Climate
change mitigation therefore urgently needs carbon removal technologies.
Not exact matches
Arguing against
mitigation by appealing to uncertainty is
therefore misplaced: any appeal to uncertainty should provoke a greater, rather than weaker, concern about climate
change than in the absence of uncertainty.
The scientists conclude that agroforestry should
therefore attract more attention in global agendas on climate
change mitigation because of its positive social and environmental impacts.
Emphasizing that developed countries bear the overwhelming historic responsibility for causing anthropogenic climate
change and must
therefore take the lead in responding to the challenge across all four building blocks of an enhanced international climate
change regime — namely
mitigation, adaption, technology and finance — that builds - upon the U.N.F.C.C.C. and its Kyoto Protocol.
Customers, investors, regulators and the public sector are
therefore pressing for greater consideration of climate
change issues and contributions to
mitigation actions.
Therefore, e.g. the «Baden - Württemberg Climate Protection and Energy Agency» acts as a think tank for technical climate protection issues and promotes awareness for climate
change and
mitigation strategies.
While it has long been known that cost - effective energy efficiency measures are beneficial to economic welfare and
therefore worth pursuing on grounds other than climate
change mitigation, the magnitude of rebound effects and their implications for the utility of energy efficiency as a climate
change mitigation strategy remain contested.
Here's where this «loophole of uncertainty» comes into play - because China has implemented actions that address climate
change through its Eleventh Five - Year Plan since 2005 and has internally funding all of its energy efficiency measures and
mitigation actions (and furthermore hasn't asked for any funding with regards to their 40 - 45 % reduction in carbon intensity by 2020 from 2005 levels), China would
therefore be exempt from international MRV if this text is eventually agreed upon.
Therefore, what balance between adaptation (dealing with whatever happens) and
mitigation (doing something about the emissions that contribute to climate
change) is likely to be more cost effective is not a question within the remit of the IPCC (although many options are discussed in the WG III report).
Therefore, knowledge on the Time of Emergence (ToE), or the years that the human contributions to climate
change will become more important than natural variability in causing heat waves, is crucial for better
mitigation and adaptation efforts.