Comments on: How we talk about climate change http://www.globaldashboard.org/2009/11/19/how-we-talk-about-climate-change/ Global risks and how to respond to them, edited by Alex Evans and David Steven Sat, 11 Feb 2012 13:49:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Paul C http://www.globaldashboard.org/2009/11/19/how-we-talk-about-climate-change/comment-page-1/#comment-17225 Paul C Sun, 22 Nov 2009 17:10:51 +0000 http://www.globaldashboard.org/?p=12214#comment-17225 The essence of your post is that people suffer from cognitive biases that prevent them from recognising the problem. If we take it as given that people's biases are not going to change any time soon, perhaps the better approach would be a thousand cuts - attacking small but manageable problems by publicly incentivizing them (not just through state- or market-led initiatives, but also by building social pressures)? The slightly worrying possibility is that the best way of dealing with macro issues like this is to distract people from the macro issue and focus obsessively on micro issues, hoping that the cumulative public pressure will reach the captains of the ships of state. If it's true that the deadline for significant action is imminent, however, this strategy is unlikely to be dynamic enough. So I'm not claiming that this will really address the problem, but at least it'll give us something to do while the ship is sinking. The essence of your post is that people suffer from cognitive biases that prevent them from recognising the problem. If we take it as given that people’s biases are not going to change any time soon, perhaps the better approach would be a thousand cuts – attacking small but manageable problems by publicly incentivizing them (not just through state- or market-led initiatives, but also by building social pressures)?

The slightly worrying possibility is that the best way of dealing with macro issues like this is to distract people from the macro issue and focus obsessively on micro issues, hoping that the cumulative public pressure will reach the captains of the ships of state. If it’s true that the deadline for significant action is imminent, however, this strategy is unlikely to be dynamic enough.

So I’m not claiming that this will really address the problem, but at least it’ll give us something to do while the ship is sinking.

]]> By: energy nut job http://www.globaldashboard.org/2009/11/19/how-we-talk-about-climate-change/comment-page-1/#comment-17078 energy nut job Thu, 19 Nov 2009 19:46:52 +0000 http://www.globaldashboard.org/?p=12214#comment-17078 Can't be bothered to read the piece closely - but UK climate change policy is basically hoping that the carbon price ( marekt price, rather than tax) will make new nuke sufficiently economically attractive to knock up about ten to twelve new plants - all before the gimmicky 2020 targets hit home (note to government chumps, not a single utility takes this seriously anymore....). The rest is largely window dressing.. You heard it first on global dashboard first 1. New nukes will come online until EDF see a carbon tax in place 2. Likewise, CCS will never be delivered on the back of the carbon price - the treasury skimping on funding and the US / Chinese putting up a 'massive' $150m for CCS shows how utterly doomed we are... 3. Mucking around with windfarms will probably result in lack of proper generation - utilities will ask for LCPD exemptions in the UK to keep the lights on - that will be very, very dirty. Now, stop warbling on about pointless public opinion Mr. Evans and address the real policy issues DECC would rather leave to Eddy boy saying it will all magically work..... PS your piece, does at least say Stern was a pile of economic murd in terms of the policy costs associated with decarbonising the global economy - too bad HMG doesn't have the gumption to say it.... Can’t be bothered to read the piece closely – but UK climate change policy is basically hoping that the carbon price ( marekt price, rather than tax) will make new nuke sufficiently economically attractive to knock up about ten to twelve new plants – all before the gimmicky 2020 targets hit home (note to government chumps, not a single utility takes this seriously anymore….). The rest is largely window dressing..

You heard it first on global dashboard first

1. New nukes will come online until EDF see a carbon tax in place
2. Likewise, CCS will never be delivered on the back of the carbon price – the treasury skimping on funding and the US / Chinese putting up a ‘massive’ $150m for CCS shows how utterly doomed we are…
3. Mucking around with windfarms will probably result in lack of proper generation – utilities will ask for LCPD exemptions in the UK to keep the lights on – that will be very, very dirty.

Now, stop warbling on about pointless public opinion Mr. Evans and address the real policy issues DECC would rather leave to Eddy boy saying it will all magically work…..

PS your piece, does at least say Stern was a pile of economic murd in terms of the policy costs associated with decarbonising the global economy – too bad HMG doesn’t have the gumption to say it….

]]>