Bloomberg reports Paris Climate Accord will require over $13T in funding

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
to reduce global warming by .2 degree C by 2100. Wow.

A whopping $7.4 trillion will be spent globally on new green energy facilities in the coming decades, but another $5.3 trillion is needed to meet the goals of the Paris climate accord, according to a new report.

Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) is out with a new long-term energy outlook report, this time projecting a total of $12.7 trillion to keep projected global warming below 2 degrees Celsius by the end of the century — a goal of the Paris accord.

BNEF projects $7.4 trillion will be invested in new green energy capacity by 2040, and that global carbon dioxide emissions will be 4 percent lower in that year than in 2016.

But that’s not enough to keep projected warming below 2 degrees, the report warns.

BNEF says a “further $5.3 trillion investment in 3.9 [terawatts] of zero-carbon capacity would be consistent with keeping the planet on a 2-degrees-C trajectory,” according to an excerpt of the report obtained by Axios.

President Donald Trump announced U.S. withdrawal from the Paris accord in early June, arguing it would hurt American workers by transferring wealth from them to economic competitors, like China and India.

“This agreement is less about the climate and more about other countries gaining a financial advantage over the United States,” Trump.

China and India joined the Paris agreement in 2016, but neither plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions anytime soon. China said it would “peak” emissions by 2030 and India has been promised foreign aid to boost green energy production.

Nearly 200 countries agreed to the Paris accord in 2015, pledging to limit future global warming to 2 degrees Celsius by 2100 and transfer $100 billion a year from rich countries to poor countries starting in 2020.

Critics of Trump’s withdrawal say the U.S. will miss out on business opportunities in green energy outside of the Paris agreement. They say the U.S. abdicated leadership and with it economic opportunity.

Much of the green energy development over the next few decades will occur in China and India, according to BNEF. Those countries will see $4 trillion in investments in green energy through 2040.

“Beyond the term of a president, Donald Trump can’t change the structure of the global energy sector single-handedly,” Seb Henbest, lead author of the BNEF report, told Bloomberg.

Except, it’s unlikely the world’s largest economy would be left out of the alleged “green revolution.” Bloomberg predicts green energy will continue to grow in the U.S. regardless of Trump’s policies to boost fossil fuels.

BNEF expects global carbon dioxide emissions to peak in 2026, with the growth largely driven by developing economies. The group predicts $2.8 trillion to be invested in non-renewable energy capacity, like natural gas.

Green energy additions will be driven by falling costs and also government policies to phase out fossil fuels to fight global warming. Many U.S. states, for example, mandate ever-growing shares of their electricity come from green sources.

Wind and solar power will make up nearly half the world’s electricity capacity, BNEF claims, and meet 34 percent of electricity needs. Today those sources only generate 5 percent of global electricity.
 

moe

Sophomore
May 29, 2001
32,560
152
63
Big money to be spent on renewable energy going forward. The U.S. needs to be on the cutting edge, lots of jobs at stake.
 

moe

Sophomore
May 29, 2001
32,560
152
63
to reduce global warming by .2 degree C by 2100. Wow.

A whopping $7.4 trillion will be spent globally on new green energy facilities in the coming decades, but another $5.3 trillion is needed to meet the goals of the Paris climate accord, according to a new report.

Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) is out with a new long-term energy outlook report, this time projecting a total of $12.7 trillion to keep projected global warming below 2 degrees Celsius by the end of the century — a goal of the Paris accord.

BNEF projects $7.4 trillion will be invested in new green energy capacity by 2040, and that global carbon dioxide emissions will be 4 percent lower in that year than in 2016.

But that’s not enough to keep projected warming below 2 degrees, the report warns.

BNEF says a “further $5.3 trillion investment in 3.9 [terawatts] of zero-carbon capacity would be consistent with keeping the planet on a 2-degrees-C trajectory,” according to an excerpt of the report obtained by Axios.

President Donald Trump announced U.S. withdrawal from the Paris accord in early June, arguing it would hurt American workers by transferring wealth from them to economic competitors, like China and India.

“This agreement is less about the climate and more about other countries gaining a financial advantage over the United States,” Trump.

China and India joined the Paris agreement in 2016, but neither plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions anytime soon. China said it would “peak” emissions by 2030 and India has been promised foreign aid to boost green energy production.

Nearly 200 countries agreed to the Paris accord in 2015, pledging to limit future global warming to 2 degrees Celsius by 2100 and transfer $100 billion a year from rich countries to poor countries starting in 2020.

Critics of Trump’s withdrawal say the U.S. will miss out on business opportunities in green energy outside of the Paris agreement. They say the U.S. abdicated leadership and with it economic opportunity.

Much of the green energy development over the next few decades will occur in China and India, according to BNEF. Those countries will see $4 trillion in investments in green energy through 2040.

“Beyond the term of a president, Donald Trump can’t change the structure of the global energy sector single-handedly,” Seb Henbest, lead author of the BNEF report, told Bloomberg.

Except, it’s unlikely the world’s largest economy would be left out of the alleged “green revolution.” Bloomberg predicts green energy will continue to grow in the U.S. regardless of Trump’s policies to boost fossil fuels.

BNEF expects global carbon dioxide emissions to peak in 2026, with the growth largely driven by developing economies. The group predicts $2.8 trillion to be invested in non-renewable energy capacity, like natural gas.

Green energy additions will be driven by falling costs and also government policies to phase out fossil fuels to fight global warming. Many U.S. states, for example, mandate ever-growing shares of their electricity come from green sources.

Wind and solar power will make up nearly half the world’s electricity capacity, BNEF claims, and meet 34 percent of electricity needs. Today those sources only generate 5 percent of global electricity.
You complain about media bias yet you rarely miss an opportunity to put up a misleading subject line, well done. Of course over half ($7.4T) of that big number is money that will be spent on renewable energy facilities. This is just one estimate and it's through the end of the century so there's that.
 

Boomboom521

Redshirt
Mar 14, 2014
20,115
6
0
You complain about media bias yet you rarely miss an opportunity to put up a misleading subject line, well done. Of course over half ($7.4T) of that big number is money that will be spent on renewable energy facilities. This is just one estimate and it's through the end of the century so there's that.
Never misses a chance to inject extreme drama into a post either. With his: wow's, omg's, and constant defense of the virtue of our nation....he's like a warrior poet, fighting for the oppressed conservative voice.
 

moe

Sophomore
May 29, 2001
32,560
152
63
Never misses a chance to inject extreme drama into a post either. With his: wow's, omg's, and constant defense of the virtue of our nation....he's like a warrior poet, fighting for the oppressed conservative voice.
Yes it's all very entertaining and he's fooling no one with his BS.
 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
46,692
1,761
113
Hahahahha the climate queens out quick to defend a ridiculously bad number.
 

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
For the whole planet for the next 83 years, that number is probably low.

The point went right over your head. $13T for an incredibly small drop in global warming. Have you ever heard about cost/benefit analysis?

It is an enormous amount of money managed by global elites and will hurt the U.S. the most.
 

moe

Sophomore
May 29, 2001
32,560
152
63
The point went right over your head. $13T for an incredibly small drop in global warming. Have you ever heard about cost/benefit analysis?

It is an enormous amount of money managed by global elites and will hurt the U.S. the most.
It's obvious that you don't have one clue about this, good luck with getting up to speed on the topic.
 
Last edited:

TarHeelEer

Redshirt
Dec 15, 2002
89,286
37
48
The point went right over your head. $13T for an incredibly small drop in their predicted global warming projections, which have been shown to be inaccurate. Have you ever heard about cost/benefit analysis?

fify
 

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38

Nice correction. I was giving the alarmists the benefit of the doubt to avoid the excuse we used phony temperatures. But you're right, this assume their modeled predictions of global temperatures are accurate, which has not been true to date.
 

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38

Boomboom521

Redshirt
Mar 14, 2014
20,115
6
0