The content of AGDP's workplan will focus in particular on «enhancing mitigation ambition to identify and to explore options for a range of actions that can close the ambition gap with a view to ensuring the highest
possible mitigation efforts by all Parties.»
Decision 1 / CP.19 requested the ADP to accelerate its conduct of the workplan on enhancing mitigation ambition to identify and to explore options for a range of actions that can close the ambition gap, with a view to ensuring the highest
possible mitigation efforts by all Parties in the context of decision 1 / CP.17, paragraphs 7 and 8.
By the same decision, the COP launched a workplan on enhancing mitigation ambition to identify and to explore options for a range of actions that can close the ambition gap with a view to ensuring the highest
possible mitigation efforts by all Parties.
Though the same decision, the COP decided to launch a workplan on enhancing mitigation ambition to identify and explore options for a range of actions that can close the ambition gap, with a view to ensuring the highest
possible mitigation efforts by all Parties.
In Lima, the COP, by decision 1 / CP.20, reiterated its resolve to enhance ambition in the pre-2020 period in order to ensure the highest
possible mitigation efforts under the Convention by all Parties.
Not exact matches
The Irondequoit Democrat says some of the money would help affected property and business owners, another portion would go to local governments and some funds would also be set aside to plan
mitigation efforts against
possible damage in future years.
Those projections on how the Chilean economy would evolve without any
efforts to reduce its greenhouse gases are expected to help define different
mitigation measures and
possible scenarios.
These significant philanthropic contributions have leveraged public funding — including funds from the San Francisco International Airport wetlands
mitigation agreement — to make this ambitious, multi-year restoration
effort possible.
Interestingly, Hoerling immediately raises the climate policy issue (stating that
mitigation efforts would not prevent extremes) and even denounces our Perspective as «policy - direct», even though we do not even mention policy — it is simply not the topic of our article, we exclusively discuss scientific questions and we point out at the outset that societal impacts and
possible policy strategies are discussed in the SREX.
To begin
mitigation, we do a moon - shot
effort to develop small nuclear plants that can be built on an assembly line and deploy them wherever
possible, which would be just about anywhere power is needed.
It entails a search for synergies across climate change
mitigation - and adaptation - related
efforts where
possible.
We can't take our foot off the pedal for any
mitigation efforts, and at the same time, we need to explore options for investing in carbon removal — in a way that complements and even supports
mitigation efforts, to the extent
possible.
I hear you, Malcolm, about the need to «be pulling all the levers in all countries as hard as
possible», but I think Jon's point here is that in the face of failed leadership to undertake such a coordinated global
effort, those of us who are ready to take action can focus on the «pullable levers» to get some points on the climate
mitigation board.
But along with emissions - reduction
mitigation to reduce the rate and magnitude of climate change as expeditiously as
possible, a comprehensive risk - management climate policy will necessarily require a strategic and multifaceted
effort at preparedness to limit vulnerabilities and increase resilience to impacts that can't be avoided.
And while it may be
possible to compensate with additional investment or
mitigation effort, it may not be — some goals may simply have slipped out of reach, or might require undesirable measures (e.g. geoengineering) that would not otherwise have been necessary.
Further discussion focused on the
possible content of the ERF: it could contain objectives for adaptation and
mitigation, based on global temperature goals (2 and 1.5 °C); and corresponding relative fair
efforts by countries.
In Part 1 of this series, we discussed that even so, the key objective of climate
mitigation efforts is still the same — we must drastically cut emissions as quickly as
possible (and Part 2 and Part 3 discussed how).