Sentences with phrase «accumulate in the atmosphere over»

And according to emissions specialists like the Tyndall Centre's Kevin Anderson (as well as others), so much carbon has been allowed to accumulate in the atmosphere over the past two decades that now our only hope of keeping warming below the internationally agreed - upon target of 2 degrees Celsius is for wealthy countries to cut their emissions by somewhere in the neighborhood of 8 — 10 percent a year.27 The «free» market simply can not accomplish this task.

This method of comparison makes some sense when carbon dioxide is being compared to greenhouse gases such as HFCs, which also accumulate in the atmosphere over long periods of time.

They will continue to accumulate in the atmosphere over the next years and possibly even decades, which together with the inertia of the climate system will support further warming.

Not exact matches

The world's permafrost is packed with the remnants of plants and animals accumulated over thousands of years, and it contains twice as much carbon as is currently in the atmosphere.

While an exceptionally strong El Niño helped to boost temperatures early in the year, most of the excess heat has built up over decades as greenhouse gases have accumulated in the atmosphere.

Unprecedented amounts of greenhouse gases (at least over the last few hundred thousand years) continue to accumulate in the atmosphere and the global climate (land surface, ocean, glaciers, stratosphere) continues to respond as predicted by theory and models.

Although emissions from developing countries now dominate, the industrial countries set the world on its global warming path with over a century's worth of CO2 emissions that have accumulated in the atmosphere.

Many people on the blog and elsewhere have presented more that a scrap of evidence that anthropogenic greenhouse gases are accumulating in the atmosphere and warming the planet over and above natural changes.

On the other hand, the correlation between accumulated emissions and accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere is much better: it is a near fit over the last 100 + years (60 years of ice core data, near 50 years of MLO data).

But that's actually an understatement by Gallup, since more than 97 % of the world's climatologists say that those carbon gases, which are given off by humans» burning of carbon - based fuels, are causing this planet's temperatures to rise over the long term, as those carbon gases accumulate in the atmosphere and also block the heat from being radiated back into outer space.

That may seem a long time away, but because carbon dioxide piles up in the atmosphere over time, as water blasting from a faucet accumulates in a sink, avoiding the two - degrees tipping point would require slashing emissions starting now, the IPCC said.

The fraction of aCO2 in the atmosphere is already about 9 %, partly because the human fraction of the inputs did grow to 5 % (8/150 GtC) over time, partly because it accumulates over 5 years, as only 20 % of all CO2 is exchanged per year, thus also only 20 % of the aCO2, but only the deep oceans exchange it with aCO2 free fresh deep ocean natural CO2, while ocean surface and vegetation give some aCO2 back in the next season.

This permafrost carbon is the remnant of plants and animals accumulated in perennially frozen soil over thousands of years, and the permafrost region contains twice as much carbon as there is currently in the atmosphere.

Now humans are applying a much stronger, much faster forcing as we put back into the atmosphere, in a geologic heartbeat, fossil fuels that accumulated over millions of years.

It is possible that the main reason why the time - integral of solar variability is of more importance to global temperature change in the medium to long term than short - term solar - energy variability is that, over time, half of any net increase in heat will accumulate in the oceans (the rest will radiate out to space), and the oceans, being a little warmer, will maintain the atmosphere at a warmer temperature than it might otherwise have exhibited.

«The differences are because the impacts of greenhouse gases accumulate and intensify over time, and because they persist in the atmosphere for such long periods,» said Unger.

A study found that of the 3,300 tons of carbon per hectare stored in Indonesia's coastal peatland areas, up to half would be released into the atmosphere over the 100 years following conversion to oil palm plantations — the equivalent of 2,800 years» worth of accumulated carbon.

Don't worry yet mate because: «Land and ocean CO2 sinks respectively removed 30 % and 25 % of all anthropogenic CO2 emissions over the period 2000 — 2008, leaving about 45 % to accumulate in the atmosphere.»

RealClimate is wonderful, and an excellent source of reliable information.As I've said before, methane is an extremely dangerous component to global warming.Comment # 20 is correct.There is a sharp melting point to frozen methane.A huge increase in the release of methane could happen within the next 50 years.At what point in the Earth's temperature rise and the rise of co2 would a huge methane melt occur?No one has answered that definitive issue.If I ask you all at what point would huge amounts of extra methane start melting, i.e at what temperature rise of the ocean near the Artic methane ice deposits would the methane melt, or at what point in the rise of co2 concentrations in the atmosphere would the methane melt, I believe that no one could currently tell me the actual answer as to where the sharp melting point exists.Of course, once that tipping point has been reached, and billions of tons of methane outgass from what had been locked stores of methane, locked away for an eternity, it is exactly the same as the burning of stored fossil fuels which have been stored for an eternity as well.And even though methane does not have as long a life as co2, while it is around in the air it can cause other tipping points, i.e. permafrost melting, to arrive much sooner.I will reiterate what I've said before on this and other sites.Methane is a hugely underreported, underestimated risk.How about RealClimate attempts to model exactly what would happen to other tipping points, such as the melting permafrost, if indeed a huge increase in the melting of the methal hydrate ice WERE to occur within the next 50 years.My amateur guess is that the huge, albeit temporary, increase in methane over even three or four decades might push other relevent tipping points to arrive much, much, sooner than they normally would, thereby vastly incresing negative feedback mechanisms.We KNOW that quick, huge, changes occured in the Earth's climate in the past.See other relevent posts in the past from Realclimate.Climate often does not change slowly, but undergoes huge, quick, changes periodically, due to negative feedbacks accumulating, and tipping the climate to a quick change.Why should the danger from huge potential methane releases be vievwed with any less trepidation?

It found that of the 3,300 tons of carbon per hectare stored in Indonesia's coastal peatland areas, up to half would be released into the atmosphere over the 100 years following conversion to oil palm plantations — the equivalent of 2,800 years worth of accumulated carbon.