Talk:Climate change mitigation

I've just carried out the merger from Co-benefits of climate change mitigation. This has made the section on co-benefits a bit too long probably. I've already looked for ways of condensing. Please help with condensing this further (if you think it ought to be condensed). We are actually so lucky that CC mitigation has so many co-benefits. Imagine if it didn't, how much harder it would then be to push it through... EMsmile (talk) 08:33, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

The overall length of the article is still on the long side: 60 kB (9271 words) "readable prose size".

What do folks suggest regarding options for condensing and culling. Does anything jump at you that can be condensed or even taken out? - Or do we argue that 60 kB is not too long for this kind of article. For comparison, the climate change article is 54 kB. EMsmile (talk) 11:42, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

:Personally as this is such a high level subject I would prefer more excerpts but only if the excerpted articles were rated good. So in practice that probably is not going to happen any time soon. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:13, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

:: General comment: I'm very wary of excerpting, since they often bring unintended and nonobvious consequences in unspecified locations. —RCraig09 (talk) 19:49, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

::: There's always room for updating and conciseness. I think that as public consciousness—along with related political controversy—continues to grow, mitigation will rise in importance, bringing an even greater need for updating and conciseness. As Effects of climate change has been promoted to Good Article status, the present article might be high on the community's to-do list. —RCraig09 (talk) 19:46, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

:::: Agreed. I think condensing is needed but am unsure which sections in particular need to be condensed, given WP:DUE considerations. And it would be great if the wider Wikipedia editing community took an interest. We have come a long way with this article. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Climate_change_mitigation&oldid=1099572321 The version from one year ago] was quite shocking! 101 kB long and rambling and all over the place, impossible to read and understand. I think we should roughly aim for no longer than 50 kB (which means culling by about 15% compared to the current length).

:::: Looking at the section sizes (see link at the top of the talk page), I have the following suggestions:

1. The section "Preserving and enhancing carbon sinks" has perhaps become a bit too long (perhaps we should rely more on the sub-article carbon sequestration to provide people with details).
2. Also "mitigation by sector" is probably too long (given that this is covered anyway at greenhouse gas emissions
3. Is the section "policies" too long and detailed, given the myriad of sub-articles on this topic?
4. Maybe we should drop the entire "example by country" section? Then again, US, China and EU are probably the three most important players (?). The section on the US is anyway only an excerpt, so it doesn't add to the overall word count. Still, perhaps remove all three examples? EMsmile (talk) 07:57, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

::::: I came back to this one year later and the article has become even longer in the meantime, currently at 63 kB! I think it would be good to get it down to say 58 kB. I had a look at the "section sizes" table at the top of the talk page to see which sections stood out as being overly long. I then condensed the content in:

:::::* Health and wellbeing

:::::* ‎Integrating variable renewable energy

:::::* National policies

:::::* Soils

::::: What do you all think? I think it would make this article more useful for our readers if we looked carefully for paragraphs with excessive detail and moved those to sub-articles. Also we need to ensure that the overall balance and WP:DUE is just right. EMsmile (talk) 14:30, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

:Hi User:Xuhang1204, I've removed this recently added content of yours, because I regard this as excessive detail for a high level article that is already overly long. Look for another article to inculde it in, e.g. greenhouse gas emissions or the one on AI maybe?:

:"AI-driven optimization and predictive maintenance in industrial processes are emerging as key strategies to enhance energy efficiency and reduce emissions, particularly in energy-intensive sectors like steel and cement.{{Cite journal |last=Akomea-Frimpong |first=Isaac |last2=Dzagli |first2=Jacinta Rejoice Ama Delali |last3=Eluerkeh |first3=Kenneth |last4=Bonsu |first4=Franklina Boakyewaa |last5=Opoku-Brafi |first5=Sabastina |last6=Gyimah |first6=Samuel |last7=Asuming |first7=Nana Ama Sika |last8=Atibila |first8=David Wireko |last9=Kukah |first9=Augustine Senanu |date=2023-12-25 |title=A systematic review of artificial intelligence in managing climate risks of PPP infrastructure projects |url=https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/ECAM-01-2023-0016/full/html |journal=Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management |language=en |doi=10.1108/ECAM-01-2023-0016 |issn=0969-9988}}" EMsmile (talk) 12:30, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

