COSTS DELAY THE OF

The report examines the physical and economic consequences of delaying climate action. It argues that because CO2 persists in the atmosphere and natural carbon sinks are saturating, stabilizing concentrations requires emissions to reach nearly zero. Delaying this transition increases the risk of nonlinear 'tipping points,' such as methane release from the Arctic, and leads to higher costs due to the need for more aggressive deployment of clean energy and the premature retirement of polluting assets. Using the Energy Policy Simulator for the U.S., the report finds that delaying action until 2030 increases the net present value of expenditures by 72% compared to starting in 2021.

• Stabilizing atmospheric CO2 concentrations at any level requires emissions to be reduced to nearly zero because a significant portion of CO2 remains in the atmosphere for centuries or millennia.
• Natural carbon sinks, specifically oceans and plants, are becoming saturated, which means the growth rate of atmospheric CO2 concentrations will continue to rise even if emissions remain constant.
• Climate impacts are subject to time lags, meaning surface air temperatures will continue to rise for at least a century and sea levels for several millennia even after emissions are substantially reduced.
• There is a risk of nonlinear climate responses, such as the release of methane from the East Siberian Arctic Shelf, which could trigger abrupt warming that cannot be practically contained.
• To limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius, the remaining carbon budget from 2018 is approximately 1,500 billion tons; for a 1.5 degrees Celsius limit, the budget is significantly smaller at 580 billion tons.
• A U.S. model comparing a 2021 start date to a 2030 start date for net-zero emissions by 2050 shows that the 2030 scenario increases the net present value of cumulative capital, operational, and fuel expenditures by 72%.
• Delaying action to 2030 would require an extreme acceleration of clean energy deployment; wind and solar deployment would need to be six times the business-as-usual projection by 2030 and nine times by the mid-2030s.
• Delayed action creates economic inefficiency by allowing polluting power plants and equipment to be built now, only to require their expensive retirement before the end of their functional life to meet rapid transition goals.

APA

Harvey, H., Aggarwal, S., Mahajan, M., & Deng, M. (2021). COSTS DELAY THE OF. Energy Innovation. https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/Cost_of_Delay.pdf

Chicago

Harvey, Hal, Sonia Aggarwal, Megan Mahajan, and Minshu Deng. COSTS DELAY THE OF. Energy Innovation, 2021. https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/Cost_of_Delay.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Harvey |first1=Hal |last2=Aggarwal |first2=Sonia |last3=Mahajan |first3=Megan |last4=Deng |first4=Minshu |title=COSTS DELAY THE OF |publisher=Energy Innovation |date=January 2021 |url=https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/Cost_of_Delay.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{harvey2021costs, author = {Harvey, Hal and Aggarwal, Sonia and Mahajan, Megan and Deng, Minshu}, title = {{COSTS DELAY THE OF}}, institution = {Energy Innovation}, year = {2021}, month = jan, url = {https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/Cost_of_Delay.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }