Sentences with phrase «ghg warming potential»

Not exact matches

Trying to find other issues, «Masking», or crutches,... still isn't ever goin to reduce the numbers on the GHG content we already have and their future global warming potentials that continue to go calculate, compound daily...

So while the sensitivity of CO2 / warming may be an important (though somewhat uncertain) matter, so too is how sensitive nature is in emitting GHGs in response to the warming (& to the concomitant GW effects), and this it seems is a lot more uncertain and has a lot more potential for danger... like some sleeping monster we keep poking.

While it is worth continuing study of global climate engineering to control warming if the rising concentrations of GHGs can not be halted over the next several decades, the potential for climate engineering approaches to moderate impacts in the particularly exposed regions being affected merits investigation.

I also explained why the extra warmth at the surface is provided by compression of descending air converting potential energy (PE) to kinetic energy (KE) and not from downward radiation from GHGs in the air warming the ground beneath.

Comparing model predictions of GHG - induced warming with recent natural temperature fluctuations also indicates the potential scale of man - made climate change.Early modelling experiments focused on the total long - term change resulting from a doubling of carbon dioxide (CO2) levels.

They discuss CO2, another GHG, but without any mention of its warming contribution, and they do so in the same manner as N2, which has no warming potential.

Nitrous oxide is a very potent GHG, with about 310 times the global warming potential (molecule per molecule) of carbon dioxide.

«Global warming» is only one of many potential consequences of GHG - induced climate change.

While HFCs are not Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS) and therefore an acceptable substitute for chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) under the Montreal Protocol, they have high global warming potentials (GWPs) and contribute to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

IPCC has sold a bill of goods to «policymakers» and the general public, which states that most of past warming was caused by human GHGs (AGW) and that this represents a serious potential threat to humanity and our environment unless human GHG emissions (principally CO2) are curtailed dramatically.

NO empirical evidence to support the premise a) that most of the past warming (since ~ 1950) has been a result of increased human GHG concentrations and b) that this demonstrates a high climate sensitivity, which leads to the conclusion that c) AGW represents a potential threat to humanity and our environment.

A global phase - down could avoid 1.1 — 1.7 billion metric tons CO2 equivalent (CO2 equivalent is a measure used to compare impacts of greenhouse gases based on their global warming potential in relation to CO2) of GHG emissions per year by 2030, with cumulative emission reductions of nearly 100 billion metric tons CO2 equivalent by 2050.

Warming from CO2 has dropped to the bottom of my list of potential «Planet Killers» — although from a Gaian point of view, there are so many interacting challenges to the biosphere now, who knows what kinds of cascades could trigger some kind of abrupt warming or cooling event — maybe not stemming froWarming from CO2 has dropped to the bottom of my list of potential «Planet Killers» — although from a Gaian point of view, there are so many interacting challenges to the biosphere now, who knows what kinds of cascades could trigger some kind of abrupt warming or cooling event — maybe not stemming frowarming or cooling event — maybe not stemming from GHGs.

Since most ODS are «super» greenhouse gases (GHG) with global warming potentials (GWP) hundreds or thousands of times greater than carbon dioxide (CO2), this phase - out has had dramatic impacts on mitigating climate change.

From a GHG - management perspective, it is crucial to understand the relative role of CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions as CH4 and N2O are more powerful GHGs than CO2 (34 and 298 times the global warming potential on a 100 - year timescale, respectively; Myhre et al. 2013).

Nitrogen fertilizers represent one of the largest sources of GHG emissions from global agricultural production resulting in significant emissions of nitrous oxide (N2O), a GHG with approximately 300 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide (CO2).

Now, based on those same models, «policy makers» should be deciding on «policies» to avert a potential disaster from human - induced global warming by curtailing human GHG emissions.

Show me (and Girma) the empirical evidence to support the CAGW hypothesis, i.e. that human GHG emissions have been the primary cause for past global warming and that this represents a serious potential threat to humanity and our environment unless these emissions are curtailed dramatically.

Today, HFCs are the most commonly used refrigerants in new refrigeration and air - conditioning systems in the United States and increasingly in developing countries, but these refrigerants are potent greenhouse gases (GHGs) with global warming potentials (GWPs) ranging from hundreds to thousands of times higher than CO2.

HFCs are powerful GHGs, with global warming potentials hundreds and thousands of times more powerful than CO2, and are primarily used in refrigeration, air conditioning, foam blowing, aerosols, fire protection, and solvents.

This expression is also known as the global warming potential of a GHG.

When I run into somebody who has a technical background but does nt believe that GHGs have the potential to warm the the planet, I send them here.

Working through the rest of my calculations (i.e., stratospheric water vapor and then black carbon) using the new 0.085 °C / decade baseline leaves a trend of 0.056 °C / decade that could potentially be from anthropogenic GHGs, or a total potential temperature rise of 0.337 °C — which is 48 % of the current «observed» value — or less than half of the current «observed» warming from the mid-20th century.

According to NASA, the major GHG's are: «Atmospheric gases that cause this effect include water vapor (H2O), carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) and flourinated (high global warming potential gases, as well as halons).

Many also question the scientific validity of the IPCC projections of future anthropogenic warming and its consequences, especially the IPCC premise that these are likely to result in serious negative impacts, i.e. a serious potential threat to humanity and our environment, unless actions are undertaken to curtail human GHG emissions (principally CO2).

The IPCC premise (let's call it CAGW for short) is that most of the observed warming since around 1950 was very likely [i.e. with greater than 90 % likelihood] caused by increased human GHG concentrations — AND that this constitutes a potential threat to humanity and our environment unless actions are undertaken to curtail human GHG emissions (principally CO2).

The CAGW premise can be stated as follows: «most of the warming since 1950 is more than 90 % likely to have been caused by increased human GHGs and this represents a serious potential threat to humanity and our environment, unless actions are undertaken to curtail human GHG emissions, principally CO2»

To calculate total warming and cooling potentials, the total effect of aerosols and greenhouse gases (GHG's) needs to be calculated.