Mitigation means that we seek to
reduce the damages from climate change by reducing carbon emissions.
«Imposing a tax on carbon dioxide emissions would
reduce the damage from climate change but would also impose a larger burden, relative to income, on low - income households than on high - income households.
Not exact matches
In a further setback to
reducing U.S. carbon emissions, the U.S Environmental Protection Agency has proposed lowering the U.S. government's «social cost» of carbon, or the estimated cost of sea - level rise, lower crop yields, and other
climate -
change related economic
damages,
from $ 42 per ton by 2020 to a low of $ 1 per ton.
«That would require a regional economic analysis for
damages from acid rain and carbon dioxide and the benefits of
reduced climate change,» said Wigley.
Mitigation —
reducing emissions fast enough to achieve the temperature goal A transparency system and global stock - take — accounting for
climate action Adaptation — strengthening ability of countries to deal with
climate impacts Loss and
damage — strengthening ability to recover
from climate impacts Support — including finance, for nations to build clean, resilient futures As well as setting a long - term direction, countries will peak their emissions as soon as possible and continue to submit national
climate action plans that detail their future objectives to address
climate change.
In contrast, EPA's estimate for the total gains
from avoided
climate change damages as well as other factors (such as
reduced macroeconomic volatility
from reduced reliance on oil imports), might yield as little as $ 29 billion in the year 2040, in the scenario where the «social cost of carbon» is relatively low.
Air pressure
changes, allergies increase, Alps melting, anxiety, aggressive polar bears, algal blooms, Asthma, avalanches, billions of deaths, blackbirds stop singing, blizzards, blue mussels return, boredom, budget increases, building season extension, bushfires, business opportunities, business risks, butterflies move north, cannibalistic polar bears, cardiac arrest, Cholera, civil unrest, cloud increase, cloud stripping, methane emissions
from plants, cold spells (Australia), computer models, conferences, coral bleaching, coral reefs grow, coral reefs shrink, cold spells, crumbling roads, buildings and sewage systems,
damages equivalent to $ 200 billion, Dengue hemorrhagic fever, dermatitis, desert advance, desert life threatened, desert retreat, destruction of the environment, diarrhoea, disappearance of coastal cities, disaster for wine industry (US), Dolomites collapse, drought, drowning people, drowning polar bears, ducks and geese decline, dust bowl in the corn belt, early spring, earlier pollen season, earthquakes, Earth light dimming, Earth slowing down, Earth spinning out of control, Earth wobbling, El Nià ± o intensification, erosion, emerging infections, encephalitis,, Everest shrinking, evolution accelerating, expansion of university
climate groups, extinctions (ladybirds, pandas, pikas, polar bears, gorillas, whales, frogs, toads, turtles, orang - utan, elephants, tigers, plants, salmon, trout, wild flowers, woodlice, penguins, a million species, half of all animal and plant species), experts muzzled, extreme
changes to California, famine, farmers go under, figurehead sacked, fish catches drop, fish catches rise, fish stocks decline, five million illnesses, floods, Florida economic decline, food poisoning, footpath erosion, forest decline, forest expansion, frosts, fungi invasion, Garden of Eden wilts, glacial retreat, glacial growth, global cooling, glowing clouds, Gore omnipresence, Great Lakes drop, greening of the North, Gulf Stream failure, Hantavirus pulmonary syndrome, harvest increase, harvest shrinkage, hay fever epidemic, heat waves, hibernation ends too soon, hibernation ends too late, human fertility
reduced, human health improvement, hurricanes, hydropower problems, hyperthermia deaths, ice sheet growth, ice sheet shrinkage, inclement weather, Inuit displacement, insurance premium rises, invasion of midges, islands sinking, itchier poison ivy, jellyfish explosion, Kew Gardens taxed, krill decline, landslides, landslides of ice at 140 mph, lawsuits increase, lawyers» income increased (surprise surprise!)
The
damage to the world
from an almost 30 year US delay in taking serious steps to
reduce the threat of
climate change including the enormity of global ghg emissions reductions that are now necessary compared to the reductions that would have been necessary if the United States and the world acted more forcefully a decade ago or so earlier.
Essentially, it requires that spending to prevent
climate change should yield at least the same rate of return, in terms of
reduced damages from warming, as any other capital investment.
During the Copenhagen conference representatives
from poor vulnerable nations begged developed countries to: (a) commit to
reduce GHG emissions to levels necessary to prevent dangerous
climate change; and (b) to fund adaptation programs in developing countries that are necessary to protect the most vulnerable
from climate change impacts that could be avoided or compensate for the
damages that could not be avoided.
That is, for instance, among other things, the Copenhagen Accord failed to get commitments
from the United States and some other developed countries to
reduce ghg emissions at levels necessary to prevent serious
climate change damage.
