To mark the two-year anniversary of President Barack Obama’s climate change agenda, the Environmental Protection Agency is out with a peer-reviewed study on Monday that says the United States would see benefits in the hundreds of billions of dollars if the world takes aggressive action on climate change.

The point of the report is no different from arguments we've heard before from the administration, which maintains that acting now will benefit the U.S. economy tremendously in the long-run. This time, however, it backs this point with a rigorous economic analysis of how inaction affects 20 economic sectors in health, electricity, water, transportation, agriculture, forests and the ecosystem by 2100.

“It is not an understatement to say there is huge costs that we’re going to bear if we don’t take action now,” EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy told reporters at a White House briefing.

There are two scenarios projected in the study—one in which countries don’t act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and one in which the world meets ambitious goals to curb warming by 2 degrees Celsius. Limiting global warming to 2 degrees Celsius would prevent 12,000 deaths annually in 49 cities, save 7.9 million acres from wildfires, and reduce droughts by 59 percent. There would be fewer bridges to repair, a more robust fishing industry, a more productive workforce, and more efficient agriculture industry. Several figures from the report contrast the two possible futures:

This isn't the first time the White House has framed climate action as a savvy investment that reaps economic benefits decades down the road, nor will it be the last. “What is hopeful about this report is that it once again shows not just that these actions are real and we need to act now, but there are real dividends, there are real economic dividends to acting early and acting aggressively particularly for our economy,” Brian Deese, the top White House adviser on climate change, said.