The real take away here is that the suit brought by the coalition of state Attorneys General, as well as the previous suit brought by Murray Oil, are just the beginning of what could be a protracted legal battle to come — which would further delay action on
reducing dangerous global warming emissions.
Not exact matches
«Any realistic plan to
reduce global warming pollution sufficiently — and in time — to avoid
dangerous consequences must rely in part on preserving tropical forests,» reports Environmental Defense Fund.
«We can
reduce health and climate change costs while
reducing the
dangerous carbon pollution driving
global warming.»
As a result there is a huge gap between national commitments to
reduce greenhouse gas (ghg) emissions that have been made thus far under the UNFCCC and
global ghg emissions reductions that are necessary to limit
warming to 2 oC, a
warming limit that has been agreed to by the international community as necessary to prevent very
dangerous climate change.
«[The research] demonstrates that proposed technological solutions, like CDR, to the problems of
global warming and ocean acidification are no substitute for
reducing carbon emissions, which remains the safest and most reliable path for avoiding
dangerous climate change.»
The alleged rationales for anti-coal and gas policies — to
reduce global warming or protect local environments — are furphies: whether or not further
warming will occur and be
dangerous — and both propositions are questionable and are being ignored by major emissions producers China and India, and soon the USA — Australia's emissions reductions will have no measurable impact on world climate.
The two will unveil legislation Wednesday designed to radically
reduce the production of fossil fuels, which they say is necessary to prevent
dangerous levels of
global warming.
Let me put it this way: do you believe there is
dangerous man - made
global warming happening right now, that we have to alter Western industrial civilization to correct, by
reducing CO2 emissions below 350 ppm?
In order to avoid
dangerous global warming, we need to
reduce global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by about 50 % by the year 2050.
By then not only climate scientists, but I would think a large part of the
global population will be fully aware of the
dangerous consequences of
global warming and the urgency of public policies to
reduce carbon emissions — thanks in a large part to Dr. Mann, James Hansen and many other vocal figures in the climate science community.