Latest news with #OrganizationforEconomicCooperationandDevelopment
Los Angeles Times
2 days ago
- Business
- Los Angeles Times
A forest the size of North America would be needed to offset Big Oil's reserves, study finds
The world would need to plant a forest the size of North America in order to offset planet-warming emissions from the 200 largest oil and gas companies, new research has found. A study published Thursday in the journal Communications Earth & Environment analyzed the economic and ecological benefits of planting trees as a means of balancing potential carbon dioxide emissions from the projected burning of oil reserves held by the fossil fuel industry. Many experts consider planting trees to be one of the best means of balancing CO2 because the plants absorb and store carbon that otherwise would enter the atmosphere and heat the planet. But researchers in England and France found that the tree-planting process, known as afforestation, faces insurmountable land use and financial challenges. 'We have to be careful as a society to think that we can continue to burn fossil fuels and emit CO2 in a sort of business-as-usual scenario and just offset it later,' said Nina Friggens, a research fellow in plant soil ecology at the University of Exeter and one of the study's authors. 'The picture on that is increasingly looking very unviable.' The world's 200 largest fossil-fuel companies hold about 200 billion tons of carbon in their reserves, which would generate as much as 742 billion tons of CO2 if burned, according to the study. That's far more than the budget required to limit global warming to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit, or 1.5 degrees Celsius — an internationally agreed-upon target intended to prevent the worst effects of climate change. The burning of fossil fuels represents about 90% of planet-warming emissions. Most experts and governments agree that rapid action is needed, including a combination of offsetting emissions and reducing them altogether. But, as the paper notes, 'fossil-fuel companies currently face little incentive to reduce the extraction and use of fossil fuels, and regulatory measures to limit these activities have been slow to materialise.' The researchers set out to calculate how much land area of afforestation would be needed to compensate for these emissions by 2050. The number they came up with was 9.5 million square miles of new trees — more land area than North America and part of South America. 'That would displace all infrastructure, agriculture and preexisting habitats,' Friggens said. 'It's not something that we are at all suggesting that we do — it's just to illustrate the size of the problem.' The economic viability of such a project for oil and gas companies is even less realistic. Most estimates suggest that afforestation is the 'cheapest' means of offsetting carbon emissions — the international Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development estimates it will cost more than $14 per ton of carbon offset. At that rate, afforestation offsets would cost the 200 largest fossil fuel companies around $10.8 trillion — or roughly 11% of global GDP, according to the study. By comparison, the price of direct air capture — a newer field of technology that draws CO2 from the air and stores it underground or in industrial products — would be about $910 per ton, costing the companies $673.7 trillion, or about 700% of global GDP, according to the study. That said, even the more affordable afforestation approach would cause nearly all fossil fuel companies to lose value, according to the researchers — they referred to this as 'negative net environmental valuation.' The companies 'would be worth less than what they would have to pay for their offsetting,' said Alain Naef, an assistant professor of environmental economics at the ESSEC Business School in Paris and another of the study's authors. The researchers acknowledged that the study has limitations as it relies on broad assumptions, including that all existing fossil fuel reserves will be sold and burned. In addition, by focusing on afforestation, it does not account for other approaches that are central to tackling climate change, such as preventing deforestation and restoring existing forests. Still, the findings come as the world moves further from its climate goals. Last year was Earth's hottest on record with a global average surface temperature about 1.46 degrees Celsius above the preindustrial baseline — closer than ever to the 1.5 degree threshold. What's more, the Trump administration has shifted the United States away from decarbonization efforts, including canceling funding for dozens of decarbonization projects in recent weeks and ramping up efforts to increase oil and gas production. President Trump in January also withdrew the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement, the treaty signed by about 200 nations from which the 1.5 degree Celsius goal stems. The researchers said their findings should not suggest afforestation and carbon offsetting are futile. 'It can work — it can have valuable climate benefits, cultural benefits, social benefits, biodiversity benefits,' Friggens said. Naef said carbon offsetting remains an important tool but cannot be used to compensate for all emissions. 'While offsetting can be useful at the margin, the key change will not be offsetting — it will be a reduction of carbon emissions,' he said. The main message from the paper, he added, is that 'oil and gas should remain in the ground.'
