Mike Mann is quoted as saying ; “A similar argument to Nordhaus might have been used to argue we couldn't possibly mount the mobilisation necessary to win World War II. But we did. "
As Paris is awfully close to Versailles, it might be prudent to recall ultimate outcome of the universally celebrated treaty that ended World War I. On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 1:45:53 PM UTC-5, Greg Rau wrote: > > > > http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/deadly-global-warming-is-inevitable-due-to-inaction-feasible-rhetoric-climate-change-fight-paris-a7521111.html > > > Nordhaus - “The international target for climate change with a limit of 2C > appears to be infeasible with reasonably accessible technologies. > > “And this is the case even with very stringent and unrealistically > ambitious abatement strategies. > > “This is so because of the inertia of the climate system, of rapid > projected economic growth in the near term, and of revisions in several > elements of the model. > > “A target of 2.5C is technically feasible but would require extreme > virtually universal global policy measures.” > > On the other hand, > > Michael Man - “I think it is an overstatement to say (as Nordhaus does in > the abstract) that ‘it will be extremely difficult to achieve the 2C target > of international agreements even if ambitious policies are introduced in > the near term’. > > “The Paris Agreement has put us on a pathway that can get us there given a > ratcheting up of the commitments already made by the nations of the word. > > “Physics isn't an obstacle, only willpower is, at this point. I'm wary of > economists’ assumptions about our willpower to take dramatic actions when > necessary. > > “A similar argument to Nordhaus might have been used to argue we couldn't > possibly mount the mobilisation necessary to win World War II. But we did. > > “We've risen to the challenge before, and we can do so here.” > > GR - We could, but climate change seems a way more abstract threat to > most humans relative to the immediate military threats that were then posed > by Germany and Japan. Can humans trust scientific predictions and then act > to protect future generations rather than just focussing on more immediate > concerns? > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
