CitiesIPCC: Suggestions to accelerate action on climate co-benefits in cities?

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Climate Policy > CitiesIPCC: Suggestions to accelerate action on climate co-benefits in cities?

CitiesIPCC: Suggestions to accelerate action on climate co-benefits in cities?13-01-2018 08:03
Msethi ☆☆☆☆☆ (1)	Hi, as some of you may be aware IPCC is organizing its first ever meet on cities titled Cities and Climate Change Science Conference 2018 in Edmonton, Canada from 5-7 March (https://citiesipcc.org/). Its aim is to foster new scientific knowledge for cities based on science, practice and policy. I have been invited to chair a session on "Co-benefits: Practical experiences, lessons learned, knowledge gaps and policy imperatives to change urbanization paths in the emerging economies". The aim of this session is to discuss the necessary changes in current urbanization and GHG path in rapidly developing countries, having climate co-benefits as an approach. As evidence, there would be case studies from China, India, Brazil, Iran and Turkey. The organizers are further open to have inputs from a wider community including experts, practitioners, thinkers and commoners who would like to suggest how climate action agenda could be better mainstreamed into planning and management of cities. In order to make this session truly representative of people's aspirations from different countries following diverse techno-societal systems, I invite you to offer your suggestions in light of the session brief (see below). Please keep your ideas specific and to the point. In the end, I would analyze these and report the most relevant suggestions in the conference proceeding, hence I encourage you to identify yourself, so that this exercise becomes more credible. Dr Mahendra Sethi New Delhi, India Session Description- Co-benefits: Practical experiences, lessons learned, knowledge gaps and policy imperatives to change urbanization paths in the emerging economies The future of sustainable development objectives is intrinsically linked to the future development processes in our cities, particularly in emerging economies. These transforming urban societies face multiple challenges like addressing economic development needs, local environmental loss, poor-infrastructure and climate resilience, amongst increasing contributions to global GHGs. This is further accentuated by their low performance on parameters of social development, equity, functional autonomy and financial capacity. Nevertheless, cities being centers of knowledge, debates and politics bear immense potential to catalyze partnerships, economies of scale and efficiency gains that lower the use of resources and energy, and thereby promote doing more with less, while offering fair outcomes to the most vulnerable people and the environment. In the last decade or so, the co-benefits approach has proved to be a key mechanism that provides both vertical cross-linkages between institutions (global, national and local objectives) on the one end and horizontal interactions between mitigation and adaptation related policy sectors on the other, to co-generate positive and larger impacts. It thus becomes crucial to assess the practical application of co-benefits experience- lessons learned, scientific tools, knowledge gaps in the emerging economies with the overarching aim to discern policy imperatives that moderate current unsustainable pathways of urbanization. The session would present a capsule of knowledge on co-benefits as an approach to change urbanization paths in rapidly developing countries, particularly in India, China, Brazil, Turkey and Iran, which all together comprise of 1.5 billion urban inhabitants. Reflections from the developed context that have a bearing on growing cities in the developing world are equally welcome.
13-01-2018 13:34
Tim the plumber ★★★★☆ (1356)	Given that the most extreme problem facing anybody from the projections is a rise in sea level of less than 1m I suggest that urban planners consider adding a little to the sea defences they build. The additional cost will be less than the budget for traffic lights and the need to keep there cool and not panic. Should do the trick. Maybe a little better flood defences vs rainfall would be good as well. That might be slightly increased, and the once in a century events that are planned for need to be considered more likely as when you plan for one of those you should be planning for 100 diffeerent once in a century events. The ones you adequately planned for will not be noticed but the one you didn't will ruin your career.
13-01-2018 20:37
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" plugged:...rise in sea level of less than 1m.....adding a little to the sea defences(sic) they build. The additional cost will be less than the budget for traffic lights.... Maybe a little better flood defences(sic) vs rainfall...... once in a century events that are planned for need to be considered more likely..... "old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" lowballs rising oceans plus the costs to combat ocean rises. Already Miami paid $450 million just to pump sea water back to the sea from flooding from a bad storm. Wait till the bills come in from ocean waters that don't recede after major storms breach the minimal defenses erected by "old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger". AGW defenses of "tipped the leaky plunger" are as thoughtful as its spelling of "defense".
13-01-2018 20:45
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	Tim the plumber wrote: Given that the most extreme problem facing anybody from the projections is a rise in sea level of less than 1m I suggest that urban planners consider adding a little to the sea defences they build. The additional cost will be less than the budget for traffic lights and the need to keep there cool and not panic. Should do the trick. Maybe a little better flood defences vs rainfall would be good as well. That might be slightly increased, and the once in a century events that are planned for need to be considered more likely as when you plan for one of those you should be planning for 100 diffeerent once in a century events. The ones you adequately planned for will not be noticed but the one you didn't will ruin your career. Heh. Do you know how much water is in 1 meter of sea level rise? Just how much ice do these idiots think is ON the land masses of the Earth, assuming you melted ALL of it??? The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
13-01-2018 21:54
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	[b]Into the Night wrote o you know how much water is in 1 meter of sea level rise? Just how much ice do these idiots think is ON the land masses of the Earth, assuming you melted ALL of it??? There is about 360,000 cubic kilometers in a 1 meter of ocean rise. Only a small portion of land ice, if melted, would raise oceans 10 times higher than 1 meter.

14-01-2018 13:02
Tim the plumber ★★★★☆ (1356)	litesong wrote: [b]Into the Night wrote o you know how much water is in 1 meter of sea level rise? Just how much ice do these idiots think is ON the land masses of the Earth, assuming you melted ALL of it??? There is about 360,000 cubic kilometers in a 1 meter of ocean rise. Only a small portion of land ice, if melted, would raise oceans 10 times higher than 1 meter. Correct. Well done. How much water flows down the Mississippi per month?
15-01-2018 18:42
Tim the plumber ★★★★☆ (1356)	litesong wrote: "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" plopped: litesong wrote: "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: Do you know how much water is in 1 meter of sea level rise? Just how much ice do these idiots think is ON the land masses of the Earth, assuming you melted ALL of it??? There is about 360,000 cubic kilometers in a 1 meter of ocean rise. Only a small portion of land ice, if melted, would raise oceans 10 times higher than 1 meter. Correct. Well done. Oh, "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" isn't very good at mathematics, because it never had science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc in its poorly earned hi skule DEE-plooomaa. It left itself wide open. I am asking you to multiply the flow rate of the Mississippi by the time of 1 month. It's OK, you don't need algebra for this. You can do it.
15-01-2018 19:41
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	"old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" plopped:I am asking you.... "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" thinks it has a teaching certificate, is authoritarian, can hand out homework, grade it & impose penalties. Meanwhile, "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" remains an old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner, who is a tipped leaky plunger.
19-01-2018 11:51
Tim the plumber ★★★★☆ (1356)	litesong wrote: "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" plopped:I am asking you.... "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" thinks it has a teaching certificate, is authoritarian, can hand out homework, grade it & impose penalties. Meanwhile, "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" remains an old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner, who is a tipped leaky plunger. Numbers are beyond you then.
20-01-2018 08:46
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	"old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" plugged: Numbers are beyond you then. "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" knows I know numbers. "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" thinks it has a teaching certificate, is authoritarian, can hand out homework, grade it & impose penalties. Meanwhile, "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" remains an old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner, who is a tipped leaky plunger. The reason "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" keeps at me, is because it knows its name is..... accurate & correct. Edited on 20-01-2018 08:49
20-01-2018 12:17
Tim the plumber ★★★★☆ (1356)	litesong wrote: "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" plugged: Numbers are beyond you then. "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" knows I know numbers. "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" thinks it has a teaching certificate, is authoritarian, can hand out homework, grade it & impose penalties. Meanwhile, "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" remains an old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner, who is a tipped leaky plunger. The reason "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" keeps at me, is because it knows its name is..... accurate & correct. I have no evidence at all that you are capable of basic arithmatic. 1, Calculate the amount of water falling on Greenland(snow) per year form the area of it, 2.166 million km², and the average precipitation of 350mm/yr or there abouts. 2, Then calculate the flow rate of the Mississippi, from 16,790 m³/s, per month. Then dived 1 by 2 to see how many Mississippi sized rivers you should see coming out of Greenland each summer (about 1 month long) to have a stable amount of ice mass on it. 4 minutes.
21-01-2018 11:00
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	Tim the plumber wrote:I have no evidence at all that you are capable of basic arithmatic(sic). Of course, you know I know numbers. & I know that "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" is an old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner, with a tipped leaky plunger. First, your estimate of Greenland precipitation may be too high. Second, you have no estimate of Greenland ice sublimation. Third, you don't have: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC3VTgIPoGU "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger"... stuff you & yer little boy calculation. "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" thinks it has a teaching certificate, is authoritarian, can hand out homework, grade it & impose penalties. Meanwhile, "old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" remains an old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner, who is a tipped leaky plunger & any calculation it makes has no effect reducing the validity of AGW.
21-01-2018 12:38
Tim the plumber ★★★★☆ (1356)	^ For pitty's sake knock off the stupid endless drivel attacks! Sublimation over a 1 month period will be very low. A lot less than 10mm. If you can find any estimate of Greenland precipitation, as an average, that is less than 350mm good luck. There are places, such as the Southern tip of it, where they have 2.5m. I will not watch any video without you explaining what it is about. I still have no evidence of you having any ability to do basic sums.
21-01-2018 18:35
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	Tim the plumber wrote: ^ For pitty's sake knock off the stupid endless drivel attacks! Sublimation over a 1 month period will be very low. A lot less than 10mm. If you can find any estimate of Greenland precipitation, as an average, that is less than 350mm good luck. There are places, such as the Southern tip of it, where they have 2.5m. I will not watch any video without you explaining what it is about. I still have no evidence of you having any ability to do basic sums. Nice argument you presented. Well thought out. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
22-01-2018 09:35
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leakey plunger" Sublimation over a 1 month period will be very low. A lot less than 10mm. If you can find any estimate of Greenland precipitation, as an average, that is less than 350mm good luck. There are places, such as the Southern tip of it, where they have 2.5m. "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leakey plunger" knows there are Science Papers indicating much more than 10mm sublimation rates. & of course, it mentions Greenland's wettest spots when the vast majority of Greenland is designated desert &/or very near. & once you see a "deglaciated map of Greenland" you can see the Island has greatly more sea/land interface to off-load great quantities of glacial melt water than imagined: https://www.google.com/search?q=greenland+desert+map&tbm=isch&tbs=rimg:CfcHtyisAZqaIjhDlR3nb_1cqmvOioPE1UnIX83mws4hOUU91bv22eCM1eMdewRgOlx-7ZftKI-I-gK5tQ0Q_1ybn8MCoSCUOVHedv9yqaETwNCzF2p5yTKhIJ86Kg8TVSchcRX4A7JwYXJ2cqEgnzebCziE5RTxG3izXeeaHYxioSCXVu_1bZ4IzV4ESSItRnIVJSMKhIJx17BGA6XH7sR-0JlEMyjjGsqEgll-0oj4j6ArhHSMJ39IWMtFioSCW1DRD_1JufwwEQdKsYOD6HtG&tbo=u&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi5nb7uhOvYAhUBDmMKHWuWBUIQ9C8IHw&biw=1412&bih=949&dpr=1#imgrc=_u62ycw9GYKcmM: Edited on 22-01-2018 09:37

24-01-2018 12:20
Tim the plumber ★★★★☆ (1356)	litesong wrote: "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leakey plunger" Sublimation over a 1 month period will be very low. A lot less than 10mm. If you can find any estimate of Greenland precipitation, as an average, that is less than 350mm good luck. There are places, such as the Southern tip of it, where they have 2.5m. "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leakey plunger" knows there are Science Papers indicating much more than 10mm sublimation rates. & of course, it mentions Greenland's wettest spots when the vast majority of Greenland is designated desert &/or very near. & once you see a "deglaciated map of Greenland" you can see the Island has greatly more sea/land interface to off-load great quantities of glacial melt water than imagined: https://www.google.com/search?q=greenland+desert+map&tbm=isch&tbs=rimg:CfcHtyisAZqaIjhDlR3nb_1cqmvOioPE1UnIX83mws4hOUU91bv22eCM1eMdewRgOlx-7ZftKI-I-gK5tQ0Q_1ybn8MCoSCUOVHedv9yqaETwNCzF2p5yTKhIJ86Kg8TVSchcRX4A7JwYXJ2cqEgnzebCziE5RTxG3izXeeaHYxioSCXVu_1bZ4IzV4ESSItRnIVJSMKhIJx17BGA6XH7sR-0JlEMyjjGsqEgll-0oj4j6ArhHSMJ39IWMtFioSCW1DRD_1JufwwEQdKsYOD6HtG&tbo=u&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi5nb7uhOvYAhUBDmMKHWuWBUIQ9C8IHw&biw=1412&bih=949&dpr=1#imgrc=_u62ycw9GYKcmM: Eh??? What is your argument? Burrying what you have to say in drivel is never going to achieve anything. That Greenland's ice melt goes away via magic undersea rivers or what? All of the meltwater and exiting ice has to go through the fjords. Any meltwater that has flown from any significant distance away from the front of the glacier will have worked it's way down under the ice and will be flowing along the bottom of the valley floor. All glaciers have a stream under them. This valley floor is covered with the sludge of ground up rock from the action of the glacier. The water running out has the distinct grey colour of water full of this sediment. If there is any Mississippi sized such river poping out anywhere it will be very obvious even if it comes out under the sea. You need 18 such rivers. To break even.