Korea Herald
2 days ago
- Business
- Korea Herald
S. Korea suffers OECD's 4th-biggest AI brain drain
South Korea, despite being a leading producer of educated professionals in artificial intelligence and science, is rapidly losing talent to countries such as the United States, Canada, Japan and Germany, according to a new report released Wednesday by the Korea Chamber of Commerce's Sustainable Growth Initiative. In 2024, South Korea recorded a net loss of 0.36 AI experts per 10,000 people. That puts it near the bottom of the 38 member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, at 35th place. Luxembourg, by comparison, gained 8.92 persons per 10,000 people. Germany gained 2.34 and the US 1.07. This measure subtracts the number of local professionals leaving the country from those coming in. In Korea's case, the gap is growing wider every year. This trend marks a reversal from what had been a modest but positive inflow of AI talent into South Korea. Just five years ago, in 2020, the country recorded a net gain. That has since shifted to a steady and worsening outflow. The broader science sector tells a similar story. In 2021, Korea's rate of scientists moving abroad (2.85 percent) was higher than the rate of foreign scientists moving in (2.64 percent). This placed Korea 33rd out of 43 countries in terms of scientific talent retention. The US is the top attractive destination for Korean researchers. The US issued 5,684 high-skilled EB-1 and EB-2 visas to Korean nationals in 2023. That is roughly 11 per 100,000 people, a far higher rate than China (0.94), Japan (0.86) and even India (1.44). And 71.1 percent of Korean Ph.D. graduates in the US reported plans to stay there long-term, a rise from the previous five years, when it had stayed below 70 percent. The SGI report identifies several structural issues behind the exodus. Chief among them is Korea's rigid and hierarchical workplace culture, which many young professionals find stifling. Compensation is also a major issue. The median starting salary for assistant professors in Korea is about $32,000 a year. In the US, it's over 83,000. Countries like Japan ($46,000) and Germany ($70,000) also pay significantly more. In addition, the report posits that Korea's 52-hour workweek cap, though intended to protect workers, often limits the flexibility that high-performing researchers need. Other countries make exceptions. The US, for instance, exempts many high-earning professionals from strict working hours regulations. Japan and Germany also allow special provisions for researchers in advanced fields. With Korea's working-age population shrinking and the research workforce projected to decline by over 20 percent by 2040, the report warns that the country faces a future where it trains the world's talent but struggles to keep enough of it to sustain its own growth. SGI recommends sweeping policy changes, including performance-based pay, flexible work arrangements for high-skilled professionals, and structured incentives for overseas Koreans to return. 'We're watching the foundation of Korea's scientific future quietly erode,' said SGI researcher Kim Cheon-goo. 'And we are helping build it elsewhere.'
Mint
4 days ago
- Business
- Mint
Semiconductor tariffs will be costly. A better way to deal with China.
