Climate change presents a significant long-term risk to the UK and international environment and economy. However, some on the political right are suspicious of taking action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Some are hostile to the climate science. Others worry that action to protect the environment is just a cover for more radical, anti-capitalist political aims. Another strand challenges the economics behind some of the policy measures being taken, and fear they threaten economic growth unnecessarily and may even undermine green aims.
Article continues below this advert:
This debate will consider whether there is a genuine problem with climate action on the right of politics and how those who care about the environment might be better able to persuade doubters of the need for policy intervention.
In particular, it will consider:
To what extent are some parts of the right suspicious about climate change?
How does climate change differ from other environmental problems which may be a more comfortable fit with a right of centre philosophy?
How do politicians balance the weight of scientific evidence and political philosophy in deciding positions? Can a localist, market-centred philosophy fit with an acceptance of the need for action on a global problem like climate change?
How can those who care about environmental issues better communicate their concerns? What language should they use?
Is appealing to other concerns like energy security or green growth the best way to build support for climate action or to alienate it?
Speakers:
CHAIR | Guy Newey | Senior Research Fellow, Environment & Energy | Policy Exchange
Rt Hon Peter Lilley MP | Former Secretary of State at The Department of Trade and Industry
Tim Yeo MP | Chair | Energy and Climate Change Select Committee
Damian Carrington | Environment Editor | The Guardian
Dr Adam Corner | School of Psychology, Cardiff University & Climate Outreach Information Network
- Tedious tripe, same old un-fact checked dogma.
Only interesting part is in the questioning.
When asked "you call it Climate Change, but can we call it Global Warming ?"
the reply began "unfortunately it hasn't warmed as much as it SHOULD have done..." etc.
- They just said : "New name is water scarcity"
... now I know the reason for all the drought porn
..(even though we've had to empty our rainwater tanks 3 times this year.)
- Now They just said "It's a small minority who disagree with us" - deluded
Posted by Will Pratt (Twitter) on May 4th 2012, 2:36 PM EDT
when all other variables are equal, a substance with higher specific heat capacity can absorb or release more energy than a substance with lower specific heat.
Water vapour has almost twice the specific heat capacity of air and so could (wrongly) be considered a "greenhouse gas". The fact that it naturally evaporates and condenses at ambient temperatures, counteracts any warming potential it may have. Thus water vapour acts as a coolant in the atmosphere.
CO2 has a specific heat capacity which is 15% lower than air and is non-condesning at ambient temperatures. CO2 therefore, also acts as a coolant in the Earths atmosphere.
W. R. Pratt
3 comments found showing page 1 of 1 « previous 1 next »
» News articles may contain quotes, these are copyright to the respective publication which will be stated, along with a link to the source article where available.
» If you feel your copyright has been violated please contact us and the article will be removed or amended at your request.
Articles Recently Viewed
3,322
Donations
» Please support the site by making a donation. No matter how big or small, your contribution helps to support the cause.
Tweet Article
Post to Facebook
Print Article
Only interesting part is in the questioning.
When asked "you call it Climate Change, but can we call it Global Warming ?"
the reply began "unfortunately it hasn't warmed as much as it SHOULD have done..." etc.