Asian Surveying & Mapping
Breaking News
President Lai reviews progress on first indigenous satellite constellation
President Lai Ching-te said developing space technology is a...
Japan’s iQPS lines up eight SAR launches
ST. LOUIS — Japan’s Institute for Q-shu Pioneers of...
UAE Astronauts Promote AI and Collaboration in Space at GITEX Europe
The Arab world’s first astronaut, Hazzaa Al Mansouri, and...
New species of space-adapted bacteria discovered on China’s Tiangong space station
Scientists have discovered a previously unknown strain of microbe...
Isro’s 101st mission fails as PSLV-C61 suffers third-stage anomaly
India’s latest Earth observation satellite mission faced a setback...
Iraq’s First Fully Solar-Powered Village in Kulak Is Now Operational
ERBIL, Kurdistan Region – May 20, 2025 — The...
Australia’s Gilmour Space Technologies ready to launch maiden Eris Test flight the nation’s first orbital launch in over 50 years
Gilmour Space Technologies is the leading launch services company...
Korea’s space agency seeks revision of plan to modify next-gen rockets into reusable system
South Korea's aerospace agency said on Thursday that it...
UAE Space Agency Signs Agreement With Technology Innovation Institute to Execute the Emirates Mission to the Asteroid Belt’s Lander Project
In the presence of His Highness Sheikh Hamdan bin...
Private Japanese lunar lander enters orbit around moon ahead of a June touchdown
A private lunar lander from Japan is now circling the moon, with...

June 16th, 2007
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

For example, a sacrifice of between one and two years’ economic growth could mean a cut of 50 per cent in emissions by 2050.

The report of Working Group I, in February, suggested that stabilising CO2 at 450-500 ppm would see global GDP grow by 345 per cent, to 2050. With no action at all, it would grow by 350 per cent, only a negligible increase.

The report suggests that the carbon price needed to achieve this would be, at most, US $50 per tonne of carbon dioxide. This implies that petrol prices would increase by 4-10 cents a litre, and electricity by 2-5 cents a kilowatt hour, depending on the government’s tax regime.

These are the costs of cutting emissions. It does not take into account the economic benefits of minimising climate change. The report urges caution in making judgements in the absence of more studies. But it concludes that even in the worst case, the costs of reducing carbon emissions will be less than the likely damage.

This is the same conclusion as the Stern Review. Even in purely economic terms, it makes sense to sharply cut emissions.

But a British bureaucrat wrote the Stern review; Western interests heavily influenced the IPCC report. How will regional governments react?

They should welcome it. The report eliminates the main reason – the cost – that governments have given for refusing to take measures to cut emissions.

It might be worth thinking about if you are stepping into the fumes of Beijing or Jakarta this morning.

Headlines