One of these is
the potential cost of climate change to agriculture, to housing, and to the remnants of wild Earth.
The IPCC's assessments of
the potential costs of climate change «is probably an underestimate,» argued Zenghelis, «because it omits consideration of many of the impacts of climate change, including potentially catastrophic risks.»
Not exact matches
In a nutshell: the
cost of climate change in Canada is already big and growing, with the
potential to become enormous.
There was a conference held at the begining
of this year that went over this sort
of thing, it was subtitled «Avoiding Dangerous
Climate Change» and you can find the presentation [slides] that were presented at http://www.stabilisation2005.com/programme.html There's a lot
of interesting things about possible thresholds, stabilisation levels for CO2 and emission reduction pathways and the
potential costs.
I agree that
climate change ranks low (22nd out
of 22
potential priority areas in a recent Gallup Poll, as I recall) among the American public, particularly when people are confronted by the reality that doing something meaningful will entail
costs.
There is an urgent need to scale up financial flows, particularly financial support to developing countries; to create positive incentives for actions; to finance the incremental
costs of cleaner and low - carbon technologies; to make more efficient use
of funds directed toward
climate change; to realize the full
potential of appropriate market mechanisms that can provide pricing signals and economic incentives to the private sector; to promote public sector investment; to create enabling environments that promote private investment that is commercially viable; to develop innovative approaches; and to lower
costs by creating appropriate incentives for and reducing and eliminating obstacles to technology transfer relevant to both mitigation and adaptation.
Whereas, if left unaddressed, the consequences
of a
changing climate have the
potential to adversely impact all Americans, hitting vulnerable populations hardest, harming productivity in key economic sectors such as construction, agriculture, and tourism, saddling future generations with costly economic and environmental burdens, and imposing additional
costs on State and Federal budgets that will further add to the long - term fiscal challenges that we face as a Nation;
Mick... The issue
of climate change, as I understand it, is about
potential costs.
Older people are at much higher risk
of dying during extreme heat events.136, 50,241,233 Pre-existing health conditions also make older adults susceptible to cardiac and respiratory impacts
of air pollution25 and to more severe consequences from infectious diseases; 257 limited mobility among older adults can also increase flood - related health risks.258 Limited resources and an already high burden
of chronic health conditions, including heart disease, obesity, and diabetes, will place the poor at higher risk
of health impacts from
climate change than higher income groups.25, 50
Potential increases in food
cost and limited availability
of some foods will exacerbate current dietary inequalities and have significant health ramifications for the poorer segments
of our population (Ch.
When Gregory turned the discussion to the
potential effects
of climate change and ways to combat them, Blackburn insisted that all
potential remedies must be subject to short - term
cost - benefit analysis.
REDD + has the
potential to deliver
cost - effective mitigation
of climate change in addition to enhancing development
of forest communities.
Predicting the
cost impact
of various
potential warming scenarios requires us to concatenate these
climate predictions with economic models that predict the
cost impact
of these predicted temperature
changes on the economy in the 21st, 22nd, and 23rd centuries.
By allowing countries to use international carbon markets to meet their commitments, the Agreement has recognized the
cost - effectiveness
potential of market - based solutions to
climate change.
Other compelling reasons to begin taking action include the
potential for catastrophes that defy the assumption that
climate change damages will be incremental and linear; the risk
of irreversible environmental impacts; the need to learn about the pace at which society can begin a transition to a
climate - stable economy; the likelihood
of imposing unconscionable burdens and impossible tasks on future generations; the need to create incentives to accelerate technological development the address
climate change; and the ready availability
of «no regrets» policies that have very low or even no
costs to the economy.
While not all states are pursuing
climate policies, Carbon Brief analysis showed that those concerned about the
potential high
cost of climate change represent 40 %
of total US emissions.
Promoted policies to mitigate
potential (but not demonstrated) risks related to
climate change would
costs hundreds
of billions dollars.
So even if the State comments had properly considered the real effect
of climate change on extreme weather events instead
of the inappropriate total
cost of a storm, there are a legitimate range
of potential outcomes --(15 % more intense to 3 % more intense).
For most
of them,
costs have declined over the last decades and the authors expect significant technical advancements and further
cost reductions in the future, resulting in a greater
potential for
climate change mitigation.
Prof Wadhams is co-author
of the controversial Nature paper which calculated the
potential economic
costs of climate change based on a scenario
of 50 Gigatonnes (Gt)
of methane being released this century from melting permafrost at the East Siberia Arctic Shelf (ESAS), a vast region
of shallow - water covered continental crust.
The agency's finding, which was sent to the White House Office
of Management and Budget without fanfare on Friday, also reversed one
of the Bush administration's landmark decisions on
climate change, and it indicated anew that President Obama's appointees will push to address the issue
of warming despite the
potential political
costs.
Whenever a
potential investment project has finances that rely on governments continuing to talk big but do little about
climate change, the project risks becoming non-viable after all the
costs of development are spent if the government subsequently starts to take
climate change seriously.
... In addition to
climate research, scientists, industry, and government should implement measures to
cost - effectively protect the
climate and intensify efforts to develop technologies that — in addition to meeting other societal goals — could help us mitigate and adapt to the
potential effects
of climate change.»