Sentences with phrase «administration global greenhouse gas»

In February 2018, the average atmospheric carbon dioxide level was 408 parts per million at Mauna Loa, Hawaii, site of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration global greenhouse gas monitoring.

Not exact matches

Several other administration policies are likely to have a greater impact on global greenhouse - gas emissions, including the Environmental Protection Agency's rule to limit carbon emissions from new power plants and its first - ever carbon limits on cars and light trucks.

Both the Sierra Club and Greenpeace have objected to CCS, although all environmentalists seem to agree that global greenhouse gas emissions must be reduced by at least 80 percent below 1990 levels by midcentury, a goal also shared by the Obama administration.

Those chemicals also act as potent greenhouse gases, so the agreement also makes him the negotiator of one of the most effective global climate treaties ever, despite being part of an administration that famously removed solar technology from the White House roof.

As part of its strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to prevent global warming from exceeding 2 °C (3.6 °F), the Obama administration unveiled a plan in September to build wind farms off of nearly every U.S. coastline by 2050 — enough turbines to generate zero - carbon electricity for more than 23 million homes.

(This status allowed the Administration to create a special rule exempting greenhouse gas emissions — which are, through global warming, melting the artic sea ice used by the polar bears for hunting — from regulation under the Endangered Species Act.)

The court's 5 - 4 ruling said the Bush administration did not adequately assess the threats from global warming when it rejected a petition from environmental groups and 12 states that sought to force federal greenhouse gas limits on motor vehicles.

«The atmospheric and oceanic CO2 increase is being driven by the burning of fossil fuels,» says Pieter Tans, a senior scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Earth System Research Laboratory, who leads the U.S. government effort to monitor global greenhouse gas levels.

The document — which administration officials have neither acknowledged or rejected as authentic — has elements guaranteed to inflame folks ranging from Rush Limbaugh (the mention of efforts to «produce a global regime to combat climate change») to environmental groups pushing for concrete commitments on restricting greenhouse gases (a phrase implying that increasing perception of United States engagement is the goal).

On Friday, the Bush administration again rejected California's move to limit greenhouse gases from vehicles, saying it was a global problem that needed to be attacked at the federal, not state, level.

U.S. officials at U.N. climate negotiations here said Tuesday that they would not embrace any overall binding goals for cutting global greenhouse gas emissions before President Bush leaves office, essentially putting off specific U.S. commitments until a new administration assumes power in 2009, according to several participants.

When an economist at the Environmental Protection Agency rejected the Obama administration's stance on global warming by writing an unsolicited report challenging the scientific consensus on greenhouse dangers, groups fighting restrictions on greenhouse gases hailed him as a courageous maverick.

The plan, called the Renewables and Efficiency Deployment Initiative, is an outgrowth of an international energy partnership created under the administration's Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate Change, which brought together the handful of countries that are responsible for more than 85 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions in a series of meetings this year.

However scientists look at these events, the success of climate - change skeptic McIntyre hints at why the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report and other mainstream, peer - reviewed global climate studies have failed to persuade Congress and the Bush Administration that action is needed to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

e360: Do you feel that if the Obama administration gets behind a serious structure of targeted greenhouse gas reductions that it's conceivable in Copenhagen to have a global agreement with binding reductions in greenhouse gases?

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration found in March 2017 that it's «premature to conclude that human activities — and particularly greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming — have already had a detectable impact on Atlantic hurricane or global tropical cyclone activity.»

Energy - related emissions of carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas that is widely believed to contribute to global warming, have fallen 12 % between 2005 and 2012 and are at their lowest level since 1994, according to a recent estimate by the Energy Information Administration, the statistical arm of the U.S. Energy Department.

The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reports: «In 2013, the vast majority of worldwide climate indicators − greenhouse gases, sea levels, global temperatures, etc − continued to reflect trends of a [continue reading...]

A draft document of the national security strategy showed that the Trump administration would actively oppose efforts to reduce the burning of fossil fuels for energy, which emits greenhouse gases that drive global warming.

They include: (1) a 35 year US delay on climate action has made the problem extraordinarily challenging to solve, (2) US greenhouse gas (ghg) emissions are more than any country responsible for rise in atmospheric concentrations to present dangerous levels, (3) US ghg emissions not only threaten the US with climate disruption but endanger many of the poorest people around the world, (4) the Obama administration's pledge to reduce ghg emissions is far short of the US fair share of safe global emissions.

Although the Obama administration has over the last year or two taken significant steps to reduce US greenhouse gas (ghg) emissions that have been widely welcomed by many nations, do the current US ghg reduction targets represent the US fair share of safe global emissions?

