Ocean Damage Could Skyrocket Climate Costs to $1 Trillion by 2030—Are You Ready for the Impact?

The global cost of greenhouse gas emissions is now nearly double what scientists previously estimated, according to a groundbreaking study from the University of California San Diego’s Scripps Institution of Oceanography. This research, published Thursday, represents a significant shift in how we understand the economic impact of climate change, particularly highlighting the previously overlooked damages to the ocean.

For the first time, the study incorporates damages from global coral loss, disruptions to fisheries, and the destruction of coastal infrastructure into the social cost of carbon (SCC)—a critical measure used to determine the economic harm associated with carbon dioxide emissions. The findings suggest that these ocean-related damages could cost nearly $2 trillion annually, fundamentally altering the landscape of climate finance and policy-making.

“For decades, we’ve been estimating the economic cost of climate change while effectively assigning a value of zero to the ocean,” said Bernardo Bastien-Olvera, the lead researcher and postdoctoral fellow at Scripps. “Ocean loss is not just an environmental issue, but a central part of the economic story of climate change.”

The social cost of carbon serves as an accounting method that translates the monetary cost of carbon emissions into actionable policy decisions. As Amy Campbell, a United Nations climate advisor and former British government COP negotiator, pointed out, “[It] is one of the most efficient tools we have for internalizing climate damages into economic decision-making.” Historically, these calculations have been employed by various international organizations and government agencies, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, to evaluate policy proposals. However, a 2025 memo from the Trump administration directed federal agencies to disregard this data unless mandated by law, complicating its practical utility.

Currently, the SCC is valued at $51 per ton of carbon dioxide when excluding ocean damages. Yet, when ocean-related costs are factored in, this figure escalates to $97.20 per ton. In 2024, global CO2 emissions are projected to reach 41.6 billion tons, making the 91% increase in cost per ton a staggering issue that merits attention.

The study, which initiated in 2021, brought together a diverse group of experts—including fisheries specialists, coral reef researchers, biologists, and climate economists—to assess climate change's downstream costs across four sectors: corals, mangroves, fisheries, and seaports. The researchers examined a broad spectrum of impacts, from the reduction of fisheries and marine trade to declines in ocean-based recreational activities.

Additionally, the study highlights what economists refer to as “non-use values.” Bastien-Olvera explained, “Something has value because it makes the world feel more livable, meaningful, or worth protecting, even if we never directly use it.” This perspective acknowledges the cultural and aesthetic significance of ecosystems, like coral reefs and deep-sea organisms, which many people may never experience firsthand but still appreciate.

The ramifications of these findings are particularly stark for island economies that depend heavily on seafood for nutrition. As noted by co-author Kate Ricke, a climate professor at UCSD’s School of Global Policy and Strategy, “The countries that have the most responsibility for causing climate change and the most capacity to fix it are not generally the same countries that will experience the largest or most near-term damages.” This disparity is alarming, especially when considering the increased morbidity and mortality risks in low-income nations facing nutritional deficiencies exacerbated by ocean warming and acidification.

Despite the alarming scale of this scientific revelation, both Bastien-Olvera and Ricke express hope that this data will act as a wake-up call for international decision-making. “I hope that the high value of ‘blue SCC’ can motivate further investment in adaptation and resilience for ocean systems,” Ricke stated, advocating for funding directed toward coral reef and mangrove restoration projects.

Moreover, Bastien-Olvera emphasized the importance of recognizing the longstanding conservation approaches of coastal communities, ocean scientists, and Indigenous groups. “For a long time, climate economics treated the ocean values as if it were worth zero,” he noted. “This is a first step toward finally acknowledging how wrong that was.”

As this study continues to circulate among policymakers and environmental advocates, it could reshape the narrative surrounding climate change funding and policy, emphasizing that the health of our oceans is not just an environmental issue but an economic imperative that affects us all.