25-01-2018 01:59
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	Tim the plumber wrote: Burrying(sic)... flown(sic)....poping(sic)..... All glaciers have a stream under them. You need 18 such rivers. Not only out-going cold streams but incoming warm streams to melt ice over-lying the fjords. & there is. Now that glaciers are in retreat, they are uncovering the deeper parts of the fjords that are even closer to the inflowing glacier snouts, with the opportunities to eat far more ice than previously. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC3VTgIPoGU
25-01-2018 10:18
Tim the plumber ★★★★☆ (1356)	litesong wrote: Tim the plumber wrote: Burrying(sic)... flown(sic)....poping(sic)..... All glaciers have a stream under them. You need 18 such rivers. Not only out-going cold streams but incoming warm streams to melt ice over-lying the fjords. & there is. Now that glaciers are in retreat, they are uncovering the deeper parts of the fjords that are even closer to the inflowing glacier snouts, with the opportunities to eat far more ice than previously. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC3VTgIPoGU How many Mississippi sized flows do you see?
25-01-2018 19:05
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	Tim the plumber wrote: litesong wrote: Tim the plumber wrote: Burrying(sic)... flown(sic)....poping(sic)..... All glaciers have a stream under them. You need 18 such rivers. Not only out-going cold streams but incoming warm streams to melt ice over-lying the fjords. & there is. Now that glaciers are in retreat, they are uncovering the deeper parts of the fjords that are even closer to the inflowing glacier snouts, with the opportunities to eat far more ice than previously. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC3VTgIPoGU How many Mississippi sized flows do you see? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC3VTgIPoGU Keep watching.....
26-01-2018 15:13
Tim the plumber ★★★★☆ (1356)	litesong wrote: Tim the plumber wrote: litesong wrote: Tim the plumber wrote: Burrying(sic)... flown(sic)....poping(sic)..... All glaciers have a stream under them. You need 18 such rivers. Not only out-going cold streams but incoming warm streams to melt ice over-lying the fjords. & there is. Now that glaciers are in retreat, they are uncovering the deeper parts of the fjords that are even closer to the inflowing glacier snouts, with the opportunities to eat far more ice than previously. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC3VTgIPoGU How many Mississippi sized flows do you see? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC3VTgIPoGU Keep watching..... No. I will not watch any video without you telling what it is about and what is in it. i expect you to have watched it yourself and to be able to quote bits of it. I further want you to explain where all the meltwater from Greenland goes.
26-01-2018 17:45
litesong ★★★★★ (2297)	"old sick silly sleepy sleezy AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" plugged:....without you telling....i expect you....I further want you to..... The authoritarian teacher without a certificate thinks it can demand. Its ego earns its name. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC3VTgIPoGU Keep watching..... Edited on 26-01-2018 17:46

Join the debate CitiesIPCC: Suggestions to accelerate action on climate co-benefits in cities?:

Threads	Replies	Last post
The Ukraine War Will End Immediately If The USA Receive The Benefits They Looking For	0	15-07-2023 09:03
Big Cities	36	09-09-2021 03:03
Big Nations Must Allow Local States Big Cities To Issue It Own New Local Currency Money	1	18-03-2021 19:44
Action that we all should take urgently!	22	13-10-2020 04:39
Govt action	25	29-02-2020 04:22