Driven by factors like the Bush administration's censorship of climate science communication, Al Gore's prominent role in promoting awareness of the science of global warming, and frequent Republican deployment of climate change denial and «skepticism» to oppose greenhouse gas regulation, a destructive dichotomy has been created suggesting that valuing the role of science in public policy is a matter of political partisanship.

According to the Energy Information Administration, although methane emissions account for only 1.1 % of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, they account for 8.5 % of the greenhouse gas emissions based on global warming potential.

Based on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Annual Greenhouse Gas Index (AGGI), the 2016 Global Carbon Project's Methane Budget and the 2017 EPA Greenhouse Gas Inventory, the paper finds that methane emissions from the U.S. natural gas industry account for just 1.2 percent of 2016 global methane emissions and 0.2 percent of total radiative forciGas Index (AGGI), the 2016 Global Carbon Project's Methane Budget and the 2017 EPA Greenhouse Gas Inventory, the paper finds that methane emissions from the U.S. natural gas industry account for just 1.2 percent of 2016 global methane emissions and 0.2 percent of total radiative foGlobal Carbon Project's Methane Budget and the 2017 EPA Greenhouse Gas Inventory, the paper finds that methane emissions from the U.S. natural gas industry account for just 1.2 percent of 2016 global methane emissions and 0.2 percent of total radiative forciGas Inventory, the paper finds that methane emissions from the U.S. natural gas industry account for just 1.2 percent of 2016 global methane emissions and 0.2 percent of total radiative forcigas industry account for just 1.2 percent of 2016 global methane emissions and 0.2 percent of total radiative foglobal methane emissions and 0.2 percent of total radiative forcing.

In their posts, the four scientists will confront challenges in global warming after years of inaction by the Bush administration, which opposed mandatory cuts of greenhouse gas pollution.

BONN, Germany — The Trump administration made its debut at a United Nations conference on climate change on Monday by giving a full - throated defense of fossil fuels and nuclear energy as answers to driving down global greenhouse gas emissions.

Update, Update, Update, the Obama administration has outfoxed everyone for today the Environmental Protection Agency announced plans to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, factories and oil refineries to curb global warming.

The most noteworthy of the Obama administration rulemakings that focused on baseload power production was the Clean Power Plan (CPP), a substantial rule designed to impose global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction requirements on the existing fleet of fossil fuel power generators.

Today's Climatewire (subscription required) summarizes data and projections from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) and the Paris - based International Energy Agency (IEA) from which we may conclude that EPA regulation of greenhouse gases (GHGs) is increasingly irrelevant to global climate change even if one accepts agency's view of climate science.

The top climate scientist at NASA says the Bush administration has tried to stop him from speaking out since he gave a lecture last month calling for prompt reductions in emissions of greenhouse gases linked to global warming.

The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reports: «In 2013, the vast majority of worldwide climate indicators − greenhouse gases, sea levels, global temperatures, etc − continued to reflect trends of a warmer planet.»

He pointed to findings that corn ethanol, which plays the largest role in meeting RFS mandates, emits more greenhouse gases than gasoline, and he said it is «confusing» for the Obama administration to push corn ethanol while it seeks to lower global greenhouse gas emissions at the Paris climate summit.

In fact, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), an agency of the federal Department of Energy, cites the IPCC's Climate Change 2001 report as the source for its three - percent figure for a table on the EIA website entitled, «Global Natural and Anthropogenic Sources and Absorption of Greenhouse Gases in the 1990s.»

In 2007, the Supreme Court instructed the Bush administration to determine whether greenhouse gases should be regulated under the Clean Air Act, but last July, then - EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson announced that the agency would instead seek months of public comment on the threat posed by global - warming pollution.

(1) Because of a growing concern over the possible consequences of global warming, which may be caused in part by increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide (a major greenhouse gas), and also because of the need for accurate estimates of carbon dioxide emissions, the Energy Information Administration (EIA) has developed factors for estimating the amount of carbon dioxide emitted as a result of U.S. coal consumption.

After he called on the United States to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in a December 2005 lecture, Dr. Hansen found that NASA officials began reviewing and filtering public statements and press interviews in an effort to limit his ability (as well as that of other government scientists) to publicly express scientific opinions that clashed with the Bush administration's views on global warming.»

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration found in March 2017 that it's «premature to conclude that human activities — and particularly greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming — have already had a detectable impact on Atlantic hurricane or global tropical cyclone activity.»

The administration is in talks at the United Nations about a deal that would seek to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions by «naming and shaming» governments that fail to take significant action.