Sentences with phrase «arguing over climate change»

We're still arguing over climate change and to some extent I can understand that; local knowledge has been passed down through five generations of farmers.

Not exact matches

The Republican Party's fast journey from debating how to combat human - caused climate change to arguing that it does not exist is a story of big political money, Democratic hubris in the Obama years and a partisan chasm that grew over nine years like a crack in the Antarctic shelf, favouring extreme positions and uncompromising rhetoric over co-operation and conciliation.

In addition to suing over Clean Power Plan regulations, Pruitt has argued that climate activists should be prosecuted, and that debate over whether climate change is human - made should be encouraged in classrooms and Congress — despite overwhelming scientific evidence that the debate is settled.

After the park board approved the project over the summer, opponents continued to argue that placing the interpretive center near the shore could lead to the structure being damaged by the elements due to inclement weather and climate change.

As Matthew Hoffmann has argued [2], the ozone negotiations marked a normative shift over the desirability of universal participation in global environmental negotiations, a shift that was locked into the initial negotiations on climate change.

(I take your point that failure to achieve this might legitimate peaceful civil disobedience; I wouldn't see that it could legitimate prioritising climate change over democratic means, which has been argued eg by Mayer Hillman).

In a report published this morning, the Environment, Food & Rural Affairs Committee argued Defra must now concentrate on rural communities, given that its climate change brief has been shifted over to the new Department of Energy and Climate climate change brief has been shifted over to the new Department of Energy and Climate Cchange brief has been shifted over to the new Department of Energy and Climate Climate ChangeChange.

Soon after the delay to the decision was announced by Hoon last Christmas, the Miliband and Benn camps both contacted the Institute for Public Policy Research, over a pamphlet by Simon Retallack, the IPPR's head of climate change, arguing that the third runway should not go ahead unless the government required aircraft using it to meet the aviation industry's own targets to cut carbon dioxide emissions and noise in new aircraft by 50 % and nitrogen oxides by 80 % by 2020.

Rather than arguing over the science of climate change, public discussion should be about actions needed to address it, he said.

In a changing climate, civil engineer Paul Kirshen argues, facilities will have to adapt to changing conditions over their useful lives — and, in some instances, be allowed to fail.

Over the past year, a number of prominent Republican voices have argued their party must rethink its long - standing opposition to measures designed to address climate change.

Most famously, in 2003, Soon co-authored a paper in the journal Climate Research that questioned the standard interpretation of climate change over the past millennium and argued that recent warming is not unusual by historical staClimate Research that questioned the standard interpretation of climate change over the past millennium and argued that recent warming is not unusual by historical staclimate change over the past millennium and argued that recent warming is not unusual by historical standards.

Author Madeleine Somerville argues that access to basic reproductive health services would help women around the world take greater ownership over their bodies and in turn ease the overpopulation crisis that's spurring climate change.

Can it be argued given the paleoclimate evidence for abrupt climate changes that there is likely no strong negative feedback over any meaningful time scale?

Even for the Senate, where members are well - known to prefer talking to listening, the amount of unilateral jabbering on the climate change bill has been remarkable, with lawmakers both for and against the measure arguing repeatedly over how much time was allotted for them to speak.

Instead of developing plans to move to a greener, zero - emissions economy, we're still arguing over the pace, causes, and consequences of climate change.

One can argue over how serious any one of these climate - driven changes are, and whether or not they are harmful.

Earlier in this suit over fossil fuel funding, says the LAT, the Bush administration argued that «alleged impacts of global climate change are too remote and speculative» to be part of project reviews.

For instance, opponents of US government action on climate change have for over 30 years predominantly argued against proposed policies on two grounds.

Physicists and climate scientists have long argued over whether changes to the Sun affect the Earth's climate?

Drawing on case studies of past environmental debates such as those over acid rain and ozone depletion, science policy experts Roger Pielke Jr. and Daniel Sarewitz argue that once next generation technologies are available that make meaningful action on climate change lower - cost, then much of the argument politically over scientific uncertainty is likely to diminish.26 Similarly, research by Yale University's Dan Kahan and colleagues suggest that building political consensus on climate change will depend heavily on advocates for action calling attention to a diverse mix of options, with some actions such as tax incentives for nuclear energy, government support for clean energy research, or actions to protect cities and communities against climate risks, more likely to gain support from both Democrats and Republicans.

OF course many skeptics kid themselves over this as well, by taking a few extreme examples, and arguing that people want climate change to be a problem.

In 2008, Monbiot seemed to agree, arguing that the eco-anarcho-socialists gathered at Climate Camp were undermining themselves: «Stopping runaway climate change must take precedence over every other aim», hClimate Camp were undermining themselves: «Stopping runaway climate change must take precedence over every other aim», hclimate change must take precedence over every other aim», he said.

