@IPEEP_eth.

More, better and enhanced data can certainly help policy making, implementation and citizen awareness, but the absence of data should not necessitate the absence of action. Nor is more data necessary before effective solutions can be implemented.

Many pollution mitigating solutions (waste management, electrification, road infrastructure, public transit, renewable energy investment) are “no regrets” policies, having broad economic and health benefits, and should be adopted in any case.

The evidence of air pollution is undeniable in many lower/middle income countries. Regardless of absolute levels of exposure, mitigating measures can save lives. Governments don’t need to wait for more evidence before acting.

Great inequalities persist in air quality monitoring. People in rich countries are 12x more likely than to have monitoring. But that doesn’t mean we need to wait for more monitors to reduce air pollution ⬇️ Camille de Lauriere and Ella Henninger @PNASNews

RT @IPEEP_eth: Can local action drive global climate change?. In their latest commentary in @NatureClimate, Thijs Bouman, @JBolderdijk & @e….

RT @keltonminor: There are days in life that shake you. I’m shattered 💔 to share that I just found out that the US Government terminated….

I’m going to go dark on here for a while. Need to make my world smaller, focus on what I can control and try to make peace with that which I cannot. But if you wanna say hi, would always love to hear from you. I am easy to find :-).

As always, remember that love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world.

RT @IPEEP_eth: How much should public transport (PT) services be expanded, and who should pay?.In Transport Policy, @LichtinFlorian, @ekeit….

RT @fdabl: I am beyond excited to announce that applications are now open for the @AmsterdamCSCC at @UvA_IAS!. Come visit a beautiful city,….

Just voted! Once again, always very thankful for the work of @COSecofState to help make voting overseas super easy.

RT @a_free_heart: Last week, I visited 4 of the 36 villages in Bangladesh 🇧🇩 in which we have been conducting a large-scale panel study on….

Identifying policy areas that may soon experience polarization can help policymakers and stakeholders prioritize legislative and regulatory agenda setting.

While solar tax credit and similar instruments may experience less resistance than other climate or renewable energy policies amongst American conservatives, levels of support are still vulnerable to larger shifts.

Future shifts in elite partisan cues (messages and statement) or partisan priorities could further polarize people with more “positive” identities - leading to levels of polarization more similar to other climate and energy policies.

We interpret these findings as a potential early warning signal for potential increases in partisanship around solar taxation policies in the US.

Most of the polarization is driven by partisans with “negative” identities - e.g. people who are largely driven to negate the goals of the other party.

We find that support for expanded investment tax credits in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act are polarized by partisan identities - but more moderately in comparison to other climate and energy related policies.

In our recent study, Adam Mayer and I explore how different partisan identities shape support for household solar energy ⬇️.