Sentences with phrase «co2 emissions mitigation»

Edmonds, J., T. Wilson, M. Wise, and J.P. Weyant, 2006: Electrification of the economy and CO2 emissions mitigation.

Renewable Energy Sources (RES) offer many benefits, such as CO2 emissions mitigation, fossil fuels import requirement reduction and new jobs creation, just to name a few.

Not exact matches

With the emission of CO2 being the primary driver behind all three stressors, the primary mitigation strategy is to reduce these emissions.»

A large ensemble of Earth system model simulations, constrained by geological and historical observations of past climate change, demonstrates our self ‐ adjusting mitigation approach for a range of climate stabilization targets ranging from 1.5 to 4.5 °C, and generates AMP scenarios up to year 2300 for surface warming, carbon emissions, atmospheric CO2, global mean sea level, and surface ocean acidification.

Climate Change — One Year of Emissions Trading On the background of rising CO2 emissions, particular emphasis is put on major instruments of climate change mitigation: The Compendium analyses the first full year of regulated emissions trading in the European Union Emissions Trading System (EEmissions Trading On the background of rising CO2 emissions, particular emphasis is put on major instruments of climate change mitigation: The Compendium analyses the first full year of regulated emissions trading in the European Union Emissions Trading System (Eemissions, particular emphasis is put on major instruments of climate change mitigation: The Compendium analyses the first full year of regulated emissions trading in the European Union Emissions Trading System (Eemissions trading in the European Union Emissions Trading System (EEmissions Trading System (EU - ETS).

The trouble is that the science doesn't actually say that mitigation is a better strategy than adaptation, let alone whether an 80 % reduction in CO2 emissions by 2050 is better than a 60 % reduction.

Some adaptation measures to climate change, like air - conditioning and water pumps use energy and may contribute to even higher CO2 emissions, and thus necessitate even more mitigation (high agreement, limited evidence)[4.5.5].

In the light of the entry into force of the Paris Agreement of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 2016, the CSI initiated an in - depth review of the 2009 technology papers and delivered in June 2017 a compilation of 52 individual papers on well - known existing technologies (for which the latest development and implementation status is reviewed) and seven additional summary papers describing state - of - the - art and anticipated technological developments that can further enhance mitigation of CO2 emissions in cement production.

Total CO2 emissions of all industrialised countries that have quantitative greenhouse gas mitigation targets under the Kyoto Protocol increased in 2010 by 3.5 % (including the USA that did not ratify the protocol).

The group developed a proposal later adopted by the WG, which states that by 2050, annual CO2 emissions derived from Earth System Models following RCP2.6, a mitigation scenario, are smaller than 1990 emissions, and that by the end of the 21st century, about half of the models infer emissions slightly above zero, while the other half infer a net removal of CO2 from the atmosphere.

At the same time, the global climate change mitigation effort will reduce the CO2 emissions per unit of electricity and steel inputs, further limiting life - cycle greenhouse gas emissions.

The model, which captures fuel use in the power, transport, and other energy sectors out to 2030, with fuel responsiveness parameterized to empirical literature, estimates the impacts of mitigation policies on CO2 emissions, revenue, premature deaths from local air pollution, household and industry groups.

The joint assistance project Capacity building for CO2 mitigation from international aviation aims at providing assistance to a selected group of 14 States in Africa and the Caribbean to support their efforts in developing and implementing their States» Action Plans on CO2 emissions reduction from international aviation, to establish aviation environmental systems for emissions monitoring at the State level and to identify, evaluate and implement mitigation measures in selected States.

Abstract Recent estimates of the global carbon budget, or allowable cumulative CO2 emissions consistent with a given level of climate warming, have the potential to inform climate mitigation policy discussions aimed at maintaining global temperatures below 2 ° C.

ICAO's Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA) is designed to complement the basket of mitigation measures the air transport community is already pursuing to reduce CO2 emissions from international aviation.

