{"word_count": 340, "character_count": 2300}
Climate Change in the United States: Benefits of Global Action. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Atmospheric Programs, 2015, 96 p. (EPA 430-R-15-001)http://www2.epa.gov/cira/downloads-cira-reportPrésentation (© EPA) :This new EPA report explores the question: What are the benefits to the United States of reducing global greenhouse gas emissions? To answer this, we need to understand the basic scale of the difference between a world with and without global climate action. This report summarizes peer-reviewed results from the Climate Change Impacts and Risks Analysis (CIRA) project, which estimates the physical and monetary benefits to the U.S. of global action on climate change. This brochure provides key findings and regional highlights of the report, showing that Americans significantly benefit from global action. Importantly, this report analyzes only some of the impacts of climate change, and therefore estimates just a portion of the total benefits of reducing GHGs.A propos de cette étude :EPA Releases Study Stressing Economic Benefits of Climate Change Mitigation, Climate Law blog, 30/06/2015Last week, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a report, “Climate Change in the U.S. – Benefits of Global Action,” detailing the findings of the EPA’s Climate Change Impacts and Risk Analysis (CIRA) study, a peer reviewed project that seeks to assess climate change risk at a regional and sectorial level. Unsurprisingly, the report finds that, in almost all of the 20 sectors discussed, mitigation results in substantial economic benefits, with savings in individual sectors often reaching billions of dollars. Examples include labor (where mitigation would save $110 billion by decreasing the number of extremely hot days where work is impossible), water quality (at least $2.6 billion saved), agriculture ($6.6 to $11 billion saved), road maintenance ($4.2 to $7.4 billion saved), droughts ($9.3 to $34 billion saved due to effects on agriculture), and water supply ($11 to $180 billion). The report also notes that the costs of mitigation, which would primarily affect the energy supply sector, would be comparable to the costs for energy alone in a business-as-usual scenario, before accounting for adaptation or economic harm... lire la suite