Letter | Published:

Economic impacts of carbon dioxide and methane released from thawing permafrost

Nature Climate Change volume 6, pages 5659 (2016) | Download Citation

Abstract

The Arctic is warming roughly twice as fast as the global average1. If greenhouse gas emissions continue to increase at current rates, this warming will lead to the widespread thawing of permafrost and the release of hundreds of billions of tonnes of CO2 and billions of tonnes of CH4 into the atmosphere2. So far there have been no estimates of the possible extra economic impacts from permafrost emissions of CO2 and CH4. Here we use the default PAGE09 integrated assessment model3 to show the range of possible global economic impacts if this CO2 and CH4 is released into the atmosphere on top of the anthropogenic emissions from Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change scenario A1B (ref. 4) and three other scenarios. Under the A1B scenario, CO2 and CH4 released from permafrost increases the mean net present value of the impacts of climate change by US$43 trillion, or about 13% (5–95% range: US$3–166 trillion), proportional to the increase in total emissions due to thawing permafrost. The extra impacts of the permafrost CO2 and CH4 are sufficiently high to justify urgent action to minimize the scale of the release.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    , , & United Nations Environment Programme Special Report (UNEP, 2012).

  2. 2.

    , , , & The impact of the permafrost carbon feedback on global climate. Environ. Res. Lett. 9, 085003 (2014).

  3. 3.

    Critical issues for the calculation of the social cost of CO2: Why the estimates from PAGE09 are higher than those from PAGE2002. Climatic Change 117, 531–543 (2013).

  4. 4.

    & IPCC Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2000).

  5. 5.

    , & Climate science: Vast costs of Arctic change. Nature 499, 401–403 (2013).

  6. 6.

    Technical Update of the Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis (United States Government, 2013);

  7. 7.

    , , & Amount and timing of permafrost carbon release in response to climate warming. Tellus B 63B, 165–180 (2011).

  8. 8.

    et al. Vulnerability of permafrost carbon to climate change: Implications for the global carbon cycle. Bioscience 58, 701–714 (2008).

  9. 9.

    et al. Soil organic carbon pools in the northern circumpolar permafrost region. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 23, GB2023 (2009).

  10. 10.

    et al. The thermal state of permafrost in the Nordic area during the International Polar Year. Permafrost Periglac. Proc. 21, 156–181 (2010).

  11. 11.

    et al. Thermal state of permafrost in Russia. Permafrost Periglac. Proc. 21, 136–155 (2010).

  12. 12.

    , & Permafrost and the global carbon budget. Science 312, 1612–1613 (2006).

  13. 13.

    Climate change policy: What do the models tell us? J. Econ. Lit. 51, 860–872 (2013).

  14. 14.

    & Diagnosis of climate models in terms of transient climate response and feedback response time. Atmos. Sci. Lett. 9, 7–12 (2008).

  15. 15.

    The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007).

  16. 16.

    A review of the Stern Review on the economics of climate change. J. Econ. Lit. 45, 686–702 (2007).

  17. 17.

    et al. A new scenario framework for climate change research: The concept of shared socioeconomic pathways. Climatic Change 122, 387–400 (2014).

  18. 18.

    & Summary of the Committee on Climate Change’s 2016 Peak Emission Scenarios Report 1 (AVOID programme, Met Office Hadley Centre, 2009);

  19. 19.

    The Economics of Climate Change in Southeast Asia: A Regional Review (Asian Development Bank, 2009)

  20. 20.

    Climate Change: Financing Global Forests (Office of Climate Change, 2008).

  21. 21.

    Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis (eds Solomon, S. et al.) (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007).

  22. 22.

    et al. Spotlighting Impacts Functions in Integrated Assessment Paper 91 (Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, 2006)

  23. 23.

    , , & Global and Regional Exposure to Large Rises in Sea-Level: A Sensitivity Analysis Working Paper 96 (Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, 2006)

  24. 24.

    , , & Did the Stern Review underestimate US and global climate damages? Energy Policy 37, 2717–2721 (2009).

  25. 25.

    New estimates of the damage costs of climate change, Part II: Dynamic estimates. Environ. Resour. Econ. 21, 135–160 (2002).

  26. 26.

    On modelling and interpreting the economics of catastrophic climate change. Rev. Econ. Stat. 91, 1–19 (2009).

  27. 27.

    et al. Tipping elements in the Earth’s climate system. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 1786–1793 (2008).

  28. 28.

    Expert opinion on climate change. Am. Sci. 82, 45–51 (1994).

  29. 29.

    , & Economic Aspects of Adaptation to Climate Change: Integrated Assessment Modelling of Adaptation Costs and Benefits Environment Working Paper 6 (OECD, 2009)

  30. 30.

    et al. Assessing the Costs of Adaptation to Climate Change: A Review of the UNFCCC and Other Recent Estimates (International Institute for Environment and Development and Grantham Institute for Climate Change, 2009).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by NASA grant NNX10AR63G and NOAA grant NA09OAR4310063. N. Arnell provided SSP2 and SSP3 data aggregated to the regions in PAGE09 under the UK’s AVOID2 research programme.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Judge Business School, Cambridge University, Cambridge CB2 1AG, UK

    • Chris Hope
  2. National Snow and Ice Data Center, Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0449, USA

    • Kevin Schaefer

Authors

  1. Search for Chris Hope in:

  2. Search for Kevin Schaefer in:

Contributions

C.H. and K.S. contributed equally to the work.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chris Hope.

Supplementary information

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2807

Further reading