C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group, 12 California, 7, 68, 102, 128, 169 - 170, 187, 196, 232 - 234, 245 California Energy Commission, 232 Cambridge Media Environment Programme (CMEP), 167 - 168 Cambridge University, 102 Cameron, David, 11, 24, 218 Cameroon, 25 Campbell, Philip, 165 Canada, 22, 32, 64, 111, 115, 130, 134, 137, 156 - 157, 166, 169, 177, 211, 222, 224 - 226, 230, 236, 243 Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS), 15 Cap - and - trade, 20, 28, 40 - 41, 44, 170, 175 allowances (permits), 41 - 42, 176, 243 Capitalism, 34 - 35, 45 Capps, Lois, 135 Car (see vehicle) Carbon, 98, 130 Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), 192 Carbon Capture and Storage Association, 164 Carbon credits (offsets), 28 - 29, 42 - 43, 45 Carbon Cycle, 80 - 82 Carbon dioxide (CO2), 9, 18, 23, 49 - 51, 53, 55, 66 - 67, 72 - 89, 91, 98 - 99, 110, 112, 115, 118, 128 - 132, 137, 139, 141 - 144, 152, 240 emissions, 12, 18 - 25, 28 - 30, 32 - 33, 36 - 38, 41 - 44, 47, 49, 53, 55, 71 - 72, 74, 77 - 78, 81 - 82, 108 - 109, 115, 132, 139, 169, 186, 199 - 201, 203 - 204, 209 - 211, 214, 217, 219, 224, 230 - 231, 238, 241, 243 - 244 Carbon Dioxide Analysis Center, 19 Carbon Expo, 42 Carbon, footprint, 3, 13, 29, 35, 41, 45, 110, 132 tax, 20, 44, 170 trading, 13, 20, 40, 43, 44, 176, 182 Carbon monoxide (CO), 120 Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC), 44 Carlin, George, 17 Carter, Bob, 63 Carter, Jimmy, 186, 188 Cato Institute, 179 CBS, 141, 146 Center for Disease Control, 174 Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, 62, 139 Centre for Policy Studies, 219 CERN (European Organization for Nuclear Research), 96 Chavez, Hugo, 34 Chicago Tribune, 146 China, 29, 32 - 33, 60 - 62, 120, 169, 176, 187 - 188, 211, 216, 225 - 226, 242 - 243 China's National Population and Planning Commission, 33 Chinese Academy of Sciences, 60 Chirac, Jacques, 36 Chlorofluorocarbons, 42 - 43, 50 Choi, Yong - Sang, 88 Christy, John, 105 Churchill, Winston, 214, 220 Chu, Steven, 187 Citibank (Citigroup), 40, 176 Clean Air Act, 85, 128 - 129 Clean Development Mechanism, 42 Climate Action Partnership, 14 Climate alarm, 4, 13, 21, 32, 35, 38, 56, 102 - 103, 115 - 117, 120, 137, 156, 168, 173, 182 Climate Audit, 66 Climate change, adaptation, 39, 110, 112 mitigation, 16, 39, 110 Climate Change and the Failure of Democracy, 34 Climate Change: Picturing the Science, 121 Climate Change Reconsidered, 242 Climate conference, 38 Cancun, 18, 29, 36 - 37, 124 - 125, 242 Copenhagen, 33, 36, 109, 125, 156, 158, 175, 241 - 242 Durban, 13, 36 - 37, 166, 242 - 243 Climategate, 2, 67, 152, 158 - 170, 180, 182, 242 Climate Protection Agreement, 12 Climate Research Unit (CRU), 48, 67, 120, 147, 152 - 153, 158 - 160, 162 - 163, 165 - 167, 169 Climate Science Register, 142 Climatism, definition, 2, 7 Clinton, Bill, 176, 178 Clinton Global Initiative, 176 CLOUD project, 96 Club of Rome, 21, 186 CO2Science, 59, 61 - 62, 66, 131 Coal, 19 - 20, 39 - 41, 80, 126, 128 - 129, 175, 185 - 186, 188 - 190, 192 - 196, 199 - 201, 209, 214, 217, 219, 222, 229 Coase, Ronald, 145 Coca - Cola, 138 Cogley, Graham, 156 Cohen, David, 220 Colorado State University, 117, 181 Columbia University, 7 Columbus, Christopher, 58 Computer models, 16, 51 - 53, 56, 67, 72, 74,77 - 79, 82, 87, 89 - 91, 94, 105, 110 - 111, 120, 124, 138 - 140, 168, 171,173, 181, 238, 240, 246 Conference on the Changing Atmosphere, 15 Consensus, scientific, 12 Copenhagen Business School, 134 Coral, 53 Corporate Average Fuel Economy, 22 - 23 Cosmic Rays, 72, 93 - 99, 180 Credit Suisse, 176 Crow, Cheryl, 30 Crowley, Tom, 167 Cuadrilla Resources, 224 - 225 Curry, Judith, 164, 167 Cycles, natural, 3, 16, 57, 62 - 63, 66 - 69, 72, 80, 99, 103, 138, 238, 240 Milankovich, 62, 67, 80 Cyprus, 134 Czech Republic, 12, 37