«
Climate science» as it is used by warmists implies adherence to a set of beliefs: (1) Increasing greenhouse gas concentrations will warm the Earth's surface and atmosphere; (2) Human production of CO2 is producing significant increases in CO2 concentration; (3) The rate of rise of temperature in the 20th and 21st centuries is unprecedented compared to the rates of change of temperature in the previous two millennia and this can only be due to rising greenhouse gas concentrations; (4) The climate of the 19th century was ideal and may be taken as a standard to compare against any current climate; (5) global climate models, while still not perfect, are good enough to indicate that continued use of fossil fuels at projected rates in the 21st century will cause the CO2 concentration to rise to a high level by 2100 (possibly 700 to 900 ppm); (6) The global average temperature under this condition will rise more than 3 °C from the late 19th century ideal; (7) The negative impact on humanity of such a rise will be enormous; (8) The only alternative to such a disaster is to immediately and sharply reduce CO2 emissions (reducing emissions in 2050 by 80 % compared to today's rate) and continue further reductions after 2050; (9) Even with such draconian CO2 reductions, the CO2 concentration is likely to reach at least 450 to 500 ppm by 2100 resulting in significant damage to humanity; (10) Such reductions in CO2 emissions are technically feasible and economically affordable while providing adequate energy to a growing world population that is increasingly industria
Climate science» as it is used by warmists implies adherence to a set of beliefs: (1) Increasing greenhouse gas concentrations will warm the Earth's surface and atmosphere; (2) Human production of CO2 is producing significant increases in CO2 concentration; (3) The rate of rise of temperature in the 20th and 21st centuries is unprecedented compared to the rates of
change of temperature in the previous two millennia and this can only be due to rising greenhouse gas concentrations; (4) The
climate of the 19th century was ideal and may be taken as a standard to compare against any current climate; (5) global climate models, while still not perfect, are good enough to indicate that continued use of fossil fuels at projected rates in the 21st century will cause the CO2 concentration to rise to a high level by 2100 (possibly 700 to 900 ppm); (6) The global average temperature under this condition will rise more than 3 °C from the late 19th century ideal; (7) The negative impact on humanity of such a rise will be enormous; (8) The only alternative to such a disaster is to immediately and sharply reduce CO2 emissions (reducing emissions in 2050 by 80 % compared to today's rate) and continue further reductions after 2050; (9) Even with such draconian CO2 reductions, the CO2 concentration is likely to reach at least 450 to 500 ppm by 2100 resulting in significant damage to humanity; (10) Such reductions in CO2 emissions are technically feasible and economically affordable while providing adequate energy to a growing world population that is increasingly industria
climate of the 19th century was ideal and may be taken as a standard to compare against any current
climate; (5) global climate models, while still not perfect, are good enough to indicate that continued use of fossil fuels at projected rates in the 21st century will cause the CO2 concentration to rise to a high level by 2100 (possibly 700 to 900 ppm); (6) The global average temperature under this condition will rise more than 3 °C from the late 19th century ideal; (7) The negative impact on humanity of such a rise will be enormous; (8) The only alternative to such a disaster is to immediately and sharply reduce CO2 emissions (reducing emissions in 2050 by 80 % compared to today's rate) and continue further reductions after 2050; (9) Even with such draconian CO2 reductions, the CO2 concentration is likely to reach at least 450 to 500 ppm by 2100 resulting in significant damage to humanity; (10) Such reductions in CO2 emissions are technically feasible and economically affordable while providing adequate energy to a growing world population that is increasingly industria
climate; (5) global
climate models, while still not perfect, are good enough to indicate that continued use of fossil fuels at projected rates in the 21st century will cause the CO2 concentration to rise to a high level by 2100 (possibly 700 to 900 ppm); (6) The global average temperature under this condition will rise more than 3 °C from the late 19th century ideal; (7) The negative impact on humanity of such a rise will be enormous; (8) The only alternative to such a disaster is to immediately and sharply reduce CO2 emissions (reducing emissions in 2050 by 80 % compared to today's rate) and continue further reductions after 2050; (9) Even with such draconian CO2 reductions, the CO2 concentration is likely to reach at least 450 to 500 ppm by 2100 resulting in significant damage to humanity; (10) Such reductions in CO2 emissions are technically feasible and economically affordable while providing adequate energy to a growing world population that is increasingly industria
climate models, while still not perfect, are good enough to indicate that continued use of fossil fuels at projected rates in the 21st century will cause the CO2 concentration to rise to a high level by 2100 (possibly 700 to 900 ppm); (6) The global average temperature under this condition will rise more than 3 °C
from the late 19th century ideal; (7) The negative impact on humanity of such a rise will be enormous; (8) The only alternative to such a disaster is to immediately and sharply
reduce CO2 emissions (
reducing emissions in 2050 by 80 % compared to today's rate) and continue further reductions after 2050; (9) Even with such draconian CO2 reductions, the CO2 concentration is likely to reach at least 450 to 500 ppm by 2100 resulting in significant
damage to humanity; (10) Such reductions in CO2 emissions are technically feasible and economically affordable while providing adequate energy to a growing world population that is increasingly industrializing.
As mentioned elsewere in this page and site, a renewable energy installation such as a wind farm or solar farm will
reduce the
damage caused by
climate change; it will
reduce the amount of air pollution resulting
from the burning of coal; it will therefore be to the advantage of all life on Earth.
But the carbon lost
from the increasing numbers of trees that are
damaged or die could
reduce this effect and reverse the positive impact of forest management measures aimed at
reducing climate change.
In fact, the Yohe paper that Romm cites suggests that additional warming of up to 2 °C, may be on the whole a net benefit to humanity, even though, like others, it seems that study doesn't fully consider the increases in adaptive capacity and secular technological
change, consideration of which would
reduce future
damages from climate change, effectively increasing the temperature beyond which
climate change would result in net losses globally, and
reduce the benefit - cost ratio for mitigation.
• Develops new laws to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions and lessen loss and
damage from climate change — laws that build on our successful foundation of environmental law and do not roll it back.