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
Näytä tämä ketju
-
For someone so keen to point to uncertainties in climate science, I find it remarkable how you embrace integrated assessment modelling with all its assumptions, simplifications and uncertainties.
Oh, very unlikely that the costs are exactly right, but as you know that is not the point. It is that they all unequivocally show that too much climate policy is worse than no climate policy, and that is relevant when talking about the 2°C target.
-
-
Even when ignoring the ambiguous "too much", there is nothing unequivocal about these models or their results. For a summary policy brief see http://bit.ly/2nVEvCx (pdf). Perhaps
@cwhope would like to share his views?pic.twitter.com/pIm67md8Cy
-
I broadly agree. Mitigation and adaptation are linked but separate policy choices. That's why the PAGE IAM gives the user complete freedom to specify mitigation and adaptation policies and investigate the result of any combination.
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.