:{{reflist-talk}} EMsmile (talk) 12:30, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

I removed this image as it's extremely hard to read. File:2022 Worldwide GHG Emissions (per capita; by region; growth).png Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 21:59, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

There is a discussion on the talk page of economics of climate change mitigation whether this text block, called "degrowth", should be moved back to here where it once was before I moved it to the sub-article. It could perhaps fit under the section of "demand reduction" but it sounds somehow wordy/academic to me, and it might overlap with existing content. I have no clear opinion on this, other to say that the article climate change mitigation is on the long side already. It's 64 kB and we put a lot of effort into shrinking it down to this size. This is the text block in question:

+++++++

Degrowth

There is a debate about a potentially critical need for new ways of economic accounting, including directly monitoring and quantifying positive real-world environmental effects such as air quality improvements and related unprofitable work like forest protection, alongside far-reaching structural changes of lifestyles{{cite journal |author1=Thomas Wiedmann |author2=Manfred Lenzen |author3=Lorenz T. Keyßer |author4=Julia Steinberger |date=19 June 2020 |title=Scientists' warning on affluence |journal=Nature Communications |volume=11 |issue=1 |page=3107 |bibcode=2020NatCo..11.3107W |doi=10.1038/s41467-020-16941-y |pmc=7305220 |pmid=32561753 |doi-access=free}}{{cite web |title=Why GDP is no longer the most effective measure of economic success |url=https://www.worldfinance.com/strategy/why-gdp-is-no-longer-the-most-effective-measure-of-economic-success |access-date=17 September 2020 |website=www.worldfinance.com}} as well as acknowledging and moving beyond the limits of current economics such as GDP.{{cite journal |last1=Kapoor |first1=Amit |last2=Debroy |first2=Bibek |author-link2=Bibek Debroy |date=4 October 2019 |title=GDP Is Not a Measure of Human Well-Being |url=https://hbr.org/2019/10/gdp-is-not-a-measure-of-human-well-being |journal=Harvard Business Review |access-date=20 September 2020}} Some argue that for effective climate change mitigation degrowth has to occur, while some argue that eco-economic decoupling could limit climate change enough while continuing high rates of traditional GDP growth.{{cite journal |last1=Hickel |first1=Jason |last2=Hallegatte |first2=Stéphane |year=2021 |title=Can we live within environmental limits and still reduce poverty? Degrowth or decoupling? |journal=Development Policy Review |language=en |volume=40 |doi=10.1111/dpr.12584 |issn=1467-7679 |s2cid=239636388|doi-access=free }}{{cite news |last1=Landler |first1=Mark |last2=Sengupta |first2=Somini |date=21 January 2020 |title=Trump and the Teenager: A Climate Showdown at Davos |newspaper=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/21/climate/greta-thunberg-trump-davos.html |access-date=20 September 2020}} There is also research and debate about requirements of how economic systems could be transformed for sustainability – such as how their jobs could transition harmonously into green jobs – a just transition – and how relevant sectors of the economy – like the renewable energy industry and the bioeconomy – could be adequately supported.{{cite web |title=Skills for Green Jobs: A Global View |url=http://www.oit.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---dcomm/---publ/documents/article/wcms_165282.pdf |access-date=8 November 2021}}{{cite journal |last1=van der Ree |first1=Kees |date=1 June 2019 |title=Promoting Green Jobs: Decent Work in the Transition to Low-Carbon, Green Economies |journal=International Development Policy {{!}} Revue internationale de politique de développement |language=en |issue=11 |pages=248–271 |doi=10.4000/poldev.3107 |issn=1663-9375 |s2cid=197784487|doi-access=free }}

While degrowth is often believed to be associated with decreased living standards and austerity measures, many of its proponents seek to expand universal public goods{{cite journal |last1=Hickel|first1=Jason|author-link1=Jason Hickel|last2=Kallis|first2=Giorgos|author-link2=Giorgos Kallis|last3=Jackson|first3=Tim|author-link3=Tim Jackson (economist)|last4=O'Neill|first4=Daniel W.|last5=Schor|first5=Juliet B.|author-link5=Juliet Schor|last6=Steinberger|first6=Julia K.|author-link6=Julia Steinberger|display-authors=etal.|date=December 12, 2022|title=Degrowth can work — here's how science can help|url= |journal=Nature|volume=612|issue=7940|pages=400–403|doi=10.1038/d41586-022-04412-x|pmid=36510013 |bibcode=2022Natur.612..400H |s2cid=254614532 |access-date=|quote=Researchers in ecological economics call for a different approach — degrowth. Wealthy economies should abandon growth of gross domestic product (GDP) as a goal, scale down destructive and unnecessary forms of production to reduce energy and material use, and focus economic activity around securing human needs and well-being.|doi-access=free}}{{cite web |url=https://monthlyreview.org/2023/07/01/planned-degrowth/|title=Planned Degrowth: Ecosocialism and Sustainable Human Development|last=Foster|first=John Bellamy|author-link=John Bellamy Foster|date=July 1, 2023 |website=Monthly Review |publisher= |access-date=August 24, 2023 |quote=Degrowth, in this sense, is not aimed at austerity, but at finding a "prosperous way down" from our current extractivist, wasteful, ecologically unsustainable, maldeveloped, exploitative, and unequal, class-hierarchical world. Continued growth would occur in some areas of the economy, made possible by reductions elsewhere. Spending on fossil fuels, armaments, private jets, sport utility vehicles, second homes, and advertising would need to be cut in order to provide room for growth in such areas as regenerative agriculture, food production, decent housing, clean energy, accessible health care, universal education, community welfare, public transportation, digital connectivity, and other areas related to green production and social needs.}} (such as public transport), increase health{{cite journal |last1=Borowy |first1=Iris |last2=Aillon |first2=Jean-Louis |date=1 August 2017 |title=Sustainable health and degrowth: Health, health care and society beyond the growth paradigm |journal=Social Theory & Health |language=en |volume=15 |issue=3 |pages=346–368 |doi=10.1057/s41285-017-0032-7 |issn=1477-822X |s2cid=152144759}}{{cite web |last1=Aillon |first1=J. |last2=Cardito |first2=M. |date=2020 |title=Health and Degrowth in times of Pandemic |url=https://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/visions/issue/download/495/Visions%20for%20Sustainability%20%2314%20-%20Full%20Issue#page=3 |language=en}}{{cite journal |last1=Missoni |first1=Eduardo |author-link1=Eduardo Missoni |date=1 July 2015 |title=Degrowth and health: local action should be linked to global policies and governance for health |url=https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11625-015-0300-1 |journal=Sustainability Science |language=en |volume=10 |issue=3 |pages=439–450 |doi=10.1007/s11625-015-0300-1 |bibcode=2015SuSc...10..439M |issn=1862-4057 |quote=Volume and increase of spending in the health sector contribute to economic growth, but do not consistently relate with better health. Instead, unsatisfactory health trends, health systems' inefficiencies, and high costs are linked to the globalization of a growth society dominated by neoliberal economic ideas and policies of privatization, deregulation, and liberalization. A degrowth approach, understood as frame that connects diverse ideas, concepts, and proposals alternative to growth as a societal objective, can contribute to better health and a more efficient use of health systems. |s2cid=55806403}} (fitness, wellbeing{{cite journal |last1=Büchs |first1=Milena |last2=Koch |first2=Max |date=1 January 2019 |title=Challenges for the degrowth transition: The debate about wellbeing |journal=Futures |language=en |volume=105 |pages=155–165 |doi=10.1016/j.futures.2018.09.002 |issn=0016-3287 |quote=The first part reviews the arguments that degrowth proponents have put forward on the ways in which degrowth can maintain or even improve wellbeing. It also outlines why the basic needs approach is most suitable for conceptualising wellbeing in a degrowth context. The second part considers additional challenges to maintaining or even improving current levels of wellbeing under degrowth |s2cid=149731503|doi-access=free }} and freedom from diseases) and increase various forms of, often unconventional commons-oriented,{{cite journal |last1=Kostakis |first1=Vasilis |last2=Latoufis |first2=Kostas |last3=Liarokapis |first3=Minas |last4=Bauwens |first4=Michel |date=1 October 2018 |title=The convergence of digital commons with local manufacturing from a degrowth perspective: Two illustrative cases |journal=Journal of Cleaner Production |language=en |volume=197 |pages=1684–1693 |doi=10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.077 |bibcode=2018JCPro.197.1684K |issn=0959-6526 |quote=A large part of the activity taking place under the CBPP umbrella presents a lot of similarities with the degrowth concept of unpaid work and decommodification (Nierling, 2012). The majority of "peers" engaged in commons-oriented projects are motivated by passion, communication, learning and enrichment (Benkler, 2006, 2011). Kostakis et al. (2015, 2016) have only theoretically and conceptually explored the contours of an emerging productive model that builds on the convergence of the digital commons of knowledge, software and design with local manufacturing technologies. They tentatively call it "design global, manufacture local" |s2cid=43975556}} labor. To this end, the application of both advanced technologies and reductions in various demands, including via overall reduced labor time{{cite journal |last1=Scarrow |first1=Ryan |date=April 2018 |title=Work and degrowth |journal=Nature Sustainability |language=en |volume=1 |issue=4 |pages=159 |doi=10.1038/s41893-018-0057-5 |bibcode=2018NatSu...1..159S |issn=2398-9629 |s2cid=149576398}} or sufficiency-oriented strategies,{{cite journal |last1=Haberl |first1=Helmut |last2=Wiedenhofer |first2=Dominik |last3=Virág |first3=Doris |last4=Kalt |first4=Gerald |last5=Plank |first5=Barbara |last6=Brockway |first6=Paul |last7=Fishman |first7=Tomer |last8=Hausknost |first8=Daniel |last9=Krausmann |first9=Fridolin |last10=Leon-Gruchalski |first10=Bartholomäus |last11=Mayer |first11=Andreas |last12=Pichler |first12=Melanie |last13=Schaffartzik |first13=Anke |last14=Sousa |first14=Tânia |last15=Streeck |first15=Jan |date=10 June 2020 |title=A systematic review of the evidence on decoupling of GDP, resource use and GHG emissions, part II: synthesizing the insights |journal=Environmental Research Letters |language=en |volume=15 |issue=6 |pages=065003 |bibcode=2020ERL....15f5003H |doi=10.1088/1748-9326/ab842a |issn=1748-9326 |last16=Creutzig |first16=Felix |author16-link=Felix Creutzig |s2cid=216453887|doi-access=free }} are considered to be important by some.{{cite journal |last1=Hickel |first1=Jason|author-link1=Jason Hickel|date=3 October 2021 |title=What does degrowth mean? A few points of clarification |journal=Globalizations |volume=18 |issue=7 |pages=1105–1111 |doi=10.1080/14747731.2020.1812222 |issn=1474-7731 |s2cid=221800076|doi-access=free |bibcode=2021Glob...18.1105H }}{{cite journal |last1=Millward-Hopkins |first1=Joel |last2=Steinberger |first2=Julia K. |last3=Rao |first3=Narasimha D. |last4=Oswald |first4=Yannick |date=1 November 2020 |title=Providing decent living with minimum energy: A global scenario |journal=Global Environmental Change |language=en |volume=65 |pages=102168 |doi=10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102168 |issn=0959-3780 |s2cid=224977493|doi-access=free |bibcode=2020GEC....6502168M }}

+++++++

Note also my proposal on the talk page of economics of climate change mitigation to delete outdated content and to merge the rest into climate change mitigation. The [https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&range=all-time&pages=Economics_of_climate_change_mitigation pageviews] of economics of climate change mitigation are very low (about 20 per day), and the recent engagement of editors with that article is also very low, which has led to a lot of outdated content (a lot of that outdated content I've already deleted last week). EMsmile (talk) 09:22, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

{{reflist-talk}} EMsmile (talk) 09:22, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

I have proposed this merge at Talk:Decarbonization pathway. I would love to hear your views on my proposal. -- Y not? 12:06, 27 February 2025 (UTC)