ChatGPT
The IMF's projected estimated global GDP for 2024 was 109.55 trillion USD based on a 3.2% growth rate over the 2023 figure.
The fastest way to wipe out 40% of that growth is to start a global trade war that has wiped out $9.6 trillion from the U.S. stock since Inauguration Day and another $8 trillion from the other global markets.
Since Inauguration Day was 77 days ago, statistically, we could attain a ruinous 40% GDP decline by Labor Day.
At a slower, more likely and relentless rate, a new projection by the University of New South Wales Institute for Climate Risk & Response indicates a 4°C rise in global temperatures could reduce the world's GDP by approximately 40% by the year 2100. That is a significant increase from earlier estimates that suggested such a decrease would be around 11%.
According to the IPCC, in a high-emission scenario, the global temperature would rise by 3.3 to 5.7ºC by the end of this Century, and in the best case, the best estimate is 1.6ºC.
In support of the 40% claim, a leading insurer has warned that the climate crisis poses a significant threat to the stability of capitalism. The rising costs associated with extreme weather events are increasingly making it difficult for the financial sector to operate effectively, Günther Thallinger, a board member at Allianz SE—one of the world’s largest insurance companies—cautioned. “The world is rapidly approaching temperature levels at which insurers may no longer be able to offer coverage for many climate-related risks”, he emphasized. Without insurance, which is already becoming unavailable in certain areas, various financial services, including mortgages and investments, would become unfeasible. "In a hotter future, we can expect cascading supply chain disruptions triggered by extreme weather events worldwide," Thallinger stated.
In a ScienceDaily article, Dr. Timothy Neal, a Scientia Senior Lecturer at the School of Economics and the Institute for Climate Risk & Response, explained that his analysis employs traditional economic frameworks to evaluate immediate transition costs against long-term climate damages, with a key modification. "Economists have typically relied on historical data that compares weather events to economic growth to assess climate damages," he noted.
However, he argues that they often overlook interruptions to global supply chains that currently cushion economic shocks. "In a warmer future, we can expect cascading supply chain disruptions caused by extreme weather events around the world," he adds. Dr. Neal asserts that the economic case for stronger actions against climate change is clear. "Because these damages haven’t been taken into account, previous economic models have mistakenly suggested that even severe climate change poses little threat to the economy, which has had significant implications for climate policy." The local-only damage models have influenced economic forecasting that shapes the climate policies of major powers and played a crucial role in international agreements.
"Because these damages haven't been taken into account, prior economic models have inadvertently concluded that even severe climate change wasn't a big problem for the economy -- and it's had profound implications for climate policy," Neal observed.
As Bloomberg has noted, Wall Street Will Regret Helping the World Burn.
As the Oxford Open Climate Change article, Addressing the urgent need for direct climate cooling: Rationale and options points out, “Emissions reduction and removal are not proceeding at a pace that will limit global average warming to less than the Paris Agreement targets of 1.5°C or 2.0°C. Accelerating global warming is indicated by record high 2023–2024 monthly temperatures and annual 2023 global mean surface temperatures around 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. Only direct climate cooling has the potential to avert continued temperature rise in the near term and moderate at least some projected climate change disruption including extreme weather, sea level rise, loss of sea ice, glacier and permafrost melting, and coral reef die-off. Strategically deployed at scale, starting in the near term, several cooling measures have the potential to reduce or reverse global warming. Others can exert local or regional cooling influences. The world needs an approach to climate change that extends beyond sole reliance on emission reductions and removal. We propose (i) researching, field testing and deploying one or more large-scale cooling influence(s) perhaps initially in polar regions and applying local and regional cooling measures that also support adaptation, (ii) accelerating emissions reductions with an early prioritization of short-lived climate drivers, and (iii) deploying large scale carbon removal to draw down legacy greenhouse gas. The authors make no attempt to determine what measures or mix of measures is optimal. That will depend on modeling and experimentation. Only by including properly researched emergency cooling “tourniquets,” in the near-term to our “bleeding” Earth can we slow and then reverse ongoing and increasingly severe climate change in the 21st Century.”
And in the process halt a 40% decline in the global GDP.