{"id":133,"date":"2011-03-08T13:26:53","date_gmt":"2011-03-08T20:26:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/econscience.org\/blog\/?p=133"},"modified":"2011-03-08T13:27:45","modified_gmt":"2011-03-08T20:27:45","slug":"succinct-goal-to-stabilize-co2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/econscience.org\/blog\/2011\/03\/08\/succinct-goal-to-stabilize-co2\/","title":{"rendered":"Succinct goal to stabilize CO2"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>NASA&#8217;s Gavin Schmidt quote from his comment at 10:17 in a <a href=\"http:\/\/news.sciencemag.org\/scienceinsider\/2011\/03\/house-climate-science-hearing-li.html\">March 7 Congressional hearing live blog<\/a>:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><span id=\"txt141465805\">CO2 stabilisation requires cuts of 60-70% in  emissions at some  point in the next few decades (and the sooner it  occurs the lower the  stabilised value will be). That *will* require  concerted international  action, which is made up of national actions.  The only ethical response  is to work towards building the conditions  for international action. <\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>NASA&#8217;s Gavin Schmidt quote from his comment at 10:17 in a March 7 Congressional hearing live blog: CO2 stabilisation requires cuts of 60-70% in emissions at some point in the next few decades (and the sooner it occurs the lower &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/econscience.org\/blog\/2011\/03\/08\/succinct-goal-to-stabilize-co2\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-133","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-co2"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p8qtAj-29","jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/econscience.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/133","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/econscience.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/econscience.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/econscience.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/econscience.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=133"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/econscience.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/133\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":136,"href":"https:\/\/econscience.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/133\/revisions\/136"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/econscience.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=133"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/econscience.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=133"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/econscience.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=133"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}