New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Heat Will Hit America's Poorest Worst

Economists calculate that each degree Celsius of warming will dock the U.S. economy by 1.2 percent--and increase the divide between rich and poor. Christopher Intagliata reports. 

Getty Images/iStockphoto/Thinkstock Images

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

In President Trump's June 1stspeechwithdrawing the U.S. from the Paris Climate Accord, he claimed the climate agreement was costing American workers. In a whole lot of ways: "In terms of lost jobs, lower wages, shuttered factories, and vastly diminished economic production."

Of course, doing nothing about climate change is an option. But what is the economic price…of that choice? A team of economists and scientists set out to answer that question, by linking up economic and climate models to estimate how much warming temperatures could cost the U.S. economy. 

And they found that for every degree Celsius the temperature goes up? It docks the U.S. gross domestic product, the GDP, by 1.2 percent. 


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


But that economic penalty will not be evenly applied. Because the southern U.S. is already much poorer than the northern U.S. today. Oh, and it's hotter, too. "You know, if you're already a really hot location, heating up is really harmful." Solomon Hsiang, an economist at UC Berkeley. "Going from 70 to 75 isn't nearly as bad as going from 90 to 95."

Add in more hurricane damage, smaller crop yields, lost jobs, an increase in death and disease—and the analysis finds that climate change could eat up 20 percent of the poorest counties' income by the end of the century.

"Effectively we're harming the poorer populations and helping the wealthier northern populations. So this means climate change can actually increase inequality within the United States." The study is in the journal Science. [Solomon Hsiang et al., Estimating economic damage from climate change in the United States]

Warming temperatures probably won't help President Trump reach his forecasted three percent growth rate for the U.S. economy, either. "You know, this is essentially going to slow down the growth rate gradually." In other words: it won't be a good climate for negotiation.

—Christopher Intagliata

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe