Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Why we need to stop aiming for the 2°C target, which is both impossible and a hindrance to better policies https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2018-02-08/two-degree-delusion …pic.twitter.com/02NhbjBP6S
Not fixing climate smartly can cost us $29.9 trillion in total Going for the 2°C (a Stern approach) could be twice as costly ($67.3tr) as doing nothing (reduces climate costs $46tr, but incurs $155tr in policy costs) http://www.nber.org/papers/w22933 pic.twitter.com/JZagFtHDKr
Hey Bjorn do you ever get sick of being nearly the only person making sense on this issue? #seriously
That argument has been made by adaptation scholars for a long time (cf Potsdam workshop on Climate Change, Adaptive Capacity and Development, and IPCC AR3, WG2 chapter 18, both 2001). 1/2
More recently, analysis of limits to adaptation (IPCC AR5, WG2 chapter 16) shows that the greater the increase in global mean temperature, the more difficult it will be to meet adaptation objectives. A 2°C temperature goal thus also helps adaptation (see also IPCC AR4 WG2 ch 18).
More of the same kick-it-in-the-long-grass nonsense from @BjornLomborg which sidesteps the RISK - given the uncertainties - of us causing higher warming which then causes worse impacts that cannot simply be adapted to. Sea level rise for a start.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
