Talk:Climate change mitigation framework

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 September 2019 and 4 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): LaurenSkirball.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Peer review

I think this article is very informative and provides ample amounts of background information which makes the contents easy to understand for a broad audience. I think the article is segmented appropriately and each section flows into the next. I've noticed that there aren't references or citations, though, which would help the reader locate the source of the information and learn more about individual topics mentioned in the article. Also, I think it would be helpful to have an intro sentence before jumping into the Kyoto Protocol that describes when it was established and what its purpose was. Finally, I think a bit more discussion on what the top-down approach actually is.

I think that the article is really informative, and well-structured! In the first paragraph, even though you linked the free rider problem page, it might be helpful to explain what it is in a few words, or in relation to the problem at hand. In the "History of climate change frameworks" section, I think a better explanation of how the top-down approach works, in general, and in relation to solving climate change (same with the bottom-up approach). Otherwise, it is a really good draft with lots of good information about the topic. Also, I'm sure you'll add them later, but remember to add you citations to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by S.gowda147 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

I think that your article does a good job at laying out some of the more well-known areas of international frameworks for solving climate change through the UNFCCC, such as Kyoto and Paris. However, there were also various other important mechanisms (for instance the Kigali Amendment, the Copenhagen Summit, the Rio Summit, etc.) that I think you could mention. I also think that you might need to clarify that your article is talking specifically about the international mechanisms to solving climate change - and particularly focusing on emissions - rather than regional, national, or local initiatives. Or, you could add sections discussing those other areas of climate change action (such as the US Climate Alliance, initiatives through regional organizations, etc.). I also think mentioning the MDGs and the SDGs as international frameworks to work towards sustainability (particularly SDG goal 13) could be beneficial. Overall, if you want to keep this article more broad and focused on well-known international frameworks, I would specify that in the article and maybe include a few more well-known summits and treaties. Or, I would suggest discussing other areas of governance on climate change as well. Kristin.T98 (talk) 21:55, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Where is original research?

doomsdayer520 or anyone - please could you move tag to section(s) and explain Chidgk1 (talk) 11:02, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

That edit tag was placed in January 2020 when the article was in a different state. At the time it seemed to have some unsupported conclusions and political statements. Since then the article has improved. I will remove the edit tag. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:38, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

The Reduce is not Zero problem

I've removed the following. The cited pages 195 - 216 of Gates's book don't talk about any of this stuff. The Manhattan2 website doesn't meet criteria for being a reliable source. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 00:15, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Bill Gates' 2021 Climate Book states the world is failing to meet goals due to a fundamental flaw in approach. He refers to this as "Reduce is not Zero". Reduce involves working on each hydroelectric dam or wind farm separately; whereas Zero involves handling the entire batch of needed equipment at one time. Equipment primarily includes hydroelectric dams, wind farms, solar panels, and nuclear reactors. When one works with a large batch, they can justify factories that mass produce. Additional factory automation is helpful since it allows one to handle large volumes at low cost. In order to implement Zero, one needs a plan that describes how to get to zero global CO₂ emissions. Currently, the world does not have a plan, and is doing Reduce.

The Manhattan 2 Project's Global Decarbonization Plan is an example of a plan that gets the world to zero emissions. It proposes that the US Government spend $10B/yr to develop factories that mass produce green energy production equipment; and give the designs of the factories away for free, to facilitate global decarbonization. The US gives instead of sells for selfish reasons -- it does not want harm to come to its shores due to climate change. The plan utilizes factory automation to drive down the cost of green energy to a level below carbon-based fuels. This causes others to go green since it saves them money. This approach uses a combination of mitigation framework, market forces, automation engineering, and free factory designs to facilitate global decarbonization. From a foreign policy perspective, the US gains influence by injecting key technology into international markets.

The disadvantage of a plan that gets us to zero is it involves trillion of dollars of equipment, and very few people, both inside and outside government, feel qualified to deal with such large numbers.

Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 00:15, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

References

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• The Eiffel Tower Is Illuminated in Green to Celebrate Paris Agreement's Entry into Force.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:22, 3 March 2023 (UTC)