future timeline technology singularity humanity
 
   
future timeline twitter future timeline facebook group future timeline youtube channel account videos future timeline rss feed
 
     
     
 
       
 
 
 

Blog » Society & Demographics

 
     
 

1st July 2017

Climate change will increase inequality in the USA

Unmitigated climate change will exacerbate inequality in the USA, with southern states losing up to 20% of their income by century's end.

 

climate change inequality usa 2100

County-level annual damages in the median scenario for 2080 to 2099.

 

Unmitigated climate change will make the USA poorer and more unequal, according to a study published yesterday in the journal Science. The poorest third of counties could sustain economic damage costing as much as 20 percent of their income if warming proceeds unabated.

States in the South and lower Midwest, which tend to be poor and hot already, will lose the most, with economic opportunity traveling northward and westward. Colder and richer counties along the northern border and in the Rockies could benefit the most as health, agriculture and energy costs are projected to improve.

Overall, the study – led by Solomon Hsiang of the University of California, Berkeley, Robert Kopp of Rutgers University-New Brunswick, Amir Jina of the University of Chicago, and James Rising, also of UC Berkeley – projects losses, economic restructuring and widening inequality.

"Unmitigated climate change will be very expensive for huge regions of the United States," said Hsiang. "If we continue on the current path, our analysis indicates it may result in the largest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich in the country's history."

 

climate change usa economic damage graph trend 2050 2100

 

The pioneering study used state-of-the-art statistical methods and 116 climate projections developed by scientists around the world to price the impacts of climate change the way the insurance industry or an investor would – comparing risks and rewards. A team of economists and climate scientists computed the real-world costs and benefits: how agriculture, crime, health, energy demand, labour and coastal communities are likely to be affected by higher temperatures, changing rainfall, rising seas and intensifying hurricanes.

"In the absence of major efforts to reduce emissions and strengthen resilience, the Gulf Coast will take a massive hit," said Kopp, a professor of Earth and Planetary Sciences at Rutgers. "Its exposure to sea-level rise, made worse by potentially stronger hurricanes, poses a major risk to its communities. Increasingly extreme heat will drive up violent crime, slow down workers, amp up air-conditioning costs, and threaten people's lives."

By 2100, economic damage in the poorest regions could be "many times larger" than the Great Recession and be permanent, according to the study, based on a projected rise of 3-5°C (6-10°F) above pre-industrial temperatures.

"The 'hidden costs' of carbon dioxide emissions are no longer hidden, since now we can see them clearly in the data," said Jina, a postdoctoral scholar in the department of economics at the University of Chicago. "The emissions coming out of our cars and power plants are reshaping the American economy. Here in the Midwest, we may see agricultural losses similar to the Dustbowl of the 1930s."

 

climate change usa economic damage graph trend 2050 2100

 

The study is the first of its kind to price warming using data and evidence accumulated by the research community over decades. From this data, the team estimates that for each one degree Fahrenheit (0.55°C) increase in global temperatures, the U.S. economy loses about 0.7 percent of Gross Domestic Product, with each degree of warming costing more than the last. This metric can help the country manage climate change as it does other systematic economic risks – for example, the way the Federal Reserve uses interest rates to manage the risk of recession.

"We could not have done this study without the ongoing revolution in big data and computing," said Rising, a Postdoctoral Fellow at UC Berkeley, describing the 29,000 simulations of the economy run for the project. "For the first time in history, we can use these tools to peer ahead into the future. We are making decisions today about the kinds of lives we and our children want to lead. Had the computing revolution come twenty years later, we wouldn't be able to see the economic hole we're digging for ourselves."

---

• Follow us on Twitter

• Follow us on Facebook

• Subscribe to us on YouTube

 

  speech bubble Comments »
 

 

 

29th June 2017

No detectable limit to how long people can live

Emma Morano passed away in April. At 117 years old, the Italian woman was the oldest known living human being. Super-centenarians, such as Morano and Jeanne Calment of France – who famously lived to be 122 years old – continue to fascinate scientists and have led them to wonder just how long humans can live for. A study published in Nature last October concluded that the upper limit of human age is peaking at around 115.

Now, however, a new study by McGill University biologists Bryan G. Hughes and Siegfried Hekimi comes to a starkly different conclusion. By analysing the lifespan of the longest-living individuals from the USA, the UK, France and Japan for each year since 1968, Hekimi and Hughes found no evidence for such an upper limit, and if such a maximum exists, it has yet to be reached or identified.

 

human lifespan future timeline

 

"We just don't know what the age limit might be. In fact, by extending trend lines, we can show that maximum and average lifespans could continue to increase far into the foreseeable future," Hekimi says. Many people are aware of what has happened with average lifespans. In 1920, for example, the average newborn Canadian could expect to live 60 years; a Canadian born in 1980 could expect 76 years, and today, life expectancy has jumped to 82. Maximum lifespan seems to follow the same trend.

It's impossible to predict what future lifespans in humans might look like, Hekimi says. Some scientists argue that technology, medical interventions, and improvements in living conditions could all push back the upper limit.

"It's hard to guess," Hekimi adds. "Three hundred years ago, many people lived only short lives. If we would have told them that one day most humans might live up to 100, they would have said we were crazy."

---

• Follow us on Twitter

• Follow us on Facebook

• Subscribe to us on YouTube

 

  speech bubble Comments »
 

 

 

 
     
       
     
   
« Previous  
   
     
   

 
     
 

Blogs

AI & Robotics Biology & Medicine Business & Politics Computers & the Internet
Energy & the Environment Home & Leisure Military & War Nanotechnology
Physics Society & Demographics Space Transport & Infrastructure

 

 

Archive

2015

 

2014

 

2013

 

2012

 

2011

 

2010

 

 
 
 
 

 


future timeline twitter future timeline facebook group future timeline youtube channel account videos future timeline rss feed