Talk:Citizens' Climate Lobby

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Promotional tone[edit]

This reads like a press release from the organization itself, which it likely is. 38.129.238.32 (talk) 19:22, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Much of the material on organization structure should go. Those looking for the names and roles of CCL staff can easily find (I guess) this information on the CCL website, where it is more likely to be current. If no one objects, I will copy-edit this section and rework some of the other more promotional text in due course. Best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 13:36, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

EMF report due late-2016 on US GHG and revenue recycling scenarios[edit]

The Energy Modeling Forum (EMF), coordinated by Stanford University, is due to release its EMF 32 report in late-2016.[1] The study is titled "US GHG and revenue recycling scenarios" and will, among other things, look at the redistribution of revenue from selected climate policies. I image a carbon tax or fee is one of those policies. Quoting from the EMF website:

The purpose of this modeling exercise is to use energy-economic models to assess emissions, energy and economic outcomes from a plausible range of US policies to reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs). In addition to standard emphasis on the effects of such policies on emissions, energy prices and macroeconomic performance, an economic issue of particular interest will be how fiscal decisions on revenue distribution might also affect these outcomes.[1]

The study appears appropriate for this article and should probably be added when released. Best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 19:17, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b "EMF 32: US GHG and revenue recycling scenarios". Energy Modeling Forum (EMF). Standford, CA, USA. Retrieved 2016-10-22.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Citizens' Climate Lobby. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:46, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Link to (not "Citizen's") Climate Lobby removed from main page.[edit]

Not able to access http://www.climatelobby.org

And so removed:

Other
Climate Lobby – an organization distinct from Citizens' Climate Lobby which opposes a fee and dividend scheme


It's not http://www.climatelobby.com, which seems to be a domain for listed sale.

Perhaps this former organization is defunct?

Irrelevant sections[edit]

Most of the the sections "economic basis for action" and "proposed US legislation" have, as far as I can tell, no direct relevance to the CCL. It rather seems to be a general summary of the case for carbon taxes. As such I'd suggest taking it out of this article and folding it into the main carbon tax article (to the extent that the content isn't already there in some form). --Tserton (talk) 05:32, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]