Misplaced Pages

Latest revision as of 09:22, 25 November 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Climate change mitigation article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 6 months

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to climate change, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Climate action was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 18 February 2016 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Climate change mitigation. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Environment High‑importance This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Misplaced Pages:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Climate change Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our recommended sources and our style guide International relations High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Geology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Soil Mid‑importance Climate change mitigation is within the scope of WikiProject Soil, which collaborates on Soil and related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.SoilWikipedia:WikiProject SoilTemplate:WikiProject SoilSoil Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Science Policy High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Policy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science policy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science PolicyWikipedia:WikiProject Science PolicyTemplate:WikiProject Science PolicyScience Policy High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Energy High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Weather: Climate High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Misplaced Pages. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Climate task force (assessed as High-importance).

Section sizes Section size for Climate change mitigation (61 sections) Section name Byte count Section total (Top) 9,432 9,432 Definitions and scope 2,020 2,020 Emission trends and pledges 9,519 16,020 Needed emissions cuts 2,473 2,473 Pledges 4,028 4,028 Low-carbon energy 4,601 24,187 Solar and wind energy 4,622 4,622 Other renewables 3,651 3,651 Integrating variable renewable energy 7,749 7,749 Nuclear power 3,432 3,432 Replacing coal with natural gas 132 132 Demand reduction 4,123 20,592 Energy conservation and efficiency 3,048 3,048 Lifestyle changes 6,045 6,045 Dietary change 4,736 4,736 Family size 2,640 2,640 Preserving and enhancing carbon sinks 6,759 40,738 Forests 153 12,294 Conservation 3,847 3,847 Afforestation and reforestation 8,294 8,294 Soils 7,316 7,316 Wetlands 6,958 6,958 Deep ocean 6,287 6,287 Enhanced weathering 1,124 1,124 Other methods to capture and store CO2 markup removed; cannot link (help) 5,602 5,602 Mitigation by sector 807 34,141 Buildings 5,854 5,854 Urban planning 1,892 1,892 Transport 6,437 12,450 Shipping 2,546 2,546 Air transport 3,467 3,467 Agriculture, forestry and land use 7,124 7,124 Industry 6,014 6,014 Co-benefits 4,662 22,700 Employment and economic development 2,763 2,763 Energy security 3,591 3,591 Health and well-being 8,767 8,767 Climate change adaptation 2,917 2,917 Negative side effects 1,631 1,631 Costs and funding 9,113 13,821 Avoided costs of climate change effects 2,618 2,618 Distributing emissions abatement costs 1,459 1,459 Funding 631 631 Policies 16 14,840 National policies 9,363 12,790 Carbon pricing 3,427 3,427 International agreements 1,813 2,034 Paris Agreement 221 221 History 5,669 5,669 Society and culture 27 9,527 Commitments to divest 1,555 1,555 Barriers 4,724 4,724 Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic 3,221 3,221 Examples by country 2,027 6,047 United States 144 144 China 1,369 1,369 European Union 2,507 2,507 Related approaches 26 2,077 Relationship with solar radiation modification (SRM) 2,051 2,051 See also 231 231 References 476 476 Total 229,751 229,751

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers. This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist. ] The anchor (#Metal and mineral extraction) has been deleted by other users before. Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

References

References are lacking throughout. 2600:1700:2E10:A80:684B:ED49:AD8B:5620 (talk) 01:55, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

What do you mean? EMsmile (talk) 20:14, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Adapting the same wording as used at climate change?

Now that we have found suitable wording for the mitigation content at climate change (in the last paragraph of the lead of that article), should we also massage the same kind of wording into the lead and main text of this article? Pinging User:Efbrazil as they steered that discussion so well. EMsmile (talk) 15:15, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! How can I turn down such a nice request? Like a moth to a flame, here's a few thoughts on the first paragraph:

• The existing paragraph is overlong and stilted
• 3/4ths of climate change is fossil fuel use, so that's where we should be putting most of our emphasis
• The remaining 1/4 is mostly land use. Land use is a complicated issue, as it is part of the fast carbon cycle, not the slow carbon cycle, so it's good to bring into the discussion but we shouldn't over emphasize it (more forests is not a solution, they'll eventually rot or burn)
• CO2 removal is a fringe technology, arguably on par with climate engineering (SRM). While it's a necessary part of aggressive pathways, it's also highly speculative and not the key thing to focus on here.
• We need to make it clear that actions to date are insufficient to avoid dangerous levels of climate change, which is not done in the current last sentence