Biological options - Biological options for mitigation of climate change involve one or more of the three strategies: conservation - conserving an existing carbon pool, thereby preventing CO2 emissions to the atmosphere; sequestration — increasing the size of existing carbon pools, thereby extracting CO2 from the atmosphere; substitution - substituting biomass for fossil fuels or energy - intensive products, thereby reducing CO2 emissions.

I don't see how one can read that and not conclude that you are advocating for a no regrets policy response over other mitigation alternatives like reducing CO2 emissions.

A complete phase - out by 2015, however, would push up CO2 emissions considerably... Climate change mitigation would not be affected, contrary to some widespread beliefs.

-LSB-...] a new Coal fired power plant, their plans must include mitigation of CO2 emissions to address the global warming fraud.

Global climate projections for 2050 and 2100 have, amongst other purposes, been used to inform potential mitigation policies, i.e. to get a sense of the challenge we are facing in terms of CO2 emission reductions.

Costs and benefits of the proposed mitigation policy compared with no mitigation policy Item; Units; Optimal Carbon Price; Low - cost backstop; Table Benefits (Reduced damages); 2006 US $ trillion; 5.23; 17.63; 5 - 3 Abatement Cost; 2007 US $ trillion; 2.16; 0.44; 5 - 3 Net Benefit of policy; 2005 US $ trillion; 3.37; 17.19; 5 - 1 Implied CO2 Tax; 2005 US $ / ton C; 202.4; 4.1; 5 - 1 CO2 emissions in 2100; Gt C / a; 11; 0; 5 - 6 CO2 concentration in 2100; ppm CO2; 586; 340; 5 - 7 Global temperature change in 2100; °C from 1900; 2.61; 0.9; 5 - 1

-- We can't be certain that atmospheric CO2 is really going to cause any substantial harm, but we can be reasonably sure that anything that raises the price of energy (e.g. mitigation, that is reducing emissions at the source) will impact improvements in lifestyle that most of the world wants.

CO2 mitigation shouldn't even be on the list of things that need to be done until it can be demonstrated that the known benefits of higher atmospheric CO2, as well as the lower cost of energy production when CO2 emission is not subject to constraint, are outweighed by the imagined negatives.

CCS is already making a small contribution to mitigation and it is possible, though far from certain, that it can be scaled up over decades to come to provide a wedge - sized contribution (i.e., 1 Gt C / yr or 3,700 Mt CO2 / yr in 50 years» time) to the emissions challenge.

Hence, cumulative carbon emissions to 2200 and peak emission rates could provide a clear and simple framework for CO2 mitigation policy.

Beginning in 2005, the Institute embarked on a «fast - action» climate mitigation campaign to promote strategies that will result in significant reductions of emissions, temperature, and impacts in the near - term, focusing primarily on strategies to reduce non-CO2 climate pollutants, to complement cuts in CO2.

I.e., arguments about the costliness, technical impracticality, and political unenforceability of mitigation strategies, and about the ineffectiveness of massive CO2 emission - reduction in the atmosphere even if all those obstacles were of no account.

Economists and climate scientists have developed a number of models to estimate global emissions prices that are consistent with ultimately stabilizing atmospheric CO2 concentrations at these target levels and minimizing the global burden of mitigation costs over time.

The scenarios include: «business as usual» (BAU), which assumes no mitigation efforts are made («RCP8.5»); «mitigation», which assumes an intermediate level of emissions («RCP4.5») without negative emissions; «carbon dioxide removal» («CDR»), which assumes moderate emissions with long - term CO2 removal; and «solar radiation management» («SRM»), which is the same as the CDR pathway, but also includes enough SRM to limit temperatures to 1.5 C above pre-industrial levels by 2100.

No policy to abate global warming by controlling CO2 emissions would prove cost - effective solely on grounds of the welfare benefit from climate mitigation.

