Sentences with phrase «regards to climate policy»

British Columbia is already ahead of the curve in regards to climate policy and it seems as if there is little appetite from our politicians to move even further ahead of everyone else.

It is now up to the GWPF to re-state their position with regard to climate policies: is there reason to act or to bury the head in the sand?

Not exact matches

- how you can claim it's unfair to characterize evangelicals as anti-intellectual while following a man who believes conspiracy theories from the National Enquirer, thinks climate change is a hoax, says vaccines cause autism, and displays such breathtaking ignorance regarding the state of the world and foreign policy that no former presidents will endorse him and multiple generals, foreign policy experts, editorial boards, and heads of state have denounced him as dangerously uninformed,

U.S. Advocates Human & Property Rights Solely for Those Nations Who Have the Power to Demand Them Dean Baker, of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, took note this morning of the Obama Administration's perverse rationale regarding the compensation of the poorer nations bearing the earliest and worst effects of climate change, as spelled...

«In 2017, we saw reckless language in the nuclear realm heat up already dangerous situations and relearned that minimizing evidence - based assessments regarding climate and other global challenges does not lead to better public policies,» said Rachel Bronson, the Bulletin's president and CEO in Chicago, Illinois.

But it's really a question regarding how the climate system responds to what we've been doing to it, rather than what our policies should be.

Can science results be used effectively in policy - oriented integrated assessment models that are our only tool for evaluating global - level impacts of policy and climate change, particularly with regard to land use?

There are still large uncertainties regarding the carbon budget due to lack of understanding of how the climate operates and lack of knowledge of how successful future climate policy will be.

Interestingly enough, regarding climate change, there are efforts to have a resolution passed in the UN General Assembly that would ask the ICJ for an advisory opinion that would define states» obligations and responsibilities with respect to greenhouse emissions under international law (see policy brief issued by The Hague Institute for Global Justice).

Formulates and recommends Departmental policies, plans and guidelines related to the natural and human environment, including efforts regarding resiliency and climate mitigation; livability and quality of life in states and communities; equity and economic growth; historic preservation, and bicycle and pedestrian transportation.

It is my opinion that media outlets and policy makers often cite controversy rather than consensus with regard to anthropogenically induced climate change.

I have attempted to identify elements that could be added to current discussion to brake the current (and for most of us unanticipated) free fall regarding climate change as a public policy concern.

In that regard it raises good questions and topics worthy of further exploration, but it is not a document that can be used for setting policy for anthropogenic climate change, although it pretends to be so.

The first and most obvious point of consideration in ascertaining the utility of the statement comes from the recognition that it refers to «experts on climate and energy policy» making predictions regarding the actions of China.

Second, I was asked to write about the science and issues at the climate science - policy interface, which I regard as of the utmost importance.

More disappointingly, the authors also seemed to have forgotten that the hockey stick was jsut the immediate symptom, that both they and M&M had raised more fundamental issues regarding paleo - climate science core culture — the lack of full disclosure, the acceptance of journal unenforced policy, the lack of informed and robust peer reviews, etc..

Ms. Kreisher, Ms. Whitman's spokeswoman, said: «The administrator has said in the past that President Bush regards climate change very seriously and supports a comprehensive, balanced energy policy that is intended to improve air quality, and the administrator is gratified that he supports that.»

I believe that the policy demands of the AGW movement regarding climate all have to do with seeking to somehow use CO2 to mitigate «climate change», even though not one mitigation method actually exists.

This talk of the united nations and your belief that it might be the vehicle to rein in trump regarding climate policy encouraged me to look at how much money America contributes to it.

This has led to doubts about the validity of IPCC conclusions, and to serious difficulty in making national and international policy regarding climate change.

The only settled conclusion regarding climate science is that scientists now have neither the technology nor the database to forecast long term global climate accurately enough to effectively guide energy policy decisions.

By accessing and using our Website or providing us information by any other means, you are agreeing to the terms of this Privacy Policy and The Climate Reality Project's privacy practices, including with regard to the collection, use and disclosure of personal information.

So unless I'm reading this incorrectly, with regard to CO2 (ignoring CFCs and OTGs for now), Scenario A represented BAU and Scenario B represented his «realistic» wish for «climate policy.»

The aim of the list was, as the introduction states, to separate «the noise from the serious concerns» with regards to those offering critiques of either climate science or institutions charged with presenting climate science to the public or policy - makers; the article was explicitly not intended to equate the viewpoints of all people contained on the list.

But it does suggest that if both sides of the debate paid close attention to the social consequences of policies, rather than the present intractable debate on the reality of AGW, then we might get to a point where we can agree on some action — you might think it is pointless with regard to the climate (but a substantial proportion of people think it will), but if it produces some other good outcomes it might be ok.

Even if we have 100 % worldwide consensus on the science (e.g. WG1), we still need to decide what is «dangerous» (IMO the climate community has failed pretty miserably in this regard), and what the best policy responses are (e.g. economically, politically and technically viable).

But it does suggest that if both sides of the debate paid close attention to the social consequences of policies, rather than the present intractable debate on the reality of AGW, then we might get to a point where we can agree on some action — you might think it is pointless with regard to the climate (but a substantial proportion of people think it will), but if it produces some other good outcomes it might be OK.

Yes, «Nobody but nobody trusts climate scientists,», yet 67 % of the American public want scientists to play a major role in policy - making regarding climate change:

This policy document stresses that two points are becoming clear regarding the challenge of adapting to climate change: the total bill is going to be enormous, and much of the investment required will have to occur in urban areas.

«We continue to be concerned regarding the level of attention being paid to the impacts of some of these climate - focused policy positions on Connecticut's ratepayers,» said Eric Brown of the Connecticut Business and Industry Association.

> curryja posted: «by Judith Curry I'm looking for ideas and discussion on > ways to improve what I regard to be a broken interface between climate > science and policy.

I'm looking for ideas and discussion on ways to improve what I regard to be a broken interface between climate science and policy.

This guidance document presents that employment, social protection, social dialogue and workers» rights need to be an integral part of any policy in pursuit of sustainable development, including with regard to climate change.

2016 Candidate Series: Leadership from a state's governor is critical to setting the tone for energy policies, like REPS, and this blog series aims to inform voters on the policy stances regarding energy and climate issues that face North Carolina.

«A number of pipeline projects have attracted attention in recent years, and societal frustration is building over the country's direction with regard to energy policy and climate change, Alan Krupnick, senior fellow, Resources for the Future, and Mark Brownstein, Environmental Defense Fund senior vice-president, climate and energy, told attendees.»

Bipartisan Policy Center grant for «To build on previous efforts surrounding climate change, including education regarding threats to hunting and fishing as well as to fish and wildlife habitat&raquTo build on previous efforts surrounding climate change, including education regarding threats to hunting and fishing as well as to fish and wildlife habitat&raquto hunting and fishing as well as to fish and wildlife habitat&raquto fish and wildlife habitat»

It is not NASA's mission to make policy regarding possible climate change mitigation strategies.

But overall I am thrilled by Koonin's op - ed — since he operates higher in the scientific and policy food chain than I do, his voice adds much gravitas to the message that I think needs to get out regarding climate science and policy.

The attempt to distinguish between the terms «projection» and «prediction», whether by the IPCC or others, has introduced an unnecessary confusion to the impacts and policy communities regarding the skill of regional and local multi-decadal climate model runs.

Lomborg appeared in the documentary film Cool It which focused on his views regarding climate policy where he suggests «that there's a well - financed effort underfoot to spin the failure of climate action into a new political strategy for high - tech mega-investments.»

Regarding the «desperately poor level of public and policy debate» I submit that climate scientists are reluctant to engage the public because of the certainty of malicious and dishonest personal attacks from denialists, and that politicians willing to act in the public interest tend to latch onto simplistic deflections of their mendacious opponents.

This «Inside Story on Climate Compatible Development» tracks issues that arose with regard to decentralised renewable energy planning in West Nusa Tenggara in order to inform subnational and national energy policies and strategies in the future.

Have they articulated any position on climate justice issues that arise in setting ghg emissions policy or in regard to the adaptation needs of vulnerable nations or people?

I regard the UNFCCC policies that specify a single emissions target with a specified timetable to lack robustness: on the one hand, this might not be enough to prevent dangerous climate change, and on the other hand, it might not be necessary.

These two complementary investigations arrived at similar conclusions regarding the state of federal climate research and the need for strong policies to protect the integrity of science and the free flow of scientific information.

Mark Cohen: The right - wing media have seized upon Climategate in order to claim that there is this conspiracy — essentially, of dishonest scientists who are attempting to foist this myth of climate change on an unknowing public — in order to paralyze the public debate and policy change regarding climate change.

Attempting to link the positions of people on policies towards the climate and the positions of other people regarding the cause of AIDS or yet other peoples position regarding smoking is untruthful.

Former NASA administrator, M. Griffith, has always claimed its skepticism regarding AGW theory and recalled that the Agency's mission was to collect data for scientific community, not to promote policies for alleviating potential effects of climate change.

That framing costs as a foregone - gain increased the amount people were prepared to reduce emissions is noteworthy because public messages about climate policy impacts typically frame the costs of reducing emissions as a loss [13]-- a pattern confirmed by our analysis of newspaper communications regarding the future costs of Australia's carbon pricing scheme.

I agree with Cox in his skepticism with regard to the first question, but only if fossil capital and its military protectors continues to have a powerful role in climate and energy policy especially in the U.S..