Brazil's setting aside of more than 500,000 square miles (1.25 million square kilometers) of rainforest in protected areas over the past decade may effectively buffer the Amazon from the effects of climate change, preventing Earth's largest rainforest from tipping towards arid savanna in the face of ongoing deforestation and rising temperatures, argues a new paper published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).

In an increasingly familiar trope, he argued that the climate change movement has become popularized because it gives politicians an excuse to exert more control over society.

Over and over again opponents of climate change policies have argued that nations need not act to reduce the threat of climate change because there are scientific uncertainties about the magnitude and timing of human - induced climate change impaOver and over again opponents of climate change policies have argued that nations need not act to reduce the threat of climate change because there are scientific uncertainties about the magnitude and timing of human - induced climate change impaover again opponents of climate change policies have argued that nations need not act to reduce the threat of climate change because there are scientific uncertainties about the magnitude and timing of human - induced climate change impacts.

Over the last few years the nuclear industry has used concerns about climate change to argue for a nuclear revival.

Inslee is optimistic and eager, having left his longstanding position as a US Congressman to do more good (he hopes) and battle climate change (rather than arguing with Republicans over its existence).

The United States and India have little in the way of deforestation that can be avoided, and argue that recognizing only credits from REDD would punish countries that had been reforesting or protecting their forests (for more on the debate over baselining, see Carbon and Avoided Deforestation: the Road to Bali or Climate Change and Forestry: a REDD Primer).

March, 2008 Fred Singer was involved in creating the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), a venture partly funded by the Heartland Institute (which currently contributes over $ 300,000 per year to funding the report) and which is designed to be a counterpoint to the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), except which argues that climate change is due to natural Climate Change (NIPCC), a venture partly funded by the Heartland Institute (which currently contributes over $ 300,000 per year to funding the report) and which is designed to be a counterpoint to the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), except which argues that climate change is due to natural cChange (NIPCC), a venture partly funded by the Heartland Institute (which currently contributes over $ 300,000 per year to funding the report) and which is designed to be a counterpoint to the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), except which argues that climate change is due to natural Climate Change (IPCC), except which argues that climate change is due to natural cChange (IPCC), except which argues that climate change is due to natural climate change is due to natural cchange is due to natural causes.

Those possible liabilities could result, the lawyers argue, from future suits over the flood damage to low - lying property anticipated from rising sea levels sparked by climate change, produced by the combustion of the fossil fuels they produce.

Instead of arguing for factories, roads, infrastructure (all the things which made Western lives better) Oxfam uses climate change to create the idea of victims and culprits, in an argument for» sustainablity» over development.

Here, we argue that the twentieth and twenty - first centuries, a period during which the overwhelming majority of human - caused carbon emissions are likely to occur, need to be placed into a long - term context that includes the past 20 millennia, when the last Ice Age ended and human civilization developed, and the next ten millennia, over which time the projected impacts of anthropogenic climate change will grow and persist.

Glaciologists are this week arguing over how a highly contentious claim about the speed at which glaciers are melting came to be included in the latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

At the time the committee's primer was drawn up, policy makers in the United States and abroad were arguing over the scope of the international climate - change agreement that in 1997 became the Kyoto Protocol.

It argues that the IPCC's «heroic days» of «Herculean work» are probably over, more frequent assessments focused on policy challenges are required, and the wider review of science made possible by the blogosphere can help: New Scientist says because the case for anthropogenic climate change is firmly established («the Nobel prize is won») the IPCC really needs to revision itself.

The fact that the earth appears to have gone through huge changes in atmospheric CO2 concentration over geologic eras, while the estimated temps went from 12degC to 22 deg C regardless of «Snowball Earth» or «Cretaceous Hot House» with both hot and cold periods occurring during both high and low CO2 regimes and both with and without ice caps argues very strongly that we do not understand the climate mechanism at all.

The total energy change over a solar cycle is quite small, which has led many to argue that solar variability has little impact on climate.

Steve S beats me to it, but here's a Myles Allen quote anyway: I have argued for years that the odds on a high climate sensitivity are largely irrelevant to the warming we should expect over the coming century, and I certainly never suggested to David that my assessment of the odds on any particular level of warming by 2100 had changed.

Argues that the twentieth and twenty - first centuries, a period during which the overwhelming majority of human - caused carbon emissions are likely to occur, need to be placed into a long - term context that includes the past 20 millennia, when the last Ice Age ended and human civilization developed, and the next ten millennia, over which time the projected impacts of anthropogenic climate change will grow and persist

In the end, while some still argue over the potential impact (and even the very existence) of climate change, what is clear is that governments, investors and customers have become engaged and are taking action.

Instead of arguing over semantics (global warming vs climate change), or possible deception from the powers that be, can't we just recognize that there is a very obvious problem with very real and obvious solutions that aren't being put in place for whatever reason?

While climate change is a topic of much political debate these days, buildings and tenants have decided to plan for the unexpected, rather than argue over it.