tammy
AU - Watson, Mark
AU - Wong, Tony E.
AU - Anthoff, David
N1 - Funding Information:
The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the US Environmental Protection Agency. This work was supported by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Hewlett Foundation, and individual donations to RFF’s Social Cost of Carbon Initiative. The work of A.E.R. and H.Š. was supported by NIH grant R01 HD070936.
Funding Information:
D.A., F.E., B.C.P., L.R., K.R. and J.W. received support from ICF with funding from the US Environmental Protection Agency during part of the time this paper was developed; that funding was not affected by this study’s results. D.D. is employed at EPRI, a non-profit public interest research institute supported by a combination of funding from industry, governments and foundations that could be affected by the results of this research, both positively and negatively. R.G.N. is a member of the NASEM Board on Environmental Change and Society, which oversaw the NASEM consensus study that guided this research, and which he also co-chaired. W.P. was also a member of that NASEM consensus study committee when he was on the faculty at Duke University. R.G.N. has also been a member of the National Petroleum Council since 2016, a federally chartered advisory committee to the US Secretary of Energy, who appoints its members.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022, The Author(s).
PY - 2022/10/27
Y1 - 2022/10/27
N2 - The social cost of carbon dioxide (SC-CO2) measures the monetized value of the damages to society caused by an incremental metric tonne of CO2 emissions and is a key metric informing climate policy. Used by governments and other decision-makers in benefit–cost analysis for over a decade, SC-CO2 estimates draw on climate science, economics, demography and other disciplines. However, a 2017 report by the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine1 (NASEM) highlighted that current SC-CO2 estimates no longer reflect the latest research. The report provided a series of recommendations for improving the scientific basis, transparency and uncertainty characterization of SC-CO2 estimates. Here we show that improved probabilistic socioeconomic projections, climate models, damage functions, and discounting methods that collectively reflect theoretically consistent valuation of risk, substantially increase estimates of the SC-CO2. Our preferred mean SC-CO2 estimate is $185 per tonne of CO2 ($44–$413 per tCO2: 5%–95% range, 2020 US dollars) at a near-term risk-free discount rate of 2%, a value 3.6 times higher than the US government’s current value of $51 per tCO2. Our estimates incorporate updated scientific understanding throughout all components of SC-CO2 estimation in the new open-source Greenhouse Gas Impact Value Estimator (GIVE) model, in a manner fully responsive to the near-term NASEM recommendations. Our higher SC-CO2 values, compared with estimates currently used in policy evaluation, substantially increase the estimated benefits of greenhouse gas mitigation and thereby increase the expected net benefits of more stringent climate policies.
AB - The social cost of carbon dioxide (SC-CO2) measures the monetized value of the damages to society caused by an incremental metric tonne of CO2 emissions and is a key metric informing climate policy. Used by governments and other decision-makers in benefit–cost analysis for over a decade, SC-CO2 estimates draw on climate science, economics, demography and other disciplines. However, a 2017 report by the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine1 (NASEM) highlighted that current SC-CO2 estimates no longer reflect the latest research. The report provided a series of recommendations for improving the scientific basis, transparency and uncertainty characterization of SC-CO2 estimates. Here we show that improved probabilistic socioeconomic projections, climate models, damage functions, and discounting methods that collectively reflect theoretically consistent valuation of risk, substantially increase estimates of the SC-CO2. Our preferred mean SC-CO2 estimate is $185 per tonne of CO2 ($44–$413 per tCO2: 5%–95% range, 2020 US dollars) at a near-term risk-free discount rate of 2%, a value 3.6 times higher than the US government’s current value of $51 per tCO2. Our estimates incorporate updated scientific understanding throughout all components of SC-CO2 estimation in the new open-source Greenhouse Gas Impact Value Estimator (GIVE) model, in a manner fully responsive to the near-term NASEM recommendations. Our higher SC-CO2 values, compared with estimates currently used in policy evaluation, substantially increase the estimated benefits of greenhouse gas mitigation and thereby increase the expected net benefits of more stringent climate policies.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85139517351&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85139517351&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1038/s41586-022-05224-9
DO - 10.1038/s41586-022-05224-9
M3 - Article
C2 - 36049503
AN - SCOPUS:85139517351
SN - 0028-0836
VL - 610
SP - 687
EP - 692
JO - Nature
JF - Nature
IS - 7933
ER -