Uncertainty is not an excuse for inaction. As Climate Progress reports, Sandia National Laboratory assessed the risk of precipitation patterns affected by climate change, and concluded: \u2026compelling risk derives from uncertainty, not certainty. The greater the uncertainty, the greater the risk. It is the uncertainty associated with climate change that validates the need to act protectively and proactively. The same point is made in \u201cDegrees of Risk\u201d, a report issued last month by Third Generation Environmentalism: In managing conventional security risks both policy makers and the general public accept that uncertainty is no excuse for inaction. Indeed it is hard to imagine a politician trying to argue that counter-terrorism measures were unnecessary because the threat of attack was uncertain. In a working paper circulated through the environmental community this week, Andrew J. Hoffman of the University of Michigan\u2019s Ross School of Business argues that the two poles in the climate debate \u2013 the \u201cskeptics\u201d and the \u201cconvinced\u201d \u2013 already think about risk, but from entirely different perspectives. As a result, the two camps are talking past each other. Hoffman based these conclusions in part on an extensive review of articles on the different perspectives at play in the climate debate. [...]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Uncertainty is not an excuse for inaction. As Climate Progress reports, Sandia National Laboratory assessed the risk of precipitation patterns affected by climate change, and concluded: \u2026compelling risk derives from uncertainty, not certainty. The greater the uncertainty, the greater the … Continue reading