The original natural family living magazine, founded in 1976. Reader-supported
and trusted by thinking people around the world who want positive alternatives
to high cost, high consumption lifestyles for themselves and their families.
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
from
Natural Life Magazine, May/June 2007 One of the arguments being put forward by some politicians against taking action to drastically reduce greenhouse gases is that such action would be economically devastating and ineffective. However, that argument is being proven incorrect. On one hand, maintaining the status quo will have a devastating financial cost. According to British economist Sir Nicholas Stern, cutting worldwide greenhouse emissions to acceptable levels will cost just one percent of global GDP by 2050, while failing to do so could cost up to 20 percent – amounting to trillions of dollars. On the other hand, clean energy and other sustainable practices will actually have an economic benefit. Economic Boom A new report from Colorado shows that if the state doubled its renewable energy by 20 percent, it would add $1.9 billion to its gross domestic production. Democratic Governor Bill Ritter says, “Increasing our use of renewable energy would bring over 4,000 high-paying, high-skilled jobs and over $570 million in wages paid to our state.” The economic boon would come from increased manufacturing, installation and operation of renewable electricity production. Pricing Carbon The economics of carbon is the subject of a new carbon ... To read the rest of this article, subscribe to Natural Life's digital edition, which includes access to this and other back issues. Wendy Priesnitz is the Editor of Natural Life Magazine and a journalist with over 30 years of experience. She has also authored nine books. Visit her website. |
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
