Experts reveal surprising factor having a massive impact on the economy: 'It's bad for almost everyone'
Economics professors from Stanford and Northwestern Universities determined that the economic damages of a warming climate are probably six times worse than we previously thought.
According to their research, every one degree Celsius rise in global temperature (or 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) leads to a 12% decrease in the world's gross domestic product.
As Harvard Magazine reported, assistant economics professor Adrien Bilal and his collaborator, Diego Kanzig, took an innovative approach to modeling the economic impacts of a changing climate. Instead of solely basing their analysis on local temperature changes, they studied extreme weather patterns, warming oceans, and global shifts more thoroughly.
They studied data from 173 countries over the past 120 years, looking at how temperature shocks correlated to changes in income. They found that disruptive weather is costly to nations' economies and impacts individuals' purchasing power and financial stability.
Bilal and Kanzig's research reinforces the interconnectedness of economics and a warming climate. They assessed the "social cost of carbon" at over $1,000 per ton, representing the economic damage caused by each ton of carbon pollution. This is a significant increase from the $150 per ton predicted by past models that didn't consider as many climate factors, the magazine reported.
The researchers predicted a future GDP decline of 30% to 50% by 2100 based on current patterns. For individuals, they predicted a 31% drop in purchasing power by 2100 due to climate change.
"The effects are more uniformly detrimental," Bilal told the magazine. "It's bad for almost everyone."
Estimating how rising temperatures affect the economy enables lawmakers to prepare for shifts and choose how to reduce carbon pollution in their communities.
Politicians typically place less importance on sustainability and environmental protection if the perceived effects on the economy are low. However, if economic impacts are high, they will pour more time, energy, money, and resources into conserving the planet because of the direct links to their countries' economic stability and success.
Bilal and Kanzig's research encourages world leaders to answer the critical question of how to invest in climate resilience and adapt to changing weather patterns to minimize the economic impacts. They suggested various ways to take local action, including coastal defense strategies, relocations to less vulnerable areas, and shifting investments.
Do you think America has a plastic waste problem?
Definitely
Only in some areas
Not really
I'm not sure
Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.
Staying up-to-date on critical climate issues is essential to understanding the problem's gravity and being open-minded to proactive solutions.
The economic impacts of rising temperatures are just one of the many reasons why it is crucial to change individual and community habits now for the health of our people and planet. However, those economic risks could be the very thing that pushes policymakers to take climate change seriously and prioritize sustainability efforts for the benefit of everyone.
Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
CHAI AI: Expands GPU Cluster to Reach 1.4 exaFLOPS in Compute
PALO ALTO, Calif., June 11, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- CHAI, a leader in social AI, is betting big on compute—announcing aggressive infrastructure scaling to fuel its next-generation AI models. Since 2023, the company has made strategic investments in high-performance computing clusters that now compete with leading AI labs and startups. Investing in Next-Gen AI Models In 2025, CHAI projects to allocate $20M to further expand its compute capacity—a bold move that solidifies its competitive edge in AI research and product innovation. This strategic investment reflects broader industry trends where firms are racing to secure computing resources amid growing demand for AI capabilities. CHAI's in-house kCluster now delivers 1.4 exaFLOPs of computing power by utilizing thousands of cutting-edge GPUs. This infrastructure outpaces most AI startups in compute capability and surpasses academic benchmarks, offering nearly 10x the power of Stanford's Sherlock HPC Cluster. Leveraging this massive infrastructure advantage, CHAI accelerates cutting-edge AI research and serves over 51,000 LLMs to users worldwide, enabling richer interactions and deeper personalization. Was CHAI the first AI Platform? CHAI was the first consumer AI product to reach 1 million users, leveraging the open-sourced LLM GPT-J, before ChatGPT or Llama. What is CHAI? CHAI is a social AI platform where users can create their own AI. Since its launch three years ago, CHAI has experienced significant growth, particularly among Gen Z users. Now, to support further growth and wider adoption, CHAI has redesigned its brand. Can you use CHAI AI in a browser? As of March 2025, no. CHAI is focused on delivering the most engaging social AI experience by hiring talented engineers to refine its app. While there are currently no plans for a web app, this may change in the future. Is CHAI AI safe? CHAI has implemented a range of safety features that allow users to engage in dynamic chats while encouraging them to stay within established guidelines. By building better AI, CHAI aims to enhance user value and experience. What makes CHAI special? CHAI is designed to be the most engaging social AI, delivering highly entertaining conversations. Many users rely on it to craft interactive stories and immersive experiences. Why do people love CHAI? CHAI employs advanced AI techniques to increase the entertainment value of its bots. Users chat with AI to write interactive novels and have engaging conversations, supported by a variety of genres that appeal to avid novel readers. Sometimes regarded as the best free AI chatbot, CHAI is paving its way to widespread adoption of conversational social AI for entertainment. Who is the founder? William Beauchamp is a 2x founder, first started building CHAI with his sister in Cambridge UK in 2020. After building the first AI chat platform they relocated to Palo Alto. Are they hiring? CHAI is a rapidly growing company that is known for paying very high salaries with an intense culture focused on delivering results and iterating quickly. Apply on CHAI's website. View original content to download multimedia: SOURCE Chai Research Corp Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Can Fashion's ‘Bridges' Overcome Its ‘Barriers'?
