The Fallout from Climate Change Could Mean a $300M+Annual Price Tag for California

✅ All InspiredEconomist articles and guides have been fact-checked and reviewed for accuracy. Please refer to our editorial policy for additional information.

Climate change is a reality, and one that has never been more evident to us than now – as we experience 80+ degree temperatures in November and hear daily about the melting of our polar ice caps.  Unfortunately, it also may carry a hefty price tag.

According to a new study released by Next Ten and the University of California at Berkeley, the aftermath of climate change could cost the State of California anywhere from $300M to $3.9B annually in damages.  Most of these damages are expected to result from wildfire and coastal damage to real estate.  Over half of California’s real estate assets, amounting to roughly $2.5T, are at risk.

[social_buttons]

One ominous fact pointed out by this report is that five major California airports sit on or near a coastline, and are in danger of being submerged if climate change results in rising sea levels.  The San Diego and Santa Barbara airports as well as all three major Bay Area airports are affected.

The report goes on to say that this price tag could shrink if the state takes action NOW to proactively address change in energy utilization, carbon emissions, water conservation, and other key areas.  One lesson we can all learn from this is that it may be profitable in the short term to neglect taking care of mother Earth, but in the long term, profits gained this way become unsustainable and the price of our neglect grows exponentially.

It is time for California to wake up to the reality of climate change, and plan proactive, sustainable change as today transitions into the future.

[ Image Credit:  tree_trunks at Flickr under a Creative Commons license]

3 thoughts on “The Fallout from Climate Change Could Mean a $300M+Annual Price Tag for California”

  1. If this is like some other studies I have seen, the risks are exaggerated. What are the costs to California of lowering greenhouse gasses? What are the projected decreases in risk from those expenses? Again, if they are like other studies I have seen, it is not worth the cost. People, as they have been doing well for 100,000 years, adapt as climate changes. To try to “stop” global warming is foolhardy, unless of course you love empowering big government. Speaking of fools, who would put housing developments in the middle of an ecosystem that is fire-driven? If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

  2. If this is like some other studies I have seen, the risks are exaggerated. What are the costs to California of lowering greenhouse gasses? What are the projected decreases in risk from those expenses? Again, if they are like other studies I have seen, it is not worth the cost. People, as they have been doing well for 100,000 years, adapt as climate changes. To try to “stop” global warming is foolhardy, unless of course you love empowering big government. Speaking of fools, who would put housing developments in the middle of an ecosystem that is fire-driven? If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

  3. This study simply reiterates what common sense is telling all Californians – our weather is going crazy, and the most logical explanation is greenhouse gases. I have lived in California for 25 years, and this year we definitely had more fires and drought related issues than I have ever seen. People adapted in the past to climate change as the earth was still unsullied with pollution and the side products of our industralization. Regarding your last statement about putting housing in the middle of an ecosystem that is fire-driven – you MUST not live in California. Where would you expect most of the population of San Diego and Orange County to relocate to?

Leave a Comment

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

Scroll to Top