Projected global average temperature rise above pre-industrial levels under a range of future scenarios, «business as usual» (BAU), which assumes no mitigation efforts are made (RCP8.5); «mitigation», which assumes moderate emissions (RCP4.5) without negative emissions, «carbon dioxide removal» (CDR), which assumes moderate emissions with long - term CO2 removal; and «solar radiation management» (SRM), which is the same as the CDR pathway but also includes enough SRM to limit temperatures to 1.5 C by 2100.

The rapid growth of carbon footprints in wealthy countries led to concerns about carbon leakage — where climate mitigation policies in one country lead to increases in CO2 emissions elsewhere — and industrial competitiveness, because international mitigation targets were slated to apply to developed countries and not the Global South.

Mitigation refers to an action that will reduce or prevent greenhouse gas emissions, such as planting trees in order to absorb more CO2.

First was «business as usual»: increasing emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases with no mitigation action (the scenario used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report on Emissions Scenaremissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases with no mitigation action (the scenario used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report on Emissions ScenarEmissions Scenarios A1B).

Kagawa, S., Suh, S., Hubacek, K., Wiedmann, T., Nansai, K., & Minx, J. 2015: CO2 emission clusters within global supply chain networks: Implications for climate change mitigation.

Lange, A. and Ziegler, A.: 2012, Offsetting versus Mitigation Activities to Reduce CO2 Emissions: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis for the US and Germany, CER - ETH Economics Working Paper Series 12/161.

The figure below shows simulations of cost - effective mitigation options in the different IAMs: BECCS starts as early as 2020, reaches 10 - 20 gigatonnes of CO2 (GtCO2) per year in 2100 (25 - 50 % of current annual emissions), and increases to 400 - 800GtCO2 by 2100 — a size comparable to the remaining carbon budget.

Based on a real world «business as usual» emissions scenario, with natural gas displacing oil at its current pace and no carbon tax, I come up with a CO2 right about inline with RCP 6.0, «a mitigation scenario, meaning it includes explicit steps to combat greenhouse gas emissions (in this case, through a carbon tax) ``.

Recent research on the mitigation potential of conservation, restoration, and improved land management demonstrates that natural solutions can reduce emissions and remove atmospheric CO2 while safeguarding food security and biodiversity.

Ultimately, from the perspective of policy makers and the general public, the impacts of climate change and the required mitigation and adaptation efforts are largely the same in a world of 2 or 4 C per doubling of CO2 concentrations where carbon dioxide emissions are rising quickly.

Research considering C and nitrogen (N) dynamics confirms that significant CO2 mitigation can be achieved, but after 20 — 30 years N inputs also need controlling to prevent the C sequestration being offset by N2O emissions.

«Carbon leakage is defined as the increase in CO2 emissions outside the countries taking domestic mitigation action divided by the reduction in the emissions of these countries.»

In sum, the assumptions that are made in these three areas — front - loading vs. back - loading, CO2 vs. non-CO2 mitigation, and negative emissions — have the direct result of specifying mitigation pathways that allow for larger or smaller fossil - fuel CO2 budgets.

There are multiple time - scales at work, and if even median mainstream projections are correct, CO2 mitigation has a kind of urgency that (say) preparing for the next ice age, or even reducing mercury emissions, does not.

1 POLICY RESPONSES Turnbull argues at some length for what he calls «no regret» mitigation policies to reduce CO2 emissions, policies which would not impact greatly on the UK economy.

I suppose the battle - lines here are drawn between on the one - hand those who believe in either significant natural feedbacks impacting the carbon cycle as - we - speak or who believe today's mitigation measures are useless, and on the other - hand those who would welcome some signs of a weakening of the accelerating CO2 - rise as this would encourage more mitigation actions (and less hand - wringing) and who consider CO2 emissions reporting is more than «fluff».

Krugman's four reasons why it's dubious to compare costs of climate mitigation to adaption didn't include the unfairness, that the people paying the costs of climate change would not be the same ones as reap the benefit of CO2 emission.

The exact warming resulting from this delay depends on the trajectory of future CO2 emissions but using one business - as usual - projection we estimate an increase of 3/4 °C for every 15 - year delay in CO2 mitigation.

In the Biblical story of Moses, Pharoah needed more than one plague to consent to allow the enslaved Israelites to go free; it appears that the case is going to be analogous with regard to the mitigation of CO2 emissions.