Where's the Left's Outrage Over This Florida Shooting?
From Madison to Minneapolis: One Leftist's Mission to Stop ICE
Two Wisconsin Hospitals Halted 'Gender-Affirming Care' for Minors, but the Fight Isn't Ove...
Dilbert Creator Scott Adams Has Died at 68
Here's the Insane Reason a U.K. Asylum Seeker Was Spared Jail Despite Sex...
Trump to Iran: Help Is on the Way
Flashback: There Was a Time Democrats Were Okay With Separating Illegal Immigrant Families
Trump Administration Makes Another Big Move to Deport Somalis
ICE, ICE Baby?
The Left Is So Desperate to Defend Their Minneapolis Narrative, They’ve Hit a...
A Chicago Man Was Brutally Attacked in the Loop. Guess How Many Times...
Trump’s Leverage Doctrine
Iran Death Toll Tops 12,000 As Security Forces Begin to Slaughter Non-Protesting Civilians
If Bill Clinton Thought He Could Just Not Show Up for His House...
The December Inflation Report Is Here, and It's Good News
Tipsheet

Climate Study That Shaped Global Policy Retracted After Major Error

AP Photo/Susan Walsh

A widely cited 2024 study that claimed to forecast climate change’s dire economic impact globally was retracted on Wednesday. 

The withdrawal came far too late as the paper had already shaped analysis by the U.S. Congressional Budget Office, influenced policy work at the World Bank, and been adopted by the Network for Greening the Financial System, a global coalition of central banks, as a key tool for stress-testing financial portfolios under European climate-risk rules.

Advertisement

The study claimed that global economic output would plunge by 62 percent by 2100 if high carbon emissions continued.

More from the Wall Street Journal:

The study examined historical data from some 1,600 regions worldwide over the past four decades to project how changes in temperature and precipitation would affect economic growth, including factors like agricultural yields, labor productivity and infrastructure.

However, after the study was published, other researchers found that economic data from one country—Uzbekistan—during a short time from 1995 to 1999 had skewed the results. Without Uzbekistan, the 2100 damage forecast fell to 23%, not 62%. The researchers published their critique in Nature in August.

“We broadly agree with the issues raised, and have made corrections to the underlying economic data and to our methodology to address them,” the study's author, Leonie Wenz, said. “These changes are too substantial for a correction of the original article in Nature.”

Advertisement

Significant damage may already have been done, with major financial institutions relying on the study to assess climate-related risks. According to Ely Sandler, a researcher at the Harvard Kennedy School, the study might have pressured government regulators to require big banks to stash away extra reserves as a safety net, slowing economic growth in the process. That tied-up money could have otherwise been used to issue loans and expand the economy.

Editor’s Note: Thanks to President Trump’s leadership and bold policies, America’s economy is back on track.

Help us continue to report on the president’s economic successes and combat the lies of the Democrats. Join Townhall VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement