Sentences with phrase «for political action on climate change»

Depending on who you ask, there were 30,000, 40,000, even 50,000 people in Washington, D.C., Sunday to lobby for political action on climate change.

Demands for political action on climate change sit behind claims about climate science, and are assumed to flow from it, a priori.

And it is on this fact that much of the moral argument for political action on climate change rests.

In what may prove to be a turning point for political action on climate change, a breathtaking new study casts extreme doubt about the near - term stability of global sea levels.

Not exact matches

Among the factors that could cause actual results to differ materially are the following: (1) worldwide economic, political, and capital markets conditions and other factors beyond the Company's control, including natural and other disasters or climate change affecting the operations of the Company or its customers and suppliers; (2) the Company's credit ratings and its cost of capital; (3) competitive conditions and customer preferences; (4) foreign currency exchange rates and fluctuations in those rates; (5) the timing and market acceptance of new product offerings; (6) the availability and cost of purchased components, compounds, raw materials and energy (including oil and natural gas and their derivatives) due to shortages, increased demand or supply interruptions (including those caused by natural and other disasters and other events); (7) the impact of acquisitions, strategic alliances, divestitures, and other unusual events resulting from portfolio management actions and other evolving business strategies, and possible organizational restructuring; (8) generating fewer productivity improvements than estimated; (9) unanticipated problems or delays with the phased implementation of a global enterprise resource planning (ERP) system, or security breaches and other disruptions to the Company's information technology infrastructure; (10) financial market risks that may affect the Company's funding obligations under defined benefit pension and postretirement plans; and (11) legal proceedings, including significant developments that could occur in the legal and regulatory proceedings described in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10 - K for the year ended Dec. 31, 2017, and any subsequent quarterly reports on Form 10 - Q (the «Reports»).

While the massive rally has prompted New York City elected officials to be more responsive to the need to take action on climate change, it has had little impact on state and national political leaders who used their partisan gridlock to avoid needed action on this and many other critical issues while promoting increased wealth and tax giveaways for the 1 %.

It tracks progress on health and climate change across 40 indicators divided into five categories: climate change impacts, exposures and vulnerability; adaptation planning and resilience for health; mitigation actions and health co-benefits; economics and finance; and public and political engagement.

The goal five years ago was to build momentum to «seal the deal» on a binding climate treaty — a fruitless task given the divisions among the world's nations — while this conclave was centered on a more modest, but more concrete, achievement — «to raise political momentum for a meaningful universal climate agreement [notice there's no mention of the word «binding»] in Paris in 2015 and to galvanize transformative action in all countries to reduce emissions and build resilience to the adverse impacts of climate change.»

This is to say that the «consensus» has political, rather than practical utility: it is more useful to the task of mobilising towards «action on climate change» than it is informing the debate about what kind of problem climate change is, and what the options for dealing with it are.

See the video of Prof. Mike Hulme for a resounding challenge to political arguments for action on climate change, based on the idea that the consensus is that global warming will cause catastrophe.

As we point out in other posts, many (if not all) political arguments for action on climate change seem to be out of kilter with the «consensus» — take, for example, our many posts on Caroline Lucas, who invents the «consensus» on the fly.

But, according to Nisbet, he can be faulted for offering «arguments for action on climate change that evoke a vision of the future that reflects his own values and priorities, rather than a broad, pragmatic set of choices designed to both effectively manage the problem and to align a diversity of political interests in support of policy action.»

The core of the issue that I worry most about, as do others, is that arguments for action on climate change that evoke only one particular vision of the future will reflect only the priorities and values of certain parties, rather than a broad, pragmatic set of choices designed to both effectively manage the problem of climate change and align a diversity of political interests in support of policy action.

There's plenty of room for argument over what to do about climate change, but cheap political point scoring of the «you didn't vote for the ETS so you don't want action on climate change» is not helpful.

In this context, for the Administration to have released a U.S. Climate Action Report with a chapter on climate change impacts that identified a range of likely adverse consequences, based on scientific reports including the National Assessment, could rightly be seen as an anomaly and appeared to be seen as a significant political error by Administration allies dedicated to denying the reality of human - induced global warming as a significant pClimate Action Report with a chapter on climate change impacts that identified a range of likely adverse consequences, based on scientific reports including the National Assessment, could rightly be seen as an anomaly and appeared to be seen as a significant political error by Administration allies dedicated to denying the reality of human - induced global warming as a significant pclimate change impacts that identified a range of likely adverse consequences, based on scientific reports including the National Assessment, could rightly be seen as an anomaly and appeared to be seen as a significant political error by Administration allies dedicated to denying the reality of human - induced global warming as a significant problem.

