Sentences with phrase «impacts of policy scenarios»

C - ROADS C - ROADS is an award - winning computer simulation that helps people understand the long - term climate impacts of policy scenarios to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Not exact matches

Comparing different policy scenarios to reduce the consumption of ultra-processed foods in UK: impact on cardiovascular disease mortality using a modelling approach

The role of the Climate Change Commission is to gather the latest science and information on climate change impacts to Hawai`i and provide advice and recommendations to the mayor, City Council, and executive departments as they look to draft policy and engage in planning for future climate scenarios.

The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives says it looked at the potential impact of income splitting in three scenarios: on pensions, for those families with children under 18 and for all families across the board.

The model explores short - term scenarios of policy decisions by simulating social - economical - environmental systems, including the impact of climate - induced drought on crop failures and food prices.

The latest relevant ABARE publication («Economic impact of climate change policy», ABARE Research Report 06 - 7) says that global CO2 emissions in its reference case closely follow those under the IPCC's A2 scenario to 2030 and that the latter scenario assumes a decline in economic growth after that year (pps.

(2007) • Contribution of Renewables to Energy Security (2007) • Modelling Investment Risks and Uncertainties with Real Options Approach (2007) • Financing Energy Efficient Homes Existing Policy Responses to Financial Barriers (2007) • CO2 Allowance and Electricity Price Interaction - Impact on Industry's Electricity Purchasing Strategies in Europe (2007) • CO2 Capture Ready Plants (2007) • Fuel - Efficient Road Vehicle Non-Engine Components (2007) • Impact of Climate Change Policy Uncertainty on Power Generation Investments (2006) • Raising the Profile of Energy Efficiency in China — Case Study of Standby Power Efficiency (2006) • Barriers to the Diffusion of Solar Thermal Technologies (2006) • Barriers to Technology Diffusion: The Case of Compact Fluorescent Lamps (2006) • Certainty versus Ambition — Economic Efficiency in Mitigating Climate Change (2006) • Sectoral Crediting Mechanisms for Greenhouse Gas Mitigation: Institutional and Operational Issues (2006) • Sectoral Approaches to GHG Mitigation: Scenarios for Integration (2006) • Energy Efficiency in the Refurbishment of High - Rise Residential Buildings (2006) • Can Energy - Efficient Electrical Appliances Be Considered «Environmental Goods»?

10:30 a.m. Panel II: Scenarios and implications: the impact of potential outcomes David Hunter, US Director, International Emissions Trading Association (moderator) Rob Brenner, Senior Fellow, Nicholas Institute, Duke University; Former EPA Director of the Office of Policy Analysis and Review at the Office of Air and Radiation (invited) William Brownell, Partner, Hunton and Williams Megan Ceronsky, Attorney, Environmental Defense Fund Kyle Danish, Member, Van Ness Feldman

Scenarios represent many of the major driving forces - including processes, impacts (physical, ecological, and socioeconomic), and potential responses that are important for informing climate change policy.

As described in section 1, evaluating climate change impacts on society and the consequences of alternative policy approaches are key goals of the scenario framework.

But the impact on the coal industry is effectively doubled, because under the current policy scenario under which much of the industry is making its investment, coal prices would be «significantly» higher, the IEA says, because of increased demand.

The energy trends envisioned in the New Policies Scenario imply that national commitments to reduce greenhouse - gas emissions, while expected to have some impact, are collectively inadequate to meet the Copenhagen Accord's overall goal of holding the global temperature increase to below 2 °C.

However, an updated and limited set of scenarios that are credible from both a science and a policy perspective, and yet diverse enough to capture key differences among potential deployment strategies will be essential for guiding these impact assessments.

They merely compare the economic impact of the climate policy to a BAU scenario where climate change does not impact the economy.

To summarize, most of these economic analyses agree that a carbon pricing policy will reduce U.S. GDP - growth by less than 1 % over the next 10 — 40 years as compared to an unrealistically optimistic BAU scenario in which climate change does not impact the economy.

The ALP may have been over-emphatic in distancing itself from these numbers; but it would be a reasonable presumption that the modelling should be re-done to assess impacts of changed policy settings (revised scenarios) using new data (revised assumptions).

Forward - looking scenario analysis, focusing on macro - and micro-economic impacts of energy efficiency policy options,

None of these scenarios account for the impact of policy on climate change.

As a result, the likely outcome of the report's release will be more of the same: a welter of scary scenarios, followed by politicians promising huge carbon cuts and expensive policies that have virtually no impact on climate change.

Second, there is an increasing interest in scenarios that explicitly explore the impact of different climate policies in addition to the no - climate - policy scenarios explored so far (e.g. SRES).

For example, distinctions can be made between scenario needs for research in climate scenario development and in the methods of conducting impact assessment (e.g., Woo, 1992; Mearns et al., 1997) and scenario needs for direct application in policy relevant impact and integrated assessments (e.g., Carter et al., 1996a; Smith et al., 1996; Hulme and Jenkins, 1998).

In this report, ACEEE used its state - of - the - art «DEEPER» energy policy model to examine the economic impacts of three cap - and - trade policy scenarios designed to meet goals for reducing carbon emissions.

While DECC predict that climate change and energy policies will cause gas prices to go up by 18 % and electricity prices by 33 % by 2020, they estimate (as of July 2010) that because of reductions in energy use «compared to the counterfactual scenario in which climate change and energy policies do not have an impact on energy bills, on average, domestic energy bills will be 1 % higher in 2020.»

We recommend that the new scenarios be used not only in the IPCC's future assessments of climate change, its impacts, and adaptation and mitigation options, but also as the basis for analyses by the wider research and policy community of climate change and other environmental problems.

Among other positions, Prof. Dr. Nakicenovic is Member of the United Nations Secretary General High - Level Technical Group on Sustainable for Energy for All Initiative; Member of the Advisory Council of the German Government on Global Change (WBGU); Member of the International Council for Science (ICSU) Committee on Scientific Planning and Review; Co-Chair, Scientific Steering Committee of the Global Carbon Project (GCP); Member of the Board, Climate Change Centre Austria (CCCA); Member of the Working Group of the Austrian Panel on Climate Change (AG - APCC); Member of the Panel on Socioeconomic Scenarios for Climate Change Impact and Response Assessments; Member of the Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century (REN21) Steering Committee; Member of the International Advisory Board of the Helmholtz Programme on Technology, and Member of the Earth League.

How scientific results impact public policy is controlled by how much confidence the general public has in the scientific results, and this confidence can be reduced if the public believes that the scientific results consist of «scary scenarios» put forward by scientists primarily in order to influence public policy.

The macroeconomic impacts of reducing greenhouse gas emissions are small, even with our relatively aggressive policy scenarios.

Recent analyses conducted by the Guttmacher Institute have looked at the impact of four different scenarios that align with many of the specific antiabortion policy attacks that have been proposed at the federal and state levels.