Sentences with phrase «act on climate change if»

Not exact matches

Although it will be incredibly difficult to ever match his contributions on the pitch, it's vitally important for a former club legend, like Henry, to publicly address his concerns regarding the direction of this club... regardless of those who still feel that Henry has some sort of agenda due to the backlash he received following earlier comments he made on air regarding Arsenal, he has an intimate understanding of the game, he knows the fans are being hosed and he feels some sense of obligation, both professionally and personally, to tell it like he sees it... much like I've continually expressed over the last couple months, this team isn't evolving under this current ownership / management team... instead we are currently experiencing a «stagnant» phase in our club's storied history... a fact that can't be hidden by simply changing the formation or bringing in one or two individuals... this team needs fundamental change in the way it conducts business both on and off the pitch or it will continue to slowly devolve into a second tier club... regardless of the euphoria surrounding our escape act on Friday evening, as it stands, this club is more likely to be fighting for a Europa League spot for the foreseeable future than a top 4 finish... we can't hope for the failures of others to secure our place in the top 4, we need to be the manufacturers of our own success by doing whatever is necessary to evolve as an organization... if Wenger, Gazidis and Kroenke can't take the necessary steps following the debacle they manufactured last season, their removal is imperative for our future success... unfortunately, I strongly believe that either they don't know how to proceed in the present economic climate or they are unwilling to do whatever it takes to turn this ship around... just look at the current state of our squad, none of our world class players are under contract beyond this season, we have a ridiculous wage bill considering the results, we can't sell our deadwood because we've mismanaged our personnel decisions and contractual obligations, we haven't properly cultivated our younger talent and we might have become one of the worst clubs ever when it comes to way we handle our transfer business, which under Dein was one of our greatest assets... it's time to get things right!!!

Things might be different if Virginia had acted on the shelved 2008 climate action plan, which called for state agencies to educate residents about causes and impacts of climate change and costs of taking action.

However, if we choose a different path — if we act aggressively to both adapt to the changing climate and to mitigate future impacts by reducing carbon emissions — we can significantly reduce our exposure to the worst economic risks from climate change, and also demonstrate global leadership on climate.

In the report released today by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the world's top scientists warned that global warming is unequivocally man - made and will become irreversible if we do not act now to reduce the amount of carbon emissions released into the atmosphere.

In my view, unfortunately, people in the younger (college - age) generation may well have to get «peaceably vocal» regarding climate change, and do some walking, and paint some signs, to bring about some healthy movement on the issue of climate change IF more of our leaders don't begin to act responsibly and maturely, soon.

As prices continue to rise and pressure to act on climate change becomes paramount, it is a good time for policy makers to ask if the trend towards air - conditioning indoor spaces is necessary, desirable or even possible.

But it said that, on the whole, rich countries including the European Union had once again shown poor leadership and acted as if climate change is a distant prospect, when in reality it is already destroying people's lives and livelihoods around the world.

Don't know if they come out on this copy but in the original article there is a link toi the climate change act 2008 and the green budget which seeks to expand the provisions of the Aact 2008 and the green budget which seeks to expand the provisions of the ActAct.

Up to $ 44 trillion could be going up in smoke if the world does not act on climate change, according to the latest piece of research from U.S. banking giant Citigroup.

But if Congress fails to act decisively, then putting those powers to use will be an essential stopâ $ gap to avoid complete inaction on climate change.

I love showing them the tenacity and determination that I am not going away, even if they are nowhere close joining me to act on climate change in Congress.

This post examines the ethical duty to act to reduce the threat of climate change even if one assumes there is more scientific uncertainty about the causes and impacts of climate change than those identified by the scientific consensus view as articulated most recently by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change climate change even if one assumes there is more scientific uncertainty about the causes and impacts of climate change than those identified by the scientific consensus view as articulated most recently by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (change even if one assumes there is more scientific uncertainty about the causes and impacts of climate change than those identified by the scientific consensus view as articulated most recently by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change climate change than those identified by the scientific consensus view as articulated most recently by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (change than those identified by the scientific consensus view as articulated most recently by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Climate Change (Change (IPCC).

The ideas seems to rest on the conclusion that if the United States acts to reduce emissions others will follow and therefore as a matter of «prudence» the US should make commitments given climate change's potential catastrophic impacts.

A variation of this argument is that the United States should not adopt policies on climate change until other nations such as China take steps to reduce their emissions because if the United States acts and other nations don't reciprocate this will harm the US economy.

Stossel writes that even if America reaches Obama's «absurd» pledge to put 1,000,000 electric vehicles on the road by 2015, the impacts of climate change would only be delayed by «one hour,» according to Lomborg, and the mitigation measure was merely a «symbolic act.»