The White House may be forced to recalibrate its tariff strategy in the face of judicial pushback. But it is also considering issuing semiconductor tariffs resting on national security concerns under Section 232, a legal authority that likely won't be restrained by the courts. That would be expensive. The U.S. consumes several hundred billion dollars of chips each year, most of which are at least partly manufactured abroad. If the Trump administration imposes expansive tariffs on semiconductors, it would raise costs for America's biggest tech firms and slow investment in chip-dependent artificial intelligence data centers. There is an alternative to broad chip tariffs that could achieve Trump's goal of fairer trade and more domestic investment. Striking a semiconductor-focused sectoral agreement with U.S. allies could reduce trade barriers, commit signatories to investing more in the U.S., and oblige them to join action against the largest source of distortions in the chip market: China. Unlike other industries, chip exports don't face tariffs or significant nontrade barriers from U.S. trading partners. U.S. semiconductor firms aren't worried about the fairness of trade with Europe, Japan, South Korea, or Taiwan. The problem—for the U.S. and for its key trading partners—is China. China's state subsidies are distorting the global chip market. Of course the U.S., the European Union, and Japan have also allocated government funds to bolster their semiconductor industries. But China's subsidies are far larger in scale. A study by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development found that while many countries support domestic firms with research and development credits or investment incentives, China's subsidy program is unique in that Chinese state funds take direct equity stakes in chip firms, enabling them to survive regardless of whether or not they make money. After more than a decade of Beijing's subsidies, Chinese firms are now a large producer of the low and mid-range chips on which the world's industrial base depends. Leading companies in the U.S., Europe, and Taiwan fear that any new investments or factories they build will be unprofitable as China floods the market with its heavily subsidized alternatives. This has already happened in one corner of the chip market—the production of silicon carbide semiconductors. Wolfspeed, a leading U.S. producer of such chips, is facing significant losses and preparing to file for bankruptcy, The Wall Street Journal reported. Recognition that Chinese subsidies threaten the survival of Western firms has motivated the U.S. and other countries to launch their own incentive programs, such as the 2022 Chips Act. Narrowly tailored, China-specific semiconductor tariffs or other market access restrictions must also be part of the solution. Washington has rightly taken steps to limit China's access to U.S. firms' advanced technology and to prevent the U.S. industrial base from increasing its reliance on Chinese chips, given the security risks such dependence would entail. But these rules restricting transfer of chipmaking equipment to China are tighter than the comparable regulations of other countries, such as Japan and the Netherlands. Firms from those countries have won market share, while also enabling China's technological advances. If U.S. manufacturers can't use cheap Chinese chips for security reasons, but firms from Europe or Japan can, then U.S. companies face a cost-disadvantage. Aligning security and trade regulations governing the use of Chinese chips would level the playing field for U.S. firms—and improve allies' economic security. That is why U.S. chip companies have already endorsed a sectoral agreement to tackle the issues posed by China's subsidies. And yet, limits on trade with China cannot solve the chip industry's staggering reliance on production across East Asia, especially in Taiwan and South Korea. Trump argues that his tariffs can force firms to build more manufacturing capacity in the U.S. High chip tariffs would certainly create this incentive—but at vast cost. If the White House imposes new tariffs on semiconductors, everything from cars to medical devices to data centers will become more expensive. A sectoral agreement could use Trump's tariff threats to achieve binding investment commitments. If countries like Taiwan and South Korea commit to expanding manufacturing in the U.S., they could be guaranteed tariff relief. This would enhance supply chain resilience, without imposing tariffs that counteract the president's AI dominance goals and undermine the domestic manufacturing renaissance he hopes to catalyze. About the author: Chris Miller is author of Chip War: The Fight for the World's Most Critical Technology. Guest commentaries like this one are written by authors outside the Barron's newsroom. They reflect the perspective and opinions of the authors. Submit feedback and commentary pitches to ideas@
Los Angeles Times
10-06-2025
- Business
- Los Angeles Times
Citing trade wars, the World Bank sharply downgrades global economic growth forecast to 2.3%
