Skip to main content

By 2050, the US Will Lose $83 Billion a Year Because of All the Nature We've Destroyed

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Fast Company: The world economy depends on nature, from coral reefs that protect coastal cities from flooding to insects that pollinate crops. But by the middle of the century, the loss of key "ecosystem services" could cost the world $479 billion each year. The U.S. will lose more than any other country, with an $83 billion loss to the GDP per year by 2050. That's a conservative estimate. The projection comes from a report, called Global Futures, from World Wildlife Fund, which looked at only six of the services that nature provides and how those might change because of the impacts of climate breakdown, lost wildlife habitat, and other human-caused destruction of nature. (Many other services will also be impacted but can't currently be accurately modeled; the study also doesn't take into account the possibility of tipping points that lead to sudden, catastrophic losses of natural services.) By 2050, if the world continues on its current path, the global economy could lose $327 billion a year as we lose natural coastal protection from coral reefs, mangrove forests, and other natural systems. Another $128 billion could be lost annually from forests and peatlands that store carbon. Agriculture could lose $15 billion from lost pollinators and $19 billion from reduced water availability. Food costs are likely to go up, threatening food security in some regions. "In the U.S., the biggest losses will come from lost coastal protection and losses in marine fisheries," adds Fast Company. "Because of the size of the U.S. economy, it will lose most in absolute terms. But developing countries will be hit hardest in terms of the percentage of GDP lost; Madagascar tops that list, followed by Togo, Vietnam, and Mozambique."

If the world is able to radically change course and protect areas most critical for biodiversity and ecosystem services, the global annual GDP could, instead, grow $11 billion by 2050.


from Slashdot: News for nerds, stuff that matters https://ift.tt/2vsRFOV
via IFTTT
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

One of the Most Destructive Botnets Can Now Spread To Nearby Wi-Fi Networks

The sophistication of the Emotet malware's code base and its regularly evolving methods for tricking targets into clicking on malicious links has allowed it to spread widely. "Now, Emotet is adopting yet another way to spread: using already compromised devices to infect devices connected to nearby Wi-Fi networks ," reports Ars Technica. From the report: Last month, Emotet operators were caught using an updated version that uses infected devices to enumerate all nearby Wi-Fi networks. It uses a programming interface called wlanAPI to profile the SSID, signal strength, and use of WPA or other encryption methods for password-protecting access. Then, the malware uses one of two password lists to guess commonly used default username and password combinations. After successfully gaining access to a new Wi-Fi network, the infected device enumerates all non-hidden devices that are connected to it. Using a second password list, the malware then tries to guess credentials for each...
Post a Comment
Read more

Under Armour's New Smart Sneakers Are Ugly as Sin But Good for Running

54 min ago Save Reviews 54 min ago Reviews 54 min ago Reviews Under Armour's New Smart Sneakers Are Ugly as Sin But Good for Running Victoria Song 3 Save Last year I reviewed Under Armour’s HOVR Infinite shoes , which sync with your smartphone to offer running data from the built-in Bluetooth chip. I was pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed working out in them. I expected the shoes to be more gimmick than substance, but the personalized gait-coaching actually… from Gizmodo | We come from the future https://ift.tt/38uP45x via IFTTT
Post a Comment
Read more

Dark Mode vs. Light Mode: Which Is Better?

Recently a well-respected UI consulting firm (the Nielsen Norman Group) published their analysis of academic studies on the question of whether Dark Mode or Light Mode was better for reading? Cosima Piepenbrock and her colleagues at the Institut für Experimentelle Psychologie in Düsseldorf, Germany studied two groups of adults with normal (or corrected-to-normal) vision: young adults (18 to 33 years old) and older adults (60 to 85 years old). None of the participants suffered from any eye diseases (e.g., cataract)... Their results showed that light mode won across all dimensions : irrespective of age, the positive contrast polarity was better for both visual-acuity tasks and for proofreading tasks... Another study, published in the journal Human Factors by the same research group, looked at how text size interacts with contrast polarity in a proofreading task. It found that the positive-polarity advantage increased linearly as the font size was decreased: namely, the smaller the fon...
Post a Comment
Read more