Here're some decent maps: https://www.berkeley.edu/news2/2010/06/climate-vulnerable.jpg https://www.berkeley.edu/news2/2010/06/climate-vulnerable.jp... https:

Here're some decent maps: https://www.berkeley.edu/news2/2010/06/climate-vulnerable.jpg https://www.berkeley.edu/news2/2010/06/climate-vulnerable.jp... https://grist.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/4-enviro-econ-impact-europe.png https://grist.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/4-enviro-econ-impa... https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/figures/projected-impact-of-climate-change/trend09-1m-soer2010-eps/image_large https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/figures/projected-im... tl;dv: - Canada, Russia, and Northeast Africa (Egypt/Libya) actually see positive impacts. For Canada and Russia global warming could be a huge boon, opening up large areas of uninhabitable permafrost to settlement and bringing in trade through arctic ocean sea routes. - The US does pretty well, but with large regional variations. The Pacific Northwest and Northeast become more desirable, with fewer rainy days. NorCal does okay but faces increased forest fires. The Southwest (LA/Vegas/Phoenix) faces water shortages. The Southeast becomes a miserable place to live. - Europe (particularly Southern Europe) is in trouble. Crop yields and rainfall drop in the South; the North is vulnerable to changes in the gulf stream. - Africa, India, Australia, and island nations get fucked. So basically, the worst effects fall on the global poor, while major geopolitical powers see mostly neutral (U.S, China) or positive (Russia) effects. Within those neutral countries, the benefits fall largely on rich heavily-populated areas, while the downsides fall on marginalized rural poor. No wonder we haven't seen much movement on fixing climate change. Canada is a big surprise winner that could catapult it to geopolitical prominence. Right now it's the U.S's friendly northern neighbor; in 2100 it could rival the U.S. in power.