When it comes to energy costs, the public debate almost always stops at the immediate elements: the price of energy, the bills, the impact on businesses. But there is another dimension that concerns the future damage produced by every ton of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere today by burning fossil fuels. This is where the concept of the social cost of carbon comes in, an economic tool that tries to put a monetary value on the effects of climate change on health, ecosystems, agriculture, infrastructure and economic stability.
In essence, the social cost of carbon estimates how much it “weighs” for the community to emit a single ton of CO₂, adding up the damage it will produce over time. It is a parameter used to assess the cost-effectiveness of a climate policy. If the future harm avoided is greater than the cost of taking action today, then the action makes economic sense, as well as being environmentally necessary.
This concept has evolved in recent years as it has become increasingly clear that a major part of climate damage affects the oceans. Hence the idea of the so-called “blue social cost of carbon,” which isolates and quantifies the specific impacts of global warming on marine ecosystems and coastal economies. Warmer and more acidic oceans mean collapsing coral reefs, less productive fisheries, coastlines more susceptible to erosion and storm surges, port infrastructure at risk, tourism compromised. And above all, more energy at play in the atmosphere, meaning an increase in the violence of extreme weather phenomena. These are all effects that have a real, often enormous, economic cost and that have so far been underestimated.
This is documented in a study published in Nature, which recalculated the social cost of CO₂ by more fully including climate damages related to natural ecosystems and systemic risks. The result is that the social cost of carbon is at least double that of the most widely used estimates in public policy. Every ton of CO₂ emitted generates much greater economic damage than has been officially recognized to date: the balance of convenience must be recalibrated. This is an important shift in perspective, because it highlights how climate is a factor that directly affects key sectors of the global economy and food security: the oceans absorb a substantial portion of the excess heat produced by greenhouse emissions; if this “service” is skipped, the damage is immense.
In a context where extreme events, rising seas and marine ecosystem crises are already having dramatic effects, the social cost of carbon becomes a key tool to expose the illusion that polluting is cheaper than changing course. The numbers, when they include all the damage, tell a very different story: that of a bill that is already steep, growing year by year, and may soon come to render our societies ungovernable.