Even Queen Mary of Denmark had nothing to say at this year's Global Fashion Summit, perhaps the industry's most boldface of sustainability conclaves. The longtime patron of the Global Fashion Agenda typically delivers a brief speech to kick things off, usually along the lines of the need for collective action for transformation to occur. Or she might joke about her daughters stealing her shoes as a form of reuse. Somewhere between the opening smooth-jazz jam and a H&M Foundation-helmed panel on operationalizing circularity, however, the royal consort slipped away from her front seat at the Copenhagen Opera House, her exit barely announced by the fading click of her stilettos. More from Sourcing Journal Refiberd Wins Trailblazer 2025 With AI-Powered Textile Recycling Global Fashion Agenda's Innovation Incubator Returns, Opens Call for Solutions What Will a Second Trump Term Mean for Fashion's Sustainability Ambitions? It was a stealthy retreat that, inadvertently or not, reflected the muted mood of the two-day conference, which one attendee described as 'somber,' another as 'a bit flat' and a third as evocative of a 'palpable decline of interest.' Fewer high-level brands abounded, a consequence of throttled travel budgets, a fear of appearing overtly political—and potentially ticking off a certain White House inhabitant—and cannibalization by concurrent events such as SXSW's first London foray and, we were told, an especially buzzy textile recycling expo in Brussels where shoulders were slapped and hands shaken over business deals. For the thousand or so people who converged on Copenhagen, just a hair fewer than those who turned up for last year's 15th anniversary, there was very little to feel celebratory about. Geopolitical turmoil, tariff uncertainty and environmental deregulation hung heavily in the air. Even attempts to put a positive gloss on corporate efforts that were already lagging before the rightwing shift in both Europe and the United States, but could now be actively backsliding, felt more perfunctory than usual. The same week, a analysis of more than 40 apparel companies found that 40 percent increased their carbon footprint versus their baseline, outlapping those on a 1.5-degree Celsius trajectory by a nearly six-to-one margin. In the latest iteration of the International Trade Union Confederation's global rights index, data showed a 'sharp escalation' in violations of fundamental labor rights, including freedom of association and collective bargaining. 'Apparently more was happening in the roundtables,' one attendee said of the closed-to-press executive-level sessions, which had the likes of Kering diving into what a just transition means in the age of climate change, Target speaking about moving production closer to consumer markets and The Fashion Pact hosting a conversation about corporate financial engagement in decarbonization. The more accessible stages—the concert hall, 'action' and 'ignite'—stuck to broader, more anodyne issues such as fiber innovations, resale, regenerative materials and the gender pay gap. The biggest ripple in all that taut placidity was occasioned by Veja co-founder Sébastien Kopp, who described sustainability as a 'bag of vomit.' Kalpona Akter's heartfelt description of garment workers' struggles in Bangladesh produced little response and, by the time the 'celebration dinner' rolled around, no offers of help that might relieve her organization's loss of funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID for short. Eileen Fisher's call for everyone to 'show up more and collaborate more' offered a burst of inspiration. Things flattened from there. 'Some feedback I heard is that some people feel the brands are too restrained and they prefer the speakers that are more candid and speak more openly,' an attendee said. But the event's dour note was hardly unexpected. There is simply no way to spin the current climate, whether political, environmental or otherwise, no matter how many times someone insists that there is no business on a dead planet. For brands grappling with the existential threat of tariffs, sustainability has dropped several rungs in priority. The Trump administration's crackdown on so-called 'woke' notions such as climate action or DEI in the United States isn't even the half of it. In Europe, the omnibus package, a series of amendments designed to simplify—and many say water down—the corporate sustainability due diligence directive, the corporate sustainability reporting directive and other legislative instruments, threatens to unravel years of progress holding corporations liable for their environmental and social impacts. It's still unclear how other forthcoming regulations involving extended producer responsibility, greener design requirements and traceability compliance will play out. 'There's a general backlash on sustainability in Brussels,' Lara Wolters, the Dutch politician who was the European Parliament's lead negotiator on the CSDD, said at a pre-game policy masterclass at the Danish Architecture Center. 'None of this is for a good reason, but maybe to take a step back. What the Commission has done is roll out a deregulatory agenda under pressure from a lot of large lobby groups in some of the member states. The intention, I think, is to give a political signal that we, too, are going to do things differently. I would even call it a sort of 'Trump Lite.'' She said that the result of this reversal would be more paperwork and less impact, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises. For the politicians who have been clamoring for fewer guardrails, however, the 'intention is to do things as fast as possible, never mind the consequences.' Across the Atlantic, the Trump administration has pulled the United States out of the Paris Agreement (again), dismantled critical climate safeguards and obliterated other regulations governing clean water, toxic pollutants and wildlife. It has clawed back most forms of foreign assistance, including grants for programs that strengthened workers' rights and combated child and forced labor. 'I spent a good chunk of my flight over breaking through President Trump's proposed 2026 budget,' said Chelsea Murtha, senior director of sustainability at the American Apparel & Footwear Association. 'And, of course, USAID is completely eliminated, and a lot of the functions that it had are not even fully being transposed over to the State Department. The U.S., in particular, was a very large funder of the [International Labour Organization's] Better Work program, and all of that funding is gone now.' The outcome has been a 'sort of paralysis,' she said. Brands, squeezed by higher import costs, are hard-pressed to fill the breach. And while individual states could step up with rulemaking to counter the White House's actions, there's also only so much they can do. 'It's not like they can't step in and do things, but they're constricted in their authorities,' she said. 'They cannot negotiate trade deals, and they can't control imports. They can pass EPR programs, because EPR programs regulate products within their state, but what they can't do is institute something like an export ban.' On the first day of the Global Fashion Summit, themed 'Barriers and Bridges,' Federica Marchionni, CEO of Global Fashion Agenda, didn't mince words, either, calling this an 'extremely challenging time for sustainability' that is hampering fashion's ability to be a 'force for good.' At the same time, she said, the only certainty in an uncertain world is climate change. And a 'strong absence' of leadership requires 'collective courage' to build supply chain resilience. The few suppliers who spoke—their attendance likely, again, constrained by a lack of financial wherewithal—alluded to their struggles. 'The volumes are lower than they used to be a couple of years ago,' said Attila Kiss, CEO of Gruppo Florence, an integrated manufacturing hub in Italy. 'The brands are asking for lower prices because they have pressure on the margins. And from the other side, we have all the ethical issues, the social issues to manage.' In a panel that discussed Arvind Limited and Fashion for Good's plans for 'near-carbon-neutral' textile factory in India that would bring online tested and emergent solutions that could collective slash greenhouse gas emissions by as much as 93 percent, Abhishek Bansal, the former's head of sustainability, said that most of the industry's climate mitigation efforts either involve setting targets or pushing the supply chain to do so. 'Unfortunately, I have seen very little money going into helping build the hard assets that are going to actually reduce emissions,' he said. 'If you honestly ask how many industry stakeholders have set aside funds to build plants or invest in technologies to achieve those targets, I think you can count them on the fingers of one hand.' 'It's a big thing to say,' Bansal added quietly, 'but I don't think we are going to meet 2030 targets.' The dearth of representation—from suppliers, from economists, from investors—was noticeable, more than one attendee said. Speaking to an audience, Tara St. James, senior director of sustainability at the Canadian retailer Moose Knuckles, said that brands could take more responsibility for fostering inclusion by bringing their suppliers to conferences or having them speak on panels with them or in their stead. 'We talk about making changes in our supply chain, which is where most of the impact is, but then we don't invite suppliers into every conversation,' one attendee said. 'And when we do, it's usually farmers and manufacturers, which is great, but I want to hear from a mom-and-pop mill, a dye house. I want more doers on the panels. And that includes more brands.' Yayra Agbofah, founder and creative director of The Revival, an organization that tackles global textile waste in Ghana, including through the Global Change Award-winning Revival Circularity Hub, said there's a difference between being ready—say, for circularity—and showing readiness based on actions. Fulfilling the second part requires reexamining fashion's business model, which he described as a failure because it fails to recognize communities like Accra's secondhand Kantamanto Market as stakeholders. 'We are dealing with the waste we didn't create, and not having a decision on how to deal with this crisis is a big problem,' he said. 'We need to be part of the decision-making. We shouldn't be left out and be an afterthought.' It was during the Q&A portion of Agbofah's panel that Brooke Roberts-Islam, a sustainable fashion journalist and consultant, nearly leaped out of her chair. Just minutes before, Golnaz Armin, vice president of color and materials at Nike, was speaking about the footwear giant's efforts to 'imagine and create meaning' with post-consumer waste. She said that Nike's size was both its advantage and disadvantage. 'Kantamanto is the only example of a scaled circular economy,' Roberts-Islam said. 'It seems so strange to have this framing of 'Why can't we scale this up for Nike because we're such a large organization?' and, you know, a lot of Nike products end up in Accra. Kanatamanto has tens of thousands of businesses that do this. They know the answer, and Nike says you're trying to find the answer, so can you, Yayra, give Nike the answer?' One of the most incisive sentiments of the conference was uttered during the very first session, but it remains to be seen if it made an impression. 'Someone told me once that a wall lying down is actually a bridge,' said Christiane Dolva, head of innovation, research and demonstration at H&M Foundation. 'I think that some of the barriers that a lot of us feel that we're running into, which literally can be like running into the wall, can be part of the solution if we shift our perspective. We need to shift our perspective.'
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Yahoo
Is College Worth the Money? Suze Orman Weighs In
For decades, a four-year college degree (bachelor's degree) was a core requirement for most government jobs. But in the last few years, numerous states have dropped this as a requirement for government state jobs. And they're not the only ones eliminating this rigid rule. Tons of companies are ditching the once standard requirement of a bachelor's degree. The trend is expected to continue. Research by Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce projected that in 2031, only 42% of jobs will require at least a bachelor's degree. Learn More: Read Next: Most Americans who pursue a bachelor's degree get a pile of student loan debt with it. We're talking tens of thousands of dollars in debt, on average. Is college worth the money and, in so many cases, the debt? In a recent blog post on her website, Suze Orman weighed in on the matter. The best way to assess whether a college degree is financially worth it is to determine whether it will enable you to make more money than you would without it. What's the return on investment (ROI)? Orman pointed to numbers crunching done by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. 'The median graduate gets a 12.5% annual boost to their income compared to what they would earn if they stopped at a high school diploma,' Orman wrote. 'That's an even better rate of return than what stocks have delivered.' This is an excellent ROI, but there are more things to consider when deciding whether a college degree is worth it. Find Out: It takes four years to get a bachelor's degree, but only if you're pursuing it full time on the university's terms. Many students sign up to get a four-year degree with the intention of graduating in four years, but end up taking six years or more. Delaying graduation is a costly move. 'If you take five years, your lifetime return drops from 12.5% to an average of 9.3%,' Orman wrote. 'Take six years, and it's down to 7%. The issue here is not just the extra cost of being in school those years, but the fact that you're likely not working full time in those years, and even if you are, until you earn a degree, you aren't going to have the credentials that will pay you more.' Orman pointed out something that you may not know about. Every school must publish its 'net price' — the average out-of-pocket cost you pay to attend net of all financial aid. Orman suggested that college may not be worth it if you're paying more than that net price. The key here is to go to a school that offers standout financial aid. 'If you attend a school that doesn't offer you a good aid package, your family will likely need to borrow more, and that can be a long-term hit to financial security,' Orman wrote. Our society spends far too much time hyping elite universities. For example, we're all familiar with Stanford and its laurels. We're less familiar with the cost. For the 2023-24 school year, the cost of attending was $20,577 per quarter. And that's just the cost of tuition — it doesn't include housing and other potential expenses. So, you may really want to get into Stanford, but do you really want to be on the hook for all that money? Orman recommended focusing on schools that are smart financial fits so that you graduate with the smallest amount of debt possible. What's the point of attending a dream school if it turns your adult life into a financial nightmare? More From GOBankingRates 3 Luxury SUVs That Will Have Massive Price Drops in Summer 2025 25 Places To Buy a Home If You Want It To Gain Value 6 Popular SUVs That Aren't Worth the Cost -- and 6 Affordable Alternatives This article originally appeared on Is College Worth the Money? Suze Orman Weighs In Sign in to access your portfolio
