This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Through greenwashing ads, disinformation campaigns, attacks on scientists, and production of fake scientific evidence, the industry has engaged the playbook of deception to undermine climate action. But rising temperatures aren’t the only factor when we are thinking about climate impacts. What is standing in the way?
Climatescientists have long predicted that the Mediterranean will be hit hard by rising temperatures and changes in rainfall, driven by human emissions. Future wildfire risk is projected to increase in southern Europe , according to the last report by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
It turns out, for example, that climate-change researchers fly more frequently than scientists in other fields. Change 65 102184 ), climatescientists jet off two to three times a year on average, whereas other researchers get on planes just twice during that time. But other scientists also fly a lot.
To get an assessment of the progress thus far, as well as an idea if what has to happen next, I turned to two of my colleagues in the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) Climate & Energy Program: Principal ClimateScientist Rachel Licker and Transmission Policy Manager Sam Gomberg. It’s a big deal.
On the merits, the court found that the respondents had taken the hard look required by SEQRA, rejecting arguments that they failed to consider (1) the New York State Energy Plan and its renewableenergy target; (2) the pending solar project; (3) the impact on fossil fuel emissions; and (4) global climate change.
And after his service in the Trump administration, the Wall Street Journal revealed new evidence that Tillerson had dismissed the ParisAgreements goal of keeping global temperature increase to well below 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels (and striving to limit it to 1.5 Climatescientists, backed by robust research, say so.
Arizona Court Ordered Production of ClimateScientists’ Emails Under Arizona’s Public Records Law. Energy & Environment Legal Institute v. California Department of Food & Agriculture , No. 34-2015-80002005 (Cal. judgment Feb. 22, 2018; consolidated ruling Jan. Arizona Board of Regents , No.
The court described the concerns that led to policies favoring use of renewableenergy sources, including oil and gas shortages and global climate change, and said these policies were “chosen by the policy makers in our Legislature and … cemented in Kansas law.” s decision not to participate in the ParisAgreement.
A few general resources: Sidelining Science Since Day One: How the Trump administration has harmed public health and safety in its first six months by The Union of Concerned Scientists I Heart ClimateScientists. . pulling out of the Parisclimate deal may make China great again. climate change issue.
Energy Policy Advocates v. Court Said ClimateScientist Provided Sufficient Evidence of Actual Malice for Blog Authors but Not for Publisher. The plaintiffs contended that the defendants should have evaluated a no-action alternative’s climate effects and effects on onshore renewableenergy. July 15, 2021).
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 12,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content