Rabett Run Carbon Visuals: Home Melbourne Climate Change Forum - Centre for Strategic Economic Studies - Research - Business and Law After many years of debate, climate policy has moved squarely into the implementation stage. The next six months are critical in determining what policies will be put in place and how effective they will be in containing global warming. The Melbourne Climate Policy Forum (MCPF) hosted six briefing seminars on key policy issues facing Australia, set in the context of the global decision making process. Each of the briefings provided an assessment of current knowledge and its implications for the policy issue in question, based in part on the ongoing research activities of the MCPF partners. Following the briefing, a distinguished external discussant reviewed the briefing provided, commented on the policy issue and introduced general discussion. The MCPF is a joint initiative of Victoria University, through the Centre for Strategic Economic Studies (CSES), and Carbon Market Economics Pty Ltd (CME). Recent News 1. Briefing 1:Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change (PDF, 2617KB). Back to top 2. 3. 4.
ClimateScienceWatch The Climate Group On the Frontlines of Climate Change | A global forum for indigenous peoples, small islands and vulnerable communities Climate Feedback Sid Perkins In the coming decades, the world’s coral reefs will suffer a variety of indignities, from global threats such as warming seas and ocean acidification to local and regional problems such as overfishing and nutrient-rich runoff. If carbon dioxide emissions remain high until the end of the century, reef coverage may drop by 50 percent or more even if local threats are addressed aggressively, a new study suggests. In a paper to be published in Global Change Biology, Kenneth Anthony, a marine ecologist at the University of Queensland in Brisbane, Australia and his colleagues modeled how reefs of branching corals of the genus Acropora would fare under various levels of climate change and fishing. Unsurprisingly, under the most extreme climate scenario — the IPCC’s A1FI scenario, in which atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide rise to exceed 900 parts per billion by 2100, compared to around 390 ppb today — reefs suffer the most.
Saul Griffith: Climate Change Recalculated Good evening. How are we for signal, very good, I am Stewart Brand from the Long Now Foundation. You maybe wonder what this Twitter thing is about. This data, it turns out is helpful helpful for funders of Long Now and of these talks. Energy Matters Forum NERC - Climate change challenge summary Summary of the debate Introduction The Natural Environment Research Council's Chief Executive, Professor Alan Thorpe, challenged climate change sceptics to an online public debate in December 2006. Alan said, "If you don't believe the science then please tell us why, or if you are confused about it, then ask a question. A panel of climate change experts answered questions about the science of climate change and discussed a range of scientific theories that try to explain the recent global warming. The web discussion forum has provided the opportunity for sceptics of the science of human-induced climate change to be frank about their views. Many sceptical correspondents were knowledgeable about aspects of the scientific literature and have tried to use the (erroneous) argument that uncertainties in one aspect of the science means that the whole idea about human influence on climate must therefore be disregarded. Topics Navigate from the following list to topics raised during the debate: 1.
the consensus project Nuclear energy vs. carbon based fuels: Which is worse? Carla Garrison Japan’s recovery and crisis management since the March 11 earthquake and tsunami has been nothing short of miraculous, though the clean-up has just begun. This week the U.K. Telegraph reported discovery of radioactive water leaks by employees at Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant reactor two. South Korean environmentalists rally to demand halt of expansion of nuclear power plants in Seoul, South Korea, Tuesday, March 29, 2011 (Photo: Associated Press) Regardless of the final outcomes, the public perception damage to nuclear power will carry on like the half-life of cesium-137 (about 30 years). It would be helpful to the world if experts, not spin doctors, would methodically answer the real burning question begged by the incident. According to statistics posted by the U.S. As of 2006, the U.S. led world nuclear production with 787 billion kilowatthours. Japan massive earhquake followed by the tsunami might be in the top five worse case scenarios. The U.S.
Climate Dilemma Climate Change Health Impact & Prevention | Climate CHIP