No Free Lunch on Climate

Ed Reid said:

"While the costs and investments seem manageable at a global level, they are likely to be challenging for individual sectors.", Pathways to a low-carbon economy, McKinsey

The combination of investments and costs does not sound like "free", no less saving money.

"If all markets were efficient all the time, there’d be no need for management consultants in the first place. Why would you hire someone to show you how you can do better, if you are perfectly efficient already?"

There is a difference between markets being efficient (if imperfect) and individual market participants being efficient in those markets. Most companies hire consultants like McKinsey because the efficient market is causing their market share to drop in response to more efficient market participants' shares. Markets do not hire consultants.

The IEA estimate of the investment required to reduce global annual CO₂ emissions by 50% by 2050 is $45 trillion, over and above the business as usual scenario. That might be "manageable at a global level" and it is certainly "likely to be challenging for individual sectors", but it is certainly not "free" and arguably not cheap either.

Further, there is a significant risk in assessing the investments and costs of interim actions which are insufficient to "solve" the perceived "problem". Many of the investments made as the result of such assesments might well become dead loss as the ultimate solution to the "problem" is pursued. The ultimate solution is not staying within +2^oC through 2030.