This really shows how far we have to go.<p>If you don't have a feel for the level of carbon price that's needed to make major change then $100 is a great rule of thumb.<p>Working in oil and gas, I know that our industry would make major changes if the global carbon price for scope 1 and 2 emissions was $100/ton. And if scope 3 emissions were included then I suspect oil and gas production would drastically decline, and probably use CCS as the norm.<p>The current average price put on all emissions in the world comes out at about $3.<p>In case you're thinking "how could a global carbon price of $100/ton possibly be affordable?" the answer is that $100 for every ton of CO2 emissions in the world is 4.3% of world GDP. And that money doesn't disappear of course, it's simply a transfer from polluters to... whoever you like.<p>And of course the economic benefit of not destroying the planet is nice.<p>Notably, one of the world's highest carbon prices is in Sweden, a location that would do just fine with a bit of global warming.
Indeed, carbon price alone cannot lead us to a net-zero world. It is only a part of the solution – a considerably big part. Yet, the inaction from the 79% of the world with no mandatory carbon pricing puts a question on how willing we really are to solve the problem.