Sentences with phrase «policy than mitigation»

Uh... if you don't care about the science, what makes you think adaptation is a more cost - effective public policy than mitigation?

However the science ends up, this Luke warmer thinks that adaptation is a more cost - effective public policy than mitigation.

Not exact matches

«National drought policies with effective early warning systems would be crucial in promoting vulnerability assessment and risk mitigation measures, particularly in light of the devastating droughts witnessed in Africa this year that have left more than 20 million people on the verge of starvation,» she added.

His work has shown that limiting cumulative emissions of carbon dioxide may be a more robust approach to climate change mitigation policy than attempting to define a «safe» stabilization level for atmospheric greenhouse gases.

There are also much, much better ways to justify climate mitigation policies than with hurricanes (e.g., Rayner 2004).»

One of the most important facts you deny is that, without evidence that GHG emissions will do more harm than good there is no justification for mitigation policies.

A Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) report by Willem de Lange and Bob Carter suggest that, with regards to sea level change «adaptation is more cost - effective than mitigation.»

What this leads to is that scaremongering has no effect on me other than to make me more determined to educate people to realise what would be the cost to humanity of the irrational mitigation policies proposed by the CAGW Alarmists.

«Rather than justifying a lack of response to climate change, the emphasis on uncertainty enlarges the risk and reinforces the responsibility for pursuing successful long - term mitigation policy,» according to a 2010 analysis by researchers at Sandia National Laboratory.

It finds in all cases that efforts to reduce vulnerability to losses, often called climate adaptation, have far greater potential effectiveness to reduce damage related to tropical cyclones than efforts to modulate the behaviour of storms through greenhouse gas emissions reduction policies, typically called climate mitigation and achieved through energy policies.

The bulk of mitigation occurs via other policies, whose implicit carbon prices are often much higher than in the market.

The likelihood of Australia being invaded by a foreign power this century is probably less than 30 per cent, yet we spend and will go on spending more on defence than on any conceivable climate change mitigation policy.

It assumes that atmospheric levels of CO2 equivalents can not rise above 450 parts per million if we are to avoid «dangerous» climate change of more than 2 ºC and then looks at the mitigation that policy - makers would need to pursue to achieve that.

Since we do not have these models, it seems impossible to support anything other than «no regrets» policies on the issue and that those supporting expensive climate mitigation actions to be doing so not based on the science, but on their personal set of belief system.

Policies like spending more than they are taking in financially are as poor economic policy as are most climate mitigation pPolicies like spending more than they are taking in financially are as poor economic policy as are most climate mitigation policiespolicies.

-LSB-...] you can accept all the basic tenets of greenhouse physics and still conclude that the threat of a dangerously large warming is so improbable as to be negligible, while the threat of real harm from climate - mitigation policies is already so high as to be worrying, that the cure is proving far worse than the disease is ever likely to be,» Ridley said in the 2011 Angus Millar speech on «Scientific Heresy,» reposted in its entirety at the skeptical blog Watts Up With That.

The study cites Spencer and Bast along with other «manufacturers of doubt,» whose work to undermine the public understanding of this consensus has been stunningly successful — only 12 percent of Americans, their previous work found, know that more than 90 percent of scientists agree on this — and has resulted in «cascading effects on public understanding that climate change is happening, human caused, a serious threat, and in turn, support for climate change mitigation and adaptation policies.»

If you think you have a better way to quantify and present the global net - benefits of GHG mitigation policies than the globally accepted standard, please show the equivalent chart in units of measure you deem appropriate, provide links to the basis for it, method, inputs, assumptions, and all else needed to be able to understand it and reproduce it (as I di for the above chart: https://anglejournal.com/article/2015-11-why-carbon-pricing-will-not-succeed/.

Rather than public evaluation of the evidence, independent validation of the models, and robust public debate over adaptation vs mitigation, climate alarmists like Lewandowsky et al. try to frustrate the scientific method, prevent debate, and impose their incredibly expensive mitigation policies.

You observed a few months ago that «the net benefit of the mitigation policies would be far lower than the red line on the chart» (https://judithcurry.com/2016/08/16/cop21-developing-countries/#comment-804327).

I've plotted the DICE net - benefit of mitigation policies per 5 years for just this century, rather than plotting cumulative out to 2300, which is commonly done but hides the reality of the negative net costs this century.

And I can't run models, other than simple ones in Excel where I can change input parameters and view the results — preferably in the charts I am most interested in; e.g., your Figure 3 here http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-012-0613-3 and my Figure 1 from DICE - 2013R outputs showing net benefit of mitigation policies per 5 years to 2100 (posted @ December 30, 2016 at 10:52 pm up thread).

If you want effective mitigation policy you need to be more than heard.

Which is to say, an outcome of limited harm that is more appropriately handled through mitigation and adaptation rather than radical socio - economic - political policies.

advocating for GHG mitigation policies given they will almost certainly cost far more than current projections and deliver no net benefits from reduced climate damages?

On the other hand, the proposed mitigation policies will increase the probability of worse well - being, than would otherwise be the case, for a large proportion of the global population.

Plus, it's «a general principle,» the report notes, that «mitigation policies that raise government revenue generally have lower social costs than approaches which do not.»

The prescribed cure is worse than the disease; the mitigation policies proposed to date would deliver no measurable change to the climate or sea levels but would cost the world dearly.

There are also much, much better ways to justify climate mitigation policies than with hurricanes....»

Put more crudely, setting mitigation policy goals that can not and will not be met, either because they are aiming beyond the scope of the knowable and do - able or because national political interests make them unrealistic and unattainable, is itself in practice less ethical than setting goals that are lower, but more readily achievable.

With this criticism: ``... setting mitigation policy goals that can not and will not be met, either because they are aiming beyond the scope of the knowable and do - able or because national political interests make them unrealistic and unattainable, is itself in practice less ethical than setting goals that are lower, but more readily achievable.»

Posted in Advocacy, Carbon, Development and Climate Change, Environment, Global Warming, Government Policies, Green House Gas Emissions, International Agencies, Lessons, Mitigation, News, Opinion, Pollution, Vulnerability Comments Off on Asia Cuts Its Carbon Faster Than Europe

It is hard to imagine that Socolow's comments can be in reference to anyone other than Romm, who has probably done more to confuse issues of mitigation policy than anyone.

«No later than 90 days after issuance of this Mortgagee Letter, mortgagees must begin to assess mortgagors in default under FHA's loss mitigation priority order and policies referenced herein.»