WASHINGTON — President Trump's trade wars are expected to slash economic growth this year in the United States and around the world, the World Bank forecast Tuesday. Citing 'a substantial rise in trade barriers'' but without mentioning Trump by name, the 189-country lender predicted that the U.S. economy — the world's largest — would grow half as fast (1.4%) this year as it did in 2024 (2.8%). That marked a downgrade from the 2.3% U.S. growth it had forecast for 2025 back in January. The bank also lopped 0.4 percentage points off its forecast for global growth this year. It now expects the world economy to expand just 2.3% in 2025, down from 2.8% in 2024. In a forward to the latest version of the twice-yearly Global Economic Prospects report, World Bank chief economist Indermit Gill wrote that the global economy has missed its chance for the 'soft landing'' — slowing enough to tame inflation without generating serious pain — it appeared headed for just six months ago. 'The world economy today is once more running into turbulence,' Gill wrote. 'Without a swift course correction, the harm to living standards could be deep.'' America's economic prospects have been clouded by Trump's erratic and aggressive trade policies, including 10% taxes — tariffs — on imports from almost every country in the world. These levies drive up costs in the U.S. and invite retaliation from other countries. The Chinese economy is forecast to see growth slow from 5% in 2024 to 4.5% this year and 4% next. The world's second-largest economy has been hobbled by the tariffs that Trump has imposed on its exports, by the collapse of its real estate market and by an aging workforce. The World Bank expects the 20 European countries that share the euro currency to collectively grow just 0.7% this year, down from an already lackluster 0.9% in 2024. Trump's tariffs are expected to hurt European exports. And the unpredictable way he rolls them out — announcing them, suspending them, coming up with new ones — has created uncertainty that discourages business investment. India is once again expected to be the world's fastest-growing major economy, expanding at a 6.3% clip this year. But that's down from 6.5% in 2024 and from the 6.7% the bank had forecast for 2025 in January. In Japan, economic growth is expected to accelerate this year — but only from 0.2% in 2024 to a sluggish 0.7% this year, well short of the 1.2% the World Bank had forecast in January. The World Bank seeks to reduce poverty and boost living standards by providing grants and low-rate loans to poor economies. Another multinational organization that seeks to promote global prosperity — the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development — last week downgraded its forecast for the U.S. and global economies. Wiseman writes for the Associated Press.
Yahoo
10-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Citing trade wars, the World Bank sharply downgrades global economic growth forecast to 2.3%
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump's trade wars are expected to slash economic growth this year in the United States and around the world, the World Bank forecast Tuesday. Citing 'a substantial rise in trade barriers'' but without mentioning Trump by name, the 189-country lender predicted that the U.S. economy – the world's largest – would grow half as fast (1.4%) this year as it did in 2024 (2.8%). That marked a downgrade from the 2.3% U.S. growth it had forecast back for 2025 back in January. The bank also lopped 0.4 percentage points off its forecast for global growth this year. It now expects the world economy to expand just 2.3% in 2025, down from 2.8% in 2024. In a forward to the latest version of the twice-yearly Global Economic Prospects report, World Bank chief economist Indermit Gill wrote that the global economy has missed its chance for the 'soft landing'' — slowing enough to tame inflation without generating serious pain — it appeared headed for just six months ago. 'The world economy today is once more running into turbulence,' Gill wrote. 'Without a swift course correction, the harm to living standards could be deep.'' America's economic prospects have been clouded by Trump's erratic and aggressive trade policies, including 10% taxes — tariffs — on imports from almost every country in the world. These levies drive up costs in the U.S. and invite retaliation from other countries. The Chinese economy is forecast to see growth slow from 5% in 2024 to 4.5% this year and 4% next. The world's second-largest economy has been hobbled by the tariffs that Trump has imposed on its exports, by the collapse of its real estate market and by an aging workforce. The World Bank expects the 20 European countries that share the euro currency to collectively grow just 0.7% this year, down from an already lackluster 0.9% in 2024. Trump's tariffs are expected to hurt European exports. And the unpredictable way he rolls them out — announcing them, suspending them, coming up with new ones — has created uncertainty that discourages business investment. India is once again expected to the be world's fastest-growing major economy, expanding at a 6.3% clip this year. But that's down from 6.5% in 2024 and from the 6.7% the bank had forecast for 2025 in January. In Japan, economic growth is expected to accelerate this year – but only from 0.2% in 2024 to a sluggish 0.7% this year, well short of the 1.2% the World Bank had forecast in January. The World Bank seeks to reduce poverty and boost living standards by providing grants and low-rate loans to poor economies. Another multinational organization that seeks to promote global prosperity — the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development — last week downgraded its forecast for the U.S. and global economies. Paul Wiseman, The Associated Press Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Melden Sie sich an, um Ihr Portfolio aufzurufen. Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten
