Sentences with phrase «co2 emission factor»

Despite improvements in some countries, the global CO2 emission factor for energy generation has hardly changed over the last 20 years.

Not exact matches

Studies indicate carbon dioxide emissions from transportation in the province have declined 16 % in that time, and while it's impossible to draw a direct causal relationship between the tax and the emissions decline, it's fair to say it was a factor contributing to indisputable behavioural changes — you can't emit 16 % less CO2 by doing the same things you did before.

«As for all electric vehicles, a grid emission factor of 0.5 g CO2 / Wh was also applied to the electric energy consumption.

Combining the generation data, project location, and eGRID emissions factor, NEC estimated the amount of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide (measured together as metric tons of CO2 Eq.)

Today's construction industry is more environmentally - conscious than ever, and the amount of CO2 emissions released by vehicles is a significant factor in deciding which ones to use during an assignment.

«There is no doubt that the most important factor causing climate warming are CO2 emissions and this must be the prime target of our climate policies.

And then you look at a place like China, which is just now — despite it's phenomenal growth in recent decades at 9 or 10 percent per year — is just now reaching about the per capita world average on all those factors, energy consumption, wealth and CO2 emissions, and they clearly want to do more.

It produces no carbon dioxide exhaust emissions, and even when the CO2 released in generating the electricity used to charge its batteries is factored in, it is responsible for less than half the amount emitted by the «greenest» petrol cars.

At present, nations report methane emissions in terms of CO2 equivalents, using GWP100 as the conversion factor.

Each system also has residual benefits that could reduce CO2 emissions that may not be factored into calculating bike - sharing's carbon footprint.

Here we show how a factor of three uncertainty in climate sensitivity introduces even greater uncertainty in allowable increases in atmospheric CO2 concentration and allowable CO2 emissions.

It is widely known that the terrestrial biosphere (the collective term for all the world's land vegetation, soil, etc.) is an important factor in mitigating climate change, as it absorbs around 20 % of all fossil fuel CO2 emissions.

Feynman, scientific integrity, Climategate 2017, Christy, Santer, Mears, RSS, Wentz, balloon data, verification, CO2 emissions, ocean carbonization, benefits, red team / blue team, US energy, oil and gas, Trump, mission 2020, Figueres, one trillion, Kemper power plant, CCS, viable, load factor, Hughes, incentives, Bezdek, 27.5

They also point out that there are other factors to consider, such as the deployment of such a system leading to political or military conflict, and the fact it ignores the acidification of the ocean, which is also caused by CO2 emissions.

Moreover, I want to consider a vehicle occupancy factor (for instance, 1 passenger would refer to 25 %, 2 passengers would refer to 50 %, etc.) that also somehow impacts CO2 emissions.

The motoring landscape is changing rapidly, but whatever the future holds, pure driving enjoyment will still be a strong currency — and in order to cut CO2 emissions and keep the fun - factor, manufacturers must address ballooning weight.

This paper presents a review of existing literature on emission factors, emission data collection techniques, and analytic approaches; presents the results of SAIC's analysis of available CO2 and CH4 GHG emission data from chassis dynamometer tests of heavy - duty vehicle exhaust; and provides suggestions for further reducing this uncertainty.

Lighter cars improve fuel consumption and CO2 emissions: above all, however, it improves the power - to - weight ratio — the crucial factor for a sports car — and thus the performance.

The study used the utility factor (since in pure EV mode there are no tailpipe emissions) and the EPA best estimate of the CO2 tailpipe emissions produced by these vehicles in real world city and highway operation based on the EPA 5 - cycle label methodology, using a weighted 55 % city / 45 % highway driving.

These factors combine with a new exhaust gas regeneration system to reduce CO2 emissions to 197 and 206g / km respectively (257 - 261g / km previously).

With the GM 2.8 L diesel gaining only 2 MPG over the 2.5 L gasoline engine, while adding 440 pounds to its curb weight, the diesel fuel economy gains are not sufficient to offset the higher emission factor for diesel fuel, with the diesel option producing 4 % more CO2 - equivalent emissions over the truck's life - cycle.

Fuel consumption and CO2 emissions are not only determined by a vehicle's fuel efficiency, but also by the driving style and other factors irrespective of vehicle specification.

There are other factors (changes in the natural sources of emissions in a warmed environment, changes in the function of traditional carbon sinks in a warmed environment, tipping points like increase forest fire activity in a warmed environment, etc.) that also play a significant role in the truly important number, which is accumulation of CO2 / e in the atmosphere and ocean acidification.

However, it is important to keep in mind that we might easily more than double it if we really don't make much effort to cut back (I think the current estimated reserves of fossil fuels would increase CO2 by a factor of like 5 or 10, which would mean a warming of roughly 2 - 3 times the climate sensitivity for doubling CO2 [because of the logarithmic dependence of the resulting warming to CO2 levels]-RRB-... and CO2 levels may be able to fall short of doubling if we really make a very strong effort to reduce emissions.

I'm simply questioning the validity of the hypothesis offered by so many climate scientists that CO2 emissions from fossil fuels are a significant factor in global warming, to the extent that they must be drastically reduced.

Victor (243): I'm simply questioning the validity of the hypothesis offered by so many climate scientists that CO2 emissions from fossil fuels are a significant factor in global warming, to the extent that they must be drastically reduced.

