Titlebook: Global Climate Change; The Economic Costs o James C. White (Professor Emeritus),William Wagner Book 1991 Elsevier Science Publishing Co., I

pus840

復(fù)習(xí)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8349-6510-3 of greenhouse gases. Rather, the panel will attempt to clarify a few aspects of the social benefits and costs. No one is able to provide definitive dollar estimates at this time. Among other difficulties, atmospheric scientists cannot tell us what would happen to global mean climate as greenhouse g

裝勇敢地做

LAVA

偶像

inferno

Im Schatten demokratischer Legitimit?te to this group was five years ago on the costs and benefits of acid rain control. At that time, I’m pretty sure we thought no more contentious environmental issue could confront the Congress. We were wrong. What we’re discussing today—climate change—is much bigger. A lot of our earlier analytic and

宇宙你

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90360-6iders some of the recent efforts to analyze policymaking in this area. Several shortcomings are seen in the present policy research, including: inconsistencies in the data and methods used in some of the analyses, a myopic vision of options available, an overly anthropocentric focus on estimating co

ALTER

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-19585-4tical efforts to address the economic costs of climate change or the benefits of slowing the rate of increase of trace gases. Almost universally, the trace gas limitations policies considered by analysts fall far short of the constraints needed to stabilize climate. Thus, these policies would only a

nostrum

Book 1991e, are rapidly ap- proaching maximum population, and through energy demands are using up our resour- ces and accumulating wastes. We have come to realize the danger of a maturing system but have made essential- ly no impact in mitigating or preventing the problems we face. While we have been able to

進(jìn)步

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90360-6sts and benefits, inadequate treatment of uncertainty and irreversibility, and the lack of recognition of differential motives of developing and developed countries. We also have concerns with how results of the analyses have been presented and interpreted, and the limited amount of peer review that has taken place.