Sentences with phrase «considered business as usual»

Technical additionality is demonstrated since the technology is not considered business as usual on U.S. dairy farms and requires special technical skills.

It seems crazy in hindsight, but this was considered business as usual during the housing boom.

Not exact matches

Not Business As Usual (the entire hour - long doc is below if you want to give it a view) asks viewers to consider not just a long - term view of how to build a business, but also a holistic — or «conscious» — consideration of how one's business affects the people involved in it, and the planet it relies onBusiness As Usual (the entire hour - long doc is below if you want to give it a view) asks viewers to consider not just a long - term view of how to build a business, but also a holistic — or «conscious» — consideration of how one's business affects the people involved in it, and the planet it relies onbusiness, but also a holistic — or «conscious» — consideration of how one's business affects the people involved in it, and the planet it relies onbusiness affects the people involved in it, and the planet it relies on to run.

Looking at the headline figures, first quarter 2018 could be considered a business - as - usual quarter for the European fund industry, since the assets under management (+ $ 10.5 trn) hit a...

One could certainly make the point that in this environment, with a thirsty U.S. Attorney who is willing to investigate what has always been considered «business as usual» in New York State, everyone needs to be extra special careful about navigating and recognizing the boundaries when it comes to political fundraising which (rightly or wrongly) exist for a reason.

According to the New York Times, the two cases have had a «chilling effect in the Capitol,» with lawmakers afraid to do much legislating for fear that what they consider «business as usual» will be interpreted as corruption by investigators.

To derive the climate projections for this assessment, we employed 20 general circulation models to consider two scenarios of global carbon emissions: one where atmospheric greenhouse gases are stabilized by the end of the century and the other where it grows on its current path (the stabilization [RCP4.5] and business - as - usual [RCP8.5] emission scenarios, respectively).

This analysis considers two plausible greenhouse gas concentration scenarios: a moderate (stabilized) and more severe (business - as - usual) scenario, referred to as RCP4.5 and RCP8.5, respectively.

Though I'm a little astonished to see it's business as usual in the UK, considering the Kennedy loan issues in Ireland... But FRM's a small company — there's far more upside for David Kennedy to try raise new equity / rebuild the company (vs. screwing existing minority shareholders).

From the Whitney's rebirth and the Guggenheim's death throes to MoMA's solid business as usual, consider the year in review.

Let us consider that it could become dangerous to life as know it on Earth for the human community much longer to pursue the prized «business as usual» course of the predominant culture: unbridled overproduction, unrestrained overconsumption and unchecked overpopulation because, when these distinctly human activities are taken together, an overpowering force of nature exists that could become unsustainable on the relatively small, evident finite, noticeably frangible planet God blesses us to inhabit and steward, and surely not to overwhelm.

I don't know about you, but as a parent and human, I don't feel that «business as usual» is nearly good enough in terms of how our generation considers matters that will impact our kids, future generations, and other species.

Certainly we are gaining commitments and financial support from many different stakeholders (including the cruise lines) to this process but perhaps the most profound effect of this project is getting everyone to rethink business as usual and instead consider what it is that they can do to change certain aspects of their own business to create a better experience for the tourist, the local host community and at the same time help protect some of the World's most special places.

Timothy Chase > But when one considers the droughts and famine which are virtually a given with the current business - as - usual approach...

But when one considers the droughts and famine which are virtually a given with the current business - as - usual approach, changing our trajectory over time while we have the time would seem the proper course.

«We have considered cases ranging from business as usual, which is scenario A, to draconian emission cuts, scenario C, which assumes zero effects from changing levels of CO2 after the year 2000 ″

There is also the question of what groups like IEA [International Energy Agency] and EIA [U.S. Energy Information Administration] are considering «business as usual» for China.

Yes, China's energy intensity target could be considered as business - as - usual if you want to be technical about it, since it is existing policy.

When expanded to consider the need to adapt to a changing climate, it is clear that business as usual with nitrogen and phosphorus will enhance our risks and make adaptation to climate change more difficult.

You've altered this to «We have considered cases ranging from business as usual, which is scenario A, to draconian emission cuts, scenario C, which assumes zero effects from CO2 after the year 2000

I still await an explanation of how he considers making a defective model fit to just two points out of 648 available data sufficient grounds for pretending it represents «business as usual» and projecting it 90y into the future.

«We have considered cases ranging from business as usual [BAU], which is scenario A, to draconian emission cuts, scenario C, which would totally eliminate net trace gas growth by year 2000.»

This allows us to challenge business - as - usual approaches that we consider to be unsustainable in the face of the unprecedented challenge posed by climate change.

There are always emissions associated with cows and compost, and, when considered in sum, the methods of the Marin Carbon project actually amounted to a huge reduction from business as usual.

However, and despite the fact that it would represent a dramatic change from business as usual, the Weak 2 °C pathway, difficult though it may be, is widely considered achievable.

But it looks like the Soil Association is not advocating business as usual in any shape or form, as Policy Director Peter Melchett explains — organic farming needs to be considered as part of a wider rethink of our destructive food systems:

The IPCC does not characterize this as «business as usual» and it was selected because it was near the high end (90th percentile) of various non-mitigation scenarios, all of which could be considered to be business as usual scenarios.

IMO it's misleading, because the US administration is still insisting (a) on only discussing emissions intensity targets (for reducing, not total emissions, but only the rate of growth of US emissions), and US emissions intensity will reduce even under business as usual; and (b) the US administration is still insisting on only considering voluntary targets, despite the fact that even many major US corporations are calling for mandatory caps and despite the fact that there is no evidence that their existing voluntary targets have made any difference.