For example, though temperature is a secondary factor, higher temperature CO2 is somewhat less likely to relax through emission than cooled CO2 — the opposite of Planck function.

If we can find no consistent correlation between TSI and temperatures during the Eighteenth and Nineteenth centuries, when CO2 emissions were clearly not yet a factor, then the «correlation» some have claimed to have found during the early 20th century is almost certainly an artifact, i.e., a fluke, with no real significance.

Factor in the «carbon light» CO2 from coal seam gas projects in the East (and other LNG expansion in the north and west) and you're talking about Australia's fossil fuel emission exports equating to TWO Saudi Arabias by 2020, not one as I've been saying to many disbelieving ears.

- most of the warming in the past century occurred before 1940, before CO2 emissions could have been a major factor

The first is basically that mentioned by Greg Simpson in point 7; the seasonal flux in biomass seems to exceed the background rate of change of CO2 in the atmosphere by a large enough factor that it probably exceeds the total emissions.

They also challenged the claim that «Reduced CO2 gas emissions; No transportation needed, fur animals are born, raised and die on the farm» was misleading because it did not take into account other transportation factors such as delivering food to the farm and the transportation of pelts.

And, that just coincidently, the rate of the rise has consistently been (when averaged over a few year period to smooth out variability due to seasonal cycles and other factors) equal to about half of the emissions of CO2 that we are putting into the atmosphere?

With all due respect, your continued clumsy attempt to equate «CO2 emissions» with «access to energy» as a factor in human well - being is either dishonest or stupid.

Bottom line: during the period during which wind increased from 0 to roughly 10 % of total electric generation, CO2 emissions stayed approximately flat, while state GDP increased by a factor of roughly 2.5.

The basic ingredients are easy to list: — absorption / emission properties (or spectroscopic parameters) of CO2 at atmospheric pressures, i.e. data presently available from HITRAN - database combined with models of line broadening — observed properties of the atmosphere where most important features include clouds and moisture content, but many other factors have some influence — computer model of the transmission of radiation along the lines of MODTRAN or GENLN2

Current attempts by national governments worldwide to control industrial CO2 emissions following the recommendations of the IPCC could be viewed within the scientific paradigm as the projection of a large scale experiment on the earth's climate system to validate the hypothesis that anthropogenic CO2 emissions through the burning of fossil fuels and land use changes (inter alia) are a major factor driving climate change.

Power - sector CO2 emissions are influenced by a number of factors not directly affected by environmental policies, such as macroeconomic growth levels and relative fuel prices.

Trembath said that CO2 Scorecard used a vague definition for its efficiency and conservation category that allowed it to bury emissions cuts that were due to mild weather and other factors in that grouping, which he said inflated the role of efficiency in carbon reductions.

The first showed that acceptance of several scientific propositions — including the acceptance of HIV causing AIDS, smoking causing lung cancer, and human CO2 emissions causing global warming — were all manifestations of a common factor, which in turn is correlated with a factor reflecting perceived scientific consensus.

That makes that the emissions factor is larger than the increase attributed to temperature... Which shows my point that the mass balance is impossible to close without a sink which is larger than what temperature allegedly causes + a part of the emissions together... Thus nature is a net sink for CO2, no matter what temperature does (within limits of course).

Thus while CO2 and temperature are thightly coupled and CO2 levels in the atmosphere follow the seasonal cooling within a month, the other factor, the emissions independently increases the amounts, pushing the setpoint of the equilibrium to higher levels.

For instance, what I have said in my comment above should be clear enough to make politicians, too, to understand that the recent increase of CO2 content in atmosphere is dominated by natural factors and not antropogenic CO2 emissions:» The CO2 content in the atmosphere is controlled together by both all CO2 emissions from sources to atmosphere and by all CO2 absorptions from atmosphere to sinks.

Soils are the largest single terrestrial source of carbon dioxide (CO2), but these emissions are highly sensitive to a range of factors associated with climate change and human land use (1).

Therefore, across any reasonable range of pathways, two other factors remain critical to limiting CO2 emissions:

It's my belief that side stepping the question of CO2 forcing and simply trying to better characterise other factors, regardless of whether CO2 has any role to play, will lead to a fuller understanding of the climate and thus a better platform from which to view what role manmade emissions does have, if any.

And here we have a brilliant scientist, tying past climate changes to one factor alone: human CO2 emissions, by statistically eliminating all other known possible factors as «background noise».

«It is no surprise that while the EU's domestic CO2 emissions have fallen, if you factor in CO2 emissions embedded in goods imported into EU, the figure remains substantially higher,» says Peiser.

There are ways of various kind to prove that the recent warming and increase of CO2 in atmosphere are dominated by natural factors; look e.g. at my comment https://judithcurry.com/2011/08/04/carbon-cycle-questions/#comment-198992 etc.: 1) The CO2 content in the atmosphere is controlled together by both all CO2 emissions from sources to atmosphere and by all CO2 absorptions from atmosphere to sinks.

Looking at all of the various inputs to global climate - including CO2 and SO2 emissions from man, and natural cycles like La Nina / El Nino, as well as changes in the sun - they believe that the rising sulfate emissions is the most likely factor to have cause the global warming slowdown, between 1998 and 2008.