Given that, here's an initial stab at a rewrite. I'm avoiding sources and wikilinks here to keep the focus on the text.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Efbrazil (talk • contribs)

Thanks a lot. This looks good. As this article is not so heavily guarded, I think we can make incremental changes in the live article without long talk page discussions preceding it. As for your proposed new first paragraph, I like it but I find the second sentence is not linked very well with neither the preceding nor the following sentence. I think we should link them better by using constructions such as "for this reason" or "because of xx, yyy is necessary" (but without generating long sentences). I don't like that the first sentence ends with "climate change", and the second sentence starts with "climate change". But the overall approach and re-focus is good. EMsmile (talk) 09:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

OK, I was bold and edited the page directly with your input here. I see what you mean about the second sentence needing better bridging, so I made changes there. If anyone objects and backs the text out we can take it up here again, but hopefully we can just edit things on the live page to get to where we want. Note I also updated sources for the lead paragraph, including cutting a few sources that seemed unnecessary. Efbrazil (talk) 17:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

That's great, thank you. I've also made some further edits. I've put details in the edit summaries. Feel free to build on this, modify or revert. I have re-checked with the readability tool and most sentences are good, just a couple that are still in red (we can probably live with that).

But the lead is still a bit on the short side (only 368 words; I think we could aim for 450 to 500 words for an article of this length). Am wondering if we should add a bit on how individual action can help with mitigation? The main text has a section on it, so I think we could summarise that in the lead, e.g. more plant-based diets.

Maybe we could also be inspired and copy some sentences from the mitigation section of the main climate change article, i.e. from here: https://en.wikipedia.org/Climate_change#Reducing_and_recapturing_emissions

Interesting how that section is no longer called "mitigation" but "Reducing and recapturing emissions". Wondering if we also want to weave that language into our lead. Not too sure though if "recapturing emissions" is fully correct or abundantly clear though.EMsmile (talk) 21:48, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

I took an edit pass on the second and third paragraphs, just trying to help it read better and put things in context. A key part was introducing the idea of the fast and slow carbon cycles. A major issue to debunk is the idea of "just plant trees" as a way to mitigate climate change. Efbrazil (talk) 00:15, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

I think I'm done for today, feel free to go further or suggest what I should tackle next... Efbrazil (talk) 17:26, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Merged Co-benefits of climate change mitigation

I've just carried out the merger from Co-benefits of climate change mitigation. This has made the section on co-benefits a bit too long probably. I've already looked for ways of condensing. Please help with condensing this further (if you think it ought to be condensed). We are actually so lucky that CC mitigation has so many co-benefits. Imagine if it didn't, how much harder it would then be to push it through... EMsmile (talk) 08:33, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

How do we feel about overall length? More culling?

The overall length of the article is still on the long side: 60 kB (9271 words) "readable prose size". What do folks suggest regarding options for condensing and culling. Does anything jump at you that can be condensed or even taken out? - Or do we argue that 60 kB is not too long for this kind of article. For comparison, the climate change article is 54 kB. EMsmile (talk) 11:42, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Personally as this is such a high level subject I would prefer more excerpts but only if the excerpted articles were rated good. So in practice that probably is not going to happen any time soon. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:13, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

General comment: I'm very wary of excerpting, since they often bring unintended and nonobvious consequences in unspecified locations. —RCraig09 (talk) 19:49, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

There's always room for updating and conciseness. I think that as public consciousness—along with related political controversy—continues to grow, mitigation will rise in importance, bringing an even greater need for updating and conciseness. As Effects of climate change has been promoted to Good Article status, the present article might be high on the community's to-do list. —RCraig09 (talk) 19:46, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. I think condensing is needed but am unsure which sections in particular need to be condensed, given WP:DUE considerations. And it would be great if the wider Misplaced Pages editing community took an interest. We have come a long way with this article. The version from one year ago was quite shocking! 101 kB long and rambling and all over the place, impossible to read and understand. I think we should roughly aim for no longer than 50 kB (which means culling by about 15% compared to the current length).

Looking at the section sizes (see link at the top of the talk page), I have the following suggestions:

1. The section "Preserving and enhancing carbon sinks" has perhaps become a bit too long (perhaps we should rely more on the sub-article carbon sequestration to provide people with details).
2. Also "mitigation by sector" is probably too long (given that this is covered anyway at greenhouse gas emissions
3. Is the section "policies" too long and detailed, given the myriad of sub-articles on this topic?
4. Maybe we should drop the entire "example by country" section? Then again, US, China and EU are probably the three most important players (?). The section on the US is anyway only an excerpt, so it doesn't add to the overall word count. Still, perhaps remove all three examples? EMsmile (talk) 07:57, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

I came back to this one year later and the article has become even longer in the meantime, currently at 63 kB! I think it would be good to get it down to say 58 kB. I had a look at the "section sizes" table at the top of the talk page to see which sections stood out as being overly long. I then condensed the content in:

• Health and wellbeing
• ‎Integrating variable renewable energy
• National policies
• Soils

What do you all think? I think it would make this article more useful for our readers if we looked carefully for paragraphs with excessive detail and moved those to sub-articles. Also we need to ensure that the overall balance and WP:DUE is just right. EMsmile (talk) 14:30, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi User:Xuhang1204, I've removed this recently added content of yours, because I regard this as excessive detail for a high level article that is already overly long. Look for another article to inculde it in, e.g. greenhouse gas emissions or the one on AI maybe?:

"AI-driven optimization and predictive maintenance in industrial processes are emerging as key strategies to enhance energy efficiency and reduce emissions, particularly in energy-intensive sectors like steel and cement." EMsmile (talk) 12:30, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

References

1. Akomea-Frimpong, Isaac; Dzagli, Jacinta Rejoice Ama Delali; Eluerkeh, Kenneth; Bonsu, Franklina Boakyewaa; Opoku-Brafi, Sabastina; Gyimah, Samuel; Asuming, Nana Ama Sika; Atibila, David Wireko; Kukah, Augustine Senanu (2023-12-25). "A systematic review of artificial intelligence in managing climate risks of PPP infrastructure projects". Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management. doi:10.1108/ECAM-01-2023-0016. ISSN 0969-9988.

EMsmile (talk) 12:30, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Image cut from article

I removed this image as it's extremely hard to read.

Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 21:59, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Content on degrowth for the section on demand reduction?

There is a discussion on the talk page of economics of climate change mitigation whether this text block, called "degrowth", should be moved back to here where it once was before I moved it to the sub-article. It could perhaps fit under the section of "demand reduction" but it sounds somehow wordy/academic to me, and it might overlap with existing content. I have no clear opinion on this, other to say that the article climate change mitigation is on the long side already. It's 64 kB and we put a lot of effort into shrinking it down to this size. This is the text block in question:

+++++++

Degrowth

There is a debate about a potentially critical need for new ways of economic accounting, including directly monitoring and quantifying positive real-world environmental effects such as air quality improvements and related unprofitable work like forest protection, alongside far-reaching structural changes of lifestyles as well as acknowledging and moving beyond the limits of current economics such as GDP. Some argue that for effective climate change mitigation degrowth has to occur, while some argue that eco-economic decoupling could limit climate change enough while continuing high rates of traditional GDP growth. There is also research and debate about requirements of how economic systems could be transformed for sustainability – such as how their jobs could transition harmonously into green jobs – a just transition – and how relevant sectors of the economy – like the renewable energy industry and the bioeconomy – could be adequately supported.

While degrowth is often believed to be associated with decreased living standards and austerity measures, many of its proponents seek to expand universal public goods (such as public transport), increase health (fitness, wellbeing and freedom from diseases) and increase various forms of, often unconventional commons-oriented, labor. To this end, the application of both advanced technologies and reductions in various demands, including via overall reduced labor time or sufficiency-oriented strategies, are considered to be important by some.

+++++++

Note also my proposal on the talk page of economics of climate change mitigation to delete outdated content and to merge the rest into climate change mitigation. The pageviews of economics of climate change mitigation are very low (about 20 per day), and the recent engagement of editors with that article is also very low, which has led to a lot of outdated content (a lot of that outdated content I've already deleted last week). EMsmile (talk) 09:22, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

References

1. Thomas Wiedmann; Manfred Lenzen; Lorenz T. Keyßer; Julia Steinberger (19 June 2020). "Scientists' warning on affluence". Nature Communications. 11 (1): 3107. Bibcode:2020NatCo..11.3107W. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-16941-y. PMC 7305220. PMID 32561753.
2. "Why GDP is no longer the most effective measure of economic success". www.worldfinance.com. Retrieved 17 September 2020.
3. Kapoor, Amit; Debroy, Bibek (4 October 2019). "GDP Is Not a Measure of Human Well-Being". Harvard Business Review. Retrieved 20 September 2020.
4. Hickel, Jason; Hallegatte, Stéphane (2021). "Can we live within environmental limits and still reduce poverty? Degrowth or decoupling?". Development Policy Review. 40. doi:10.1111/dpr.12584. ISSN 1467-7679. S2CID 239636388.
5. Landler, Mark; Sengupta, Somini (21 January 2020). "Trump and the Teenager: A Climate Showdown at Davos". The New York Times. Retrieved 20 September 2020.
6. "Skills for Green Jobs: A Global View" (PDF). Retrieved 8 November 2021.
7. van der Ree, Kees (1 June 2019). "Promoting Green Jobs: Decent Work in the Transition to Low-Carbon, Green Economies". International Development Policy | Revue internationale de politique de développement (11): 248–271. doi:10.4000/poldev.3107. ISSN 1663-9375. S2CID 197784487.
8. Hickel, Jason; Kallis, Giorgos; Jackson, Tim; O'Neill, Daniel W.; Schor, Juliet B.; Steinberger, Julia K.; et al. (December 12, 2022). "Degrowth can work — here's how science can help". Nature. 612 (7940): 400–403. Bibcode:2022Natur.612..400H. doi:10.1038/d41586-022-04412-x. PMID 36510013. S2CID 254614532. Researchers in ecological economics call for a different approach — degrowth. Wealthy economies should abandon growth of gross domestic product (GDP) as a goal, scale down destructive and unnecessary forms of production to reduce energy and material use, and focus economic activity around securing human needs and well-being.
9. Foster, John Bellamy (July 1, 2023). "Planned Degrowth: Ecosocialism and Sustainable Human Development". Monthly Review. Retrieved August 24, 2023. Degrowth, in this sense, is not aimed at austerity, but at finding a "prosperous way down" from our current extractivist, wasteful, ecologically unsustainable, maldeveloped, exploitative, and unequal, class-hierarchical world. Continued growth would occur in some areas of the economy, made possible by reductions elsewhere. Spending on fossil fuels, armaments, private jets, sport utility vehicles, second homes, and advertising would need to be cut in order to provide room for growth in such areas as regenerative agriculture, food production, decent housing, clean energy, accessible health care, universal education, community welfare, public transportation, digital connectivity, and other areas related to green production and social needs.
10. Borowy, Iris; Aillon, Jean-Louis (1 August 2017). "Sustainable health and degrowth: Health, health care and society beyond the growth paradigm". Social Theory & Health. 15 (3): 346–368. doi:10.1057/s41285-017-0032-7. ISSN 1477-822X. S2CID 152144759.
11. Aillon, J.; Cardito, M. (2020). "Health and Degrowth in times of Pandemic".
12. Missoni, Eduardo (1 July 2015). "Degrowth and health: local action should be linked to global policies and governance for health". Sustainability Science. 10 (3): 439–450. Bibcode:2015SuSc...10..439M. doi:10.1007/s11625-015-0300-1. ISSN 1862-4057. S2CID 55806403. Volume and increase of spending in the health sector contribute to economic growth, but do not consistently relate with better health. Instead, unsatisfactory health trends, health systems' inefficiencies, and high costs are linked to the globalization of a growth society dominated by neoliberal economic ideas and policies of privatization, deregulation, and liberalization. A degrowth approach, understood as frame that connects diverse ideas, concepts, and proposals alternative to growth as a societal objective, can contribute to better health and a more efficient use of health systems.
13. Büchs, Milena; Koch, Max (1 January 2019). "Challenges for the degrowth transition: The debate about wellbeing". Futures. 105: 155–165. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2018.09.002. ISSN 0016-3287. S2CID 149731503. The first part reviews the arguments that degrowth proponents have put forward on the ways in which degrowth can maintain or even improve wellbeing. It also outlines why the basic needs approach is most suitable for conceptualising wellbeing in a degrowth context. The second part considers additional challenges to maintaining or even improving current levels of wellbeing under degrowth
14. Kostakis, Vasilis; Latoufis, Kostas; Liarokapis, Minas; Bauwens, Michel (1 October 2018). "The convergence of digital commons with local manufacturing from a degrowth perspective: Two illustrative cases". Journal of Cleaner Production. 197: 1684–1693. Bibcode:2018JCPro.197.1684K. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.077. ISSN 0959-6526. S2CID 43975556. A large part of the activity taking place under the CBPP umbrella presents a lot of similarities with the degrowth concept of unpaid work and decommodification (Nierling, 2012). The majority of "peers" engaged in commons-oriented projects are motivated by passion, communication, learning and enrichment (Benkler, 2006, 2011). Kostakis et al. (2015, 2016) have only theoretically and conceptually explored the contours of an emerging productive model that builds on the convergence of the digital commons of knowledge, software and design with local manufacturing technologies. They tentatively call it "design global, manufacture local"
15. Scarrow, Ryan (April 2018). "Work and degrowth". Nature Sustainability. 1 (4): 159. Bibcode:2018NatSu...1..159S. doi:10.1038/s41893-018-0057-5. ISSN 2398-9629. S2CID 149576398.
16. Haberl, Helmut; Wiedenhofer, Dominik; Virág, Doris; Kalt, Gerald; Plank, Barbara; Brockway, Paul; Fishman, Tomer; Hausknost, Daniel; Krausmann, Fridolin; Leon-Gruchalski, Bartholomäus; Mayer, Andreas; Pichler, Melanie; Schaffartzik, Anke; Sousa, Tânia; Streeck, Jan; Creutzig, Felix (10 June 2020). "A systematic review of the evidence on decoupling of GDP, resource use and GHG emissions, part II: synthesizing the insights". Environmental Research Letters. 15 (6): 065003. Bibcode:2020ERL....15f5003H. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ab842a. ISSN 1748-9326. S2CID 216453887.
17. Hickel, Jason (3 October 2021). "What does degrowth mean? A few points of clarification". Globalizations. 18 (7): 1105–1111. Bibcode:2021Glob...18.1105H. doi:10.1080/14747731.2020.1812222. ISSN 1474-7731. S2CID 221800076.
18. Millward-Hopkins, Joel; Steinberger, Julia K.; Rao, Narasimha D.; Oswald, Yannick (1 November 2020). "Providing decent living with minimum energy: A global scenario". Global Environmental Change. 65: 102168. Bibcode:2020GEC....6502168M. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102168. ISSN 0959-3780. S2CID 224977493.

EMsmile (talk) 09:22, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• C-Class level-5 vital articles
• Misplaced Pages level-5 vital articles in Physical sciences
• C-Class vital articles in Physical sciences
• C-Class Environment articles
• High-importance Environment articles
• C-Class Climate change articles
• Top-importance Climate change articles
• WikiProject Climate change articles
• C-Class International relations articles
• High-importance International relations articles
• WikiProject International relations articles
• C-Class Geology articles
• Low-importance Geology articles
• Low-importance C-Class Geology articles
• WikiProject Geology articles
• C-Class Soil articles
• Mid-importance Soil articles
• WikiProject Soil articles
• C-Class politics articles
• High-importance politics articles
• WikiProject Politics articles
• C-Class Science Policy articles
• High-importance Science Policy articles
• C-Class energy articles
• High-importance energy articles
• C-Class Weather articles
• High-importance Weather articles
• C-Class Climate articles
• High-importance Climate articles
• WikiProject Weather articles
• Misplaced Pages articles that use British English