Stanford scientists suggest that the “social cost of carbon” emission (SCC), a metric guiding fossil fuel regulation, is much higher than previous estimates showed.

SCC factors in potential damages to national worker productivity and agriculture, generally any cost of climate change that slows economic growth.

Frances Moore, coauthor of the recent study that updates the standard model of calculating SCC, explains in an official statement that the cost of carbon is potentially $83 per ton higher than current United States government estimates. This raises the SCC to $220 per ton.

“For 20 years now, the models have assumed that climate change can’t affect the basic growth rate of the economy,  but a number of new studies suggest this may not be true, “ adds Moore. “If climate change affects not only a country’s economic output but also its growth, then has a permanent effect that accumulates over time, leading to a much higher social cost of carbon.”

The implications of new SCC estimates may shake the arguments of developing countries, which traditionally resist fossil fuel regulation on the basis that carbon emissions assist rapid economic growth.  In particular, poor regions are vulnerable to rising sea levels and rainfall, according to Stanford’s statement.

The social cost of carbon is determined using multiple integrated assessment models, known as IAM’s.  In developing their research, the team constructed their own IAM. If further studies back up Stanford’s findings, new assessment models may replace today’s standards, and policy shifts will likely follow suit.

Fellow coauthor Delavane Diaz explains, “If the social cost of carbon is higher, many more mitigation measures will pass a cost-benefit analysis. Because carbon emissions are so harmful to society, even costly means of reducing emissions would be worthwhile.”

While the study takes new measures into account that today’s assessment models ignore, there is still room for improvement, reports Forbes. For example, the economic impact of regulation on growth and the slow rate of clean energy implementation are largely overlooked by the new assessment model.

The study was originally published in the peer-reviewed journal Nature Climate Change.