The second reason is climate mitigation, which requires the reduction of fossil-fuel emissions. It involves an economic concept known as the social cost of carbon, or the cost to future generations of the carbon we emit today. The economist William Nordhaus has pegged the social cost of carbon at $44 per ton, meaning each new ton we emit incurs future costs worth at least $44 in 2010s money. The Obama and Biden administrations, relying partly on his model, arrived at a social cost of about $50.

These are pretty conservative estimates: The economists Joseph Stiglitz and Nicholas Stern argue that the social cost of carbon is actually $100 per ton or even higher.

Metrics like these are typically used to calculate the proper price of a carbon tax, but they apply to infrastructure spending as well. Future generations will look back at this one and wonder why we did not do everything in our power to reduce pollution from our cars, our stoves, our air-conditioning units and more — why we were unwilling to pay a short-term price for the long-term welfare of the species.

According to one estimate, unchecked climate change could cost the United States around 10.5 percent of G.D.P. by the end of the century, but Congress can reduce these costs by helping to speed the transition to a green economy. It may cost a lot up front to build infrastructure for electric vehicles and wind power, but the dividends for future generations will be enormous.

Short-term concerns about inflation or the size of the deficit ought to seem petty compared with the long-term moral imperative to act on climate change. The only way for Congress to act on climate is to spend as much as possible, as soon as possible.

Spending money can be controversial, but in this case it shouldn’t be. Even if the Democrats do not raise a cent of new revenue, the climate provisions in the larger infrastructure bill will more than pay for themselves over time. Mr. Biden and centrists in Congress may value a short-term bipartisan win, but given the stakes of the crisis ahead of us, a bite-size infrastructure bill would be too small to afford.

Jake Bittle is a freelance reporter who is writing a book about climate migration.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.





Source link

Abhi
info@thesostenible.com

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *