摘要：Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} At this moment in the conference I see the debate shifting from science to economics. In a broader sense, through the good work of the IPCC, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and the scientific community the sizeable portion of Americans who do not believe that global warming is a significant problem is getting smaller and smaller. Importantly, I feel that the business community is no longer in great numbers resisting it to the extent that it can completely flummox the political flow in Washington. So as we accept climate change as a significant problem we move from the question of whether to one of how. I believe that is really an issue of economics, a combination of conventional economics and some of the non-conventional economics that we just heard about.
