2007 Estimates of climate sensitivity vary widely

2007 The long tail of climate sensitivity

2008 How much sensitivity matters

2009 Risk of temperature directly related to concentrations, and varies widely over time

2010 Linking temperature to cumulative emissions

2010 Modeled sensitivity per 1000 GTs emissions

2010 Relating emissions trajectories to near-term and long-term warming

2011 Estimates of climate sensitivity have varied widely

2011 Probability distributions of climate sensitivity

2011 The tail of scientific uncertainty is longer than we thought

2011 Uncertainty - Climate sensitivity

2011 Uncertainty in climate sensitivity

2014 Estimated Equilibrium climate sensitivity

2014 Implications of climate sensitivity

2014 Transient climate response

2014 Where Climate Sensitivity Estimates Come From

A wide range of climate sensitivity estimates

Feedbacks with what impact?

Sea Level Rise SLR

The IPCC considers a wide range of values

Taylor: 90% of people advocate a modest tax with a strict escalator

Taylor: A recent survey of economists - 50% support drastic action, 43% say some action, 1% not a serious problem

Taylor: Conservative street doesn't like the message, the messengers, or where the policy train is headed

Taylor: Elected Republicans are out of touch with their base on climate change

Taylor: Even if you're unconvinced to act, that decision has been made. The only question is how we'll act

Taylor: Everything we have learned since 1906 is verified by our understanding of basic physics

Taylor: Governments job is to protect your life and liberty - regardless of the cost-benefit test

Taylor: Hayek noted that conservatives tend to reject well developed science and thought

Taylor: If liberals are right that mitigation is cheap, then emissions reductions from a carbon tax should be huge

Taylor: IPCC says a 10% chance by 2100 of 11 degrees. The scientific debate is about the error bars

Taylor: Ironically, conservatives have the best answer to climate change - the power of markets and the invisible hand

Taylor: It's a matter of what issues are in play - conservatives are NOT risk tolerant (look at refugees)

Taylor: Libertarians tend to argue the opposite way in every other policy arena

Taylor: Skeptical scientists don't argue the basic physics of warming. That's not the issue

Taylor: The "conservative street" is utterly disconnected from the science

Taylor: The debate should NOT be about the most likely outcomes - that's not the way we think

Taylor: The high end scenarios (even if low probability) would have cataclysmic outcomes

Taylor: The political right has been very poorly served by the policy of denial

Taylor: There are incredible uncertainties over climate change, but economic futures are even MORE uncertain

Taylor: There is no objective answer to risk tolerance

Taylor: There is NOTHING that will get the job done besides a real price on carbon - regulation can't get there

Taylors: Skeptics want to focus on likely outcomes, not explore the range of possible outcomes