«The most salient
arguments around climate change are associated with health impacts,» he said.
Not exact matches
revolves
around an ethical
argument he made a decade ago on the economics of
climate change in his famous «Stern Review.»
Because a high percentage of the
arguments made by most proponents of
climate change policy have been focused on adverse
climate impacts that citizens will experience where they live, while ignoring the harms to hundreds of millions of vulnerable poor people
around the world that are being affected by GHG emissions from all - high emitting nations, along with claims that mainstream
climate science is credible and has been undermined by morally reprehensible tactics, there is a need to make more people aware of:
We track the subsidies the industry receives; we analyze industry - friendly
arguments around extreme fossil fuel extraction; and we show the impact of fossil fuels on the economy, energy security and
climate change.
It is too bad, as Andrew Price notes, that the «need to stop
climate change» is not seen as an effective enough
argument to convince Americans to rally
around clean energy legislation.
In her article «Rough Forecasts,» (April 14, 2014) Elizabeth Kolbert used the global ban on CFCs to foreground her
argument that it is time to stop «standing
around and waiting» when dealing with
climate change.