via TriplePundit
Researchers at the University of California Davis Center for Watershed Sciences have attached a dollar estimate to the economic impact of the drought in California’s Central Valley. Their preliminary report, released earlier this week, estimates a total economic loss of $1.7 billion, along with “substantial long-term costs” of groundwater overdraft that will go unaccounted for.
Last year marked the driest year in California since records began in 1895, and in January Governor Jerry Brown declared a drought state of emergency. Seven of the state’s 12 main reservoirs are at or below 60 percent of the historical average, and a dry winter has left snowpack levels–an important source for replenishing water supplies–at just a fifth of historical levels, as of late April.
Read the complete article here: http://www.triplepundit.com/2014/05/california-drought-leaves-groundwater-reserves-vulnerable-cost-nears-2-billion/
Showing posts with label ecosystem services. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ecosystem services. Show all posts
Monday, June 2, 2014
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Making the Case for Ecosystem Services Valuation
Nature, Volume 465, Pages 985–986
On June 14, 2010, BP pledged $20 billion to an escrow account to pay for damage caused by the April 22, 2010 sinking of its Deepwater Horizon drilling platform off the coast of Louisiana. The beneficiaries of this fund are expected to be fishermen, hoteliers, charter-boat operators, and other Gulf-coast business owners who have lost income, as well as states and other entities with clean-up costs.
However, whether payment will ever be made for the loss of 'ecosystem services' is unknown. Ecosystem services benefit everyone but are owned by no one, such as the carbon sequestration provided by marsh plants and ocean plankton, or the buffering that coastal marshes provide to nearby communities from the Gulf's many hurricanes.
The 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska raised similar questions, and sparked a flurry of research in the once-obscure discipline of ecological economics, which seeks to estimate quantities such as the 'replacement cost' of an ecosystem — or even an individual organism. (For example, killer whales cost $300,000 at the time; cormorants were $310.) The Gulf oil spill seems likely to inspire another surge of research in this field.
Ecological economist Robert Costanza at the University of Vermont in Burlington has already estimated a $34 billion to $670 billion price tag for the loss of Gulf ecosystem services.
Read more in "A Full Accounting", in the June 24, 2010 issue of Nature.
On June 14, 2010, BP pledged $20 billion to an escrow account to pay for damage caused by the April 22, 2010 sinking of its Deepwater Horizon drilling platform off the coast of Louisiana. The beneficiaries of this fund are expected to be fishermen, hoteliers, charter-boat operators, and other Gulf-coast business owners who have lost income, as well as states and other entities with clean-up costs.
However, whether payment will ever be made for the loss of 'ecosystem services' is unknown. Ecosystem services benefit everyone but are owned by no one, such as the carbon sequestration provided by marsh plants and ocean plankton, or the buffering that coastal marshes provide to nearby communities from the Gulf's many hurricanes.
The 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska raised similar questions, and sparked a flurry of research in the once-obscure discipline of ecological economics, which seeks to estimate quantities such as the 'replacement cost' of an ecosystem — or even an individual organism. (For example, killer whales cost $300,000 at the time; cormorants were $310.) The Gulf oil spill seems likely to inspire another surge of research in this field.
Ecological economist Robert Costanza at the University of Vermont in Burlington has already estimated a $34 billion to $670 billion price tag for the loss of Gulf ecosystem services.
Read more in "A Full Accounting", in the June 24, 2010 issue of Nature.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Protecting Ecosystems Saves Money
Natural capital – ecosystems, biodiversity, and natural resources – underpins economies, societies, and individual well-being. And, according to a new study hosted by the UN Environment Program (UNEP), protecting ecosystems saves money. For example, the Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity study puts a $2 to 5 trillion price tag on the ongoing cost of forest loss and estimates that potential rates of return can reach 40% for mangrove and woodlands/shrublands, 50% for tropical forests, and 79% for grasslands.
The study highlights that losses in the natural world have direct economic repercussions that we systematically underestimate. Developing our capacity to measure and monitor biodiversity, ecosystems, and the provision of services is an essential step towards better management of our natural capital. Providing evidence of the value of our natural capital to decision-makers paves the way for more targeted and cost-effective solutions. Developing and strengthening policy frameworks to manage the transition to a resource-efficient economy is the way forward. Investing in natural capital can be a cost-effective response to the climate change crisis, support local economies, and create jobs.
Study leader, Pavan Sukhdev, a Deutsche Bank economist, said "We have now evaluated 1,100 studies ranging across different countries and different ecosystem services. And we find that with protected areas, for example, no matter how you slice the figures up you come up with a ratio of benefits to costs that’s between 25-to-one and 100-to-one."
Sukhdev added, "Now we can say quite confidently that there is a solid benefit from investing in protected areas…Establishing reserves, policing them and so on, would cost about $40-50 billion per year – and the annual benefit would be about $4-5 trillion."
The study highlights that losses in the natural world have direct economic repercussions that we systematically underestimate. Developing our capacity to measure and monitor biodiversity, ecosystems, and the provision of services is an essential step towards better management of our natural capital. Providing evidence of the value of our natural capital to decision-makers paves the way for more targeted and cost-effective solutions. Developing and strengthening policy frameworks to manage the transition to a resource-efficient economy is the way forward. Investing in natural capital can be a cost-effective response to the climate change crisis, support local economies, and create jobs.
Study leader, Pavan Sukhdev, a Deutsche Bank economist, said "We have now evaluated 1,100 studies ranging across different countries and different ecosystem services. And we find that with protected areas, for example, no matter how you slice the figures up you come up with a ratio of benefits to costs that’s between 25-to-one and 100-to-one."
Sukhdev added, "Now we can say quite confidently that there is a solid benefit from investing in protected areas…Establishing reserves, policing them and so on, would cost about $40-50 billion per year – and the annual benefit would be about $4-5 trillion."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)