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.

When and if the urgency of climate change dawns on more of the political spectrum, they may be ready for immediate action by any means, perhaps even advanced nuclear (but non-carbon) power.

Both Romm and advocacy organizations such as Media Matters for America raise their financial support and define their professional roles as watch dogging the mainstream media, asserting that consistent false balance in mainstream coverage at leading outlets such as the NY Times or the Washington Post remains a major barrier to political action on climate change and that conservative media like Fox News have a powerful impact on wider public opinion.

On the other hand, campaigns that focus only on demand - side policy, on the population's demand for cheap, polluting fuel, tend to overlook the effects of the massive political - economic disinformation campaign by the fossil fuel industries and their political surrogates on laming climate action once human - caused climate change was recognized internationally as a problem around 25 years agOn the other hand, campaigns that focus only on demand - side policy, on the population's demand for cheap, polluting fuel, tend to overlook the effects of the massive political - economic disinformation campaign by the fossil fuel industries and their political surrogates on laming climate action once human - caused climate change was recognized internationally as a problem around 25 years agon demand - side policy, on the population's demand for cheap, polluting fuel, tend to overlook the effects of the massive political - economic disinformation campaign by the fossil fuel industries and their political surrogates on laming climate action once human - caused climate change was recognized internationally as a problem around 25 years agon the population's demand for cheap, polluting fuel, tend to overlook the effects of the massive political - economic disinformation campaign by the fossil fuel industries and their political surrogates on laming climate action once human - caused climate change was recognized internationally as a problem around 25 years agon laming climate action once human - caused climate change was recognized internationally as a problem around 25 years ago.

Along the way, he has hosted major political fundraisers for Democratic Congressional leaders and President Obama, lobbying for stronger action on climate change, including rejecting the Keystone XL pipeline.1, 2

Real Climate «has clearly aligned itself squarely with one political position on climate change» — January 14, 2005 — Excerpt: The site's focus has been exclusively on attacking those who invoke science as the basis for their opposition to action on climate change, folks such as George Will, Senator James Inhofe, Michael Crichton, McIntyre and McKitrick, Fox News, and MyronClimate «has clearly aligned itself squarely with one political position on climate change» — January 14, 2005 — Excerpt: The site's focus has been exclusively on attacking those who invoke science as the basis for their opposition to action on climate change, folks such as George Will, Senator James Inhofe, Michael Crichton, McIntyre and McKitrick, Fox News, and Myronclimate change» — January 14, 2005 — Excerpt: The site's focus has been exclusively on attacking those who invoke science as the basis for their opposition to action on climate change, folks such as George Will, Senator James Inhofe, Michael Crichton, McIntyre and McKitrick, Fox News, and Myronclimate change, folks such as George Will, Senator James Inhofe, Michael Crichton, McIntyre and McKitrick, Fox News, and Myron Ebell.

Targets in 2025 will be too late if we continue with the weak proposals for the next six years - you face a political and physical imperative to drastically change direction on immediate climate action.

Way, way back in the 2000s, when everyone believed in Hockey Sticks, the UK's Labour government commissioned somebody nobody had ever heard of to write a report on the economics of climate change, so that it could make an argument for domestic and international political action.

Political focus on tackling climate change has dropped since Paris talks, but need for urgent action remains writes Thoriq Ibrahim

The study - published in this spring's Sociological Quarterly - documents opinions on global warming, and seems to confirm that global warming has become yet another political totem issue; a worrying sign for the chances of moving forward from debate to action on slowing climate change

Probably, the major issue that forces us as individuals to take action is health and in so far, no socio - environmental issue like climate change has given rise to such international political and institutional movement, and societal initiatives, including governmental and non-governmental ones, devising strategies in sectors like Energy and so on — for instance, biodiversity maintenance does not have that power!

«India's leadership builds on the continued strong political momentum from Paris for urgent global action on climate change,» the U.N. spokesman's office said in a statement.

Also, check out the events of Global Climate Week, September 21 - 25, for more ways you can personally take political action on climate Climate Week, September 21 - 25, for more ways you can personally take political action on climate climate change.

The response from political leaders has mostly been to reiterate their generic injunctions even more emphatically: «we should act on climate change» becomes «the time for action is now!»

And in a more general sense, given the twists and turns of American politics in recent years — since 2005 the conventional wisdom has gone from permanent Republican domination to permanent Democratic domination to God knows what — there has to be a real chance that political support for action on climate change will revive.

«As we're in the run up to the next big set of negotiations in Paris this year, it seems from the data in the study that there is quite a mandate for UK political action at the international level on climate change.»