While I am still comfortable with my argument that «human inertia» is the prime explanation for a long response time for doing
anything about greenhouse gas emissions, I am very wary of efforts by California and the U.K. to stick their necks out on carbon reductions.
Not exact matches
The Bush administration made clear today that it doesn't intend to do
anything about climate change in the final six months in office, announcing that instead of responding to the Supreme Court's mandate last year that the EPA determine the dangers posed to humankind by
greenhouse -
gas emissions they would simply request further public comment.
It's immediately clear that climate models are unable to resolve any thermal effect of
greenhouse gas emissions or tell us
anything about future air temperatures.
I have absolutely no doubt that at the current rate of [
greenhouse gas emissions] we can cross a tipping point, and when that occurs it's too late to do
anything about it.»
Does section 202 of the Clean Air Act, the provision through which EPA is promulgating motor vehicle
greenhouse gas emission standards, say
anything about fuel economy?
The fundamental conflict is of what (if
anything) we should do
about greenhouse gas emissions (and other assorted pollutants), not what the weather was like 1000 years ago.