«The importance of experiential learning creates several challenges to a public consensus needed to implement
meaningful climate change policy,» the researchers write.
In general, there are sound reasons to seek to compensate consumers for the energy price increases that will be brought about by a cap - and - trade system, or
any meaningful climate change policy.
Not exact matches
«Programs or
policies that help reduce the cost and difficulty of making long - term
changes or that bring in whole communities to make long - term
changes together can help support people to take big steps that have a
meaningful impact on the
climate.»
It's unfortunate that this loss or delay of valuable information that would support solid
policy shift on mitigating
climate change and reducing impacts including saving human lives, is not given more
meaningful coverage in mainstream press.
However, as the Agreement's key
policies are yet to be realized, member states have both an exceptional opportunity and a moral impetus to use these results to address
climate change equity in a
meaningful manner.
House Democrats pressing for action on
climate policy are having to resort to various work - arounds, in a situation where it is difficult even to get a
meaningful climate change hearing, and for now impossible to move significant legislation.
A particularly hot autumn and winter could add to the pressure on
policy makers to reach a
meaningful deal at December's
climate -
change negotiations in Copenhagen.
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.
During this time, the
climate change disinformation campaign also successfully prevented enactment of
meaningful US domestic
climate change laws and
policies.
These questions are organized according to the most frequent arguments made against
climate change policies which are claims that
climate change policies: (a) will impose unacceptable costs on a national economy or specific industries or prevent nations from pursuing other national priorities, (b) should not be adopted because of scientific uncertainty about
climate change impacts, or (c) are both unfair and ineffective as long as high emitting nations such as China or India do not adopt
meaningful ghg emissions reduction
policies.
There is a
meaningful issue issue, IMO, where there is crossover / confusion / conflation between discussion of the science of
climate change and positions on the
policy implications of the science.
«Billions are being wasted on
climate change policies which will have no
meaningful impact on the
climate and the science supporting alarmist
climate theories is also crumbling.
These two articles perfectly encapsulate two of the problems that have plagued our approach to
climate change over the last 8 years: Delay any
meaningful action on reducing emissions and, instead of adopting sound, far - reaching
policies, take shortsighted, politically convenient half - steps.
The study's author, Robert Brulle, refers to these organizations as the
climate change counter-movement, and concludes that their outsized influence «has not only played a major role in confounding public understanding of
climate science, but also successfully delayed
meaningful government
policy actions to address the issue.»