If they don't enact a stiff tax on carbon in 2021; and if they don't start using the full legal authority of the Clean Air Act to regulate all sources of carbon emissions — implementing what is in effect a carbon fuel rationing scheme — then they can be rightly accused of being totally dishonest and hypocritical in claiming to be concerned about the impacts of climate changIf they don't enact a stiff tax on carbon in 2021; and if they don't start using the full legal authority of the Clean Air Act to regulate all sources of carbon emissions — implementing what is in effect a carbon fuel rationing scheme — then they can be rightly accused of being totally dishonest and hypocritical in claiming to be concerned about the impacts of climate changif they don't start using the full legal authority of the Clean Air Act to regulate all sources of carbon emissions — implementing what is in effect a carbon fuel rationing scheme — then they can be rightly accused of being totally dishonest and hypocritical in claiming to be concerned about the impacts of climate change.

If you claim that the US or other developed nation has no duty to act on climate change until China acts, do you agree that economic competitors such has China have no duty to reduce their emissions until the United States does so?

If you claim that the US or other developed nation has no duty to act on climate change until China acts, do you agree that economic competitors such has China have no duty to reduce their ghg emissions until the United States does so?

Are you aware that the claim frequently made by opponents of US and other national action on climate change that if the country acts to reduce its ghg emissions and China or other developing country does not act it will make no difference because climate change will still happen is not true because ghg emissions from nations exceeding their fair share of safe global emissions are responsible for rising atmospheric concentrations of ghgs?

Given that the United States and most other developed anions have for over twenty - five years failed to adequately respond to climate change because of alleged unacceptable costs to each nation and that due to the delay ghg emissions reductions now needed to avoid potentially catastrophic climate change are much steeper and costly than what would be required if these nations acted twenty five years ago, is it just for the United States and other developed nations to now defend further inaction on climate change on the basis of cost to it?

Later entries in this series will identify questions that should be asked to counter arguments made against national climate change policies on the basis of scientific uncertainty and unfairness or ineffectiveness if China or another large ghg emitter nation do not act.

If Pope Francis is Right that Climate Change is a Moral Issue, How Should NGOs and Citizens Respond to Arguments Against Climate Policies Based on the Failure of Other Countries Like China to Act?

The President has said electricity rates will «necessarily skyrocket,» coal companies will face bankruptcy, and if Congress does not act on climate change and cap - tax - and - trade, he will.

If we are truly serious about reducing the threat of climate change, then we step out of our comfort zones to act, organize, and put polite pressure on our members of Congress.

If it is done well, it can even impress the staff of the conservative members of Congress, or even the members of Congress that you want to influence to act on climate change.

In addition, economic arguments for not acting on climate change ignore obligations that nations have if they are creating human rights violations and duties entailed by distributive justice.

For instance, if the the US not only has economic interests in the climate change policies in political debate but also obligations and duties to poor vulnerable nations to not cause them great harm from US ghg emissions, the United States may not justify failure to act to reduce its ghg emissions on the basis of economic cost to the US.

It's tipping points like these that make climate change such a distinct problem: If we don't act quickly, and on a global scale, then the problem will literally become insoluble.

Similarly, in his 2006 report on the economic consequences of climate change, Sir Nicholas Stern wrote that, «If we don't act, the overall costs and risks of climate change will be equivalent to losing at least five per cent of global GDP each year, now and forever.»

Previewing the plan on CBS's Face the Nation on Sunday, Sanders emphasized the urgency of tackling climate change, saying, «I am frightened about the planet we're going to leave our kids if we don't act.»

To give his government's policies moral legitimacy, she had thrown at him the figure that, according to the UN, 150,000 people die each year as a result of climate change, for which the UK would be culpable if it failed to act on climate change.

Scientists estimate that if it warms by about 4 to 5 degrees Celsius (7.2 to 9 degrees Fahrenheit), which is projected to happen by the end of the century if we don't act on climate change, then all the ice will eventually melt.

An IPSOS survey presented during Climate Week NYC, on behalf of The Climate Group and Futerra, shows that a majority of people globally are optimistic about addressing climate change if we act now — with people in emerging economies the most positive about the role of new techClimate Week NYC, on behalf of The Climate Group and Futerra, shows that a majority of people globally are optimistic about addressing climate change if we act now — with people in emerging economies the most positive about the role of new techClimate Group and Futerra, shows that a majority of people globally are optimistic about addressing climate change if we act now — with people in emerging economies the most positive about the role of new techclimate change if we act now — with people in emerging economies the most positive about the role of new technology.

We can avoid climate change, and boost the world's economy — if we act now Reversing the damage is within our grasp, but it will hinge on a strong international climate agreement and policies that make polluters pay

I don't want to come across as a wet blanket, but just as a general comment on prediction (weather, climate, or otherwise): If a prediction is made and believed then people will act on that prediction in order to change the predicted future in some manner if it is in their interest and power to do sIf a prediction is made and believed then people will act on that prediction in order to change the predicted future in some manner if it is in their interest and power to do sif it is in their interest and power to do so.

Plus, he predicts we'll all turn into cannibals if we don't get our act together on climate change.

So here's where we go from here: If you were happy to hear Obama mention his desire to address climate change, you have just opted - in to the movement that will force him to act on this pledge.

That's anecdote, not data, admittedly, but I wouldn't be surprised if the first - time demonstrators against Keystone XL in Washington felt similarly empowered and motivated to continue to act on climate change.