Sentences with phrase «acting on co2»

The Act on CO2 line will give free, impartial and tailored advice from the Energy Saving Trust on how individuals can reduce their carbon footprint.

The Act on CO2 promotion follows the launch of a carbon calculator.

Defra maintains it has already made it a priority to help consumers to do their own bit for the environment, pointing to its recent Act on CO2 campaign.

I'm thinking of the «Act on CO2 ″ campaign in the UK: http://tinyurl.com/6lae4q

The U.K. Guardian reported in February 2008, «Firms will act on CO2 only if its cost triples,» says oil giant Royal Dutch / Shell:

Not exact matches

One person driving less, eating less factory - farmed meat, flying less, polluting less, using less air conditioning — you know things you could do — may affect little on a global CO2 scale, but maybe today, if everyone who reads this article who cares about Thoreau's legacy, who believes in self - determination, who calls him - or herself a leader, or just wants to be one, acts by his or her values...

In a story few noticed at the time, last month Greenwire obtained a copy of a PowerPoint presentation that seems to suggest that the EPA will be naming CO2 as a danger to human health under the Clean Air Act, and it will happen on Thursday.

Sulphur particles in the stratosphere reflect sunlight and therefore act antagonistically to atmospheric greenhouse gases like CO2, which capture the heat of the sun on Earth.

The concern that figuring out how to sequester CO2 could act as a «license to burn» more coal is important, since dirty coal has such a negative impact on local air quality and human health, in addition to emitting CO2.

Nominally it the response of the climate to a doubling of CO2 (or to a ~ 4 W / m2 forcing), however, it should be clear that this is a function of time with feedbacks associated with different components acting on a whole range of timescales from seconds to multi-millennial to even longer.

There are many factors — both warming (CO2, CH4) and cooling (sulphates) that act on the Arctic.

On CO2 as a fertilizer, in the oceans CO2 is acting as a pollutant and is altering the chemistry (the ph) and the emerging data shows a harmful effect on organismOn CO2 as a fertilizer, in the oceans CO2 is acting as a pollutant and is altering the chemistry (the ph) and the emerging data shows a harmful effect on organismon organisms.

The expansion of sea ice during the last ice age acted as a «lid» on the Southern Ocean, preventing CO2 from escaping.

I think the statement on «acting on climate mitigation and adaptation» has been mis - interpreted through the prism of CO2 induced climate change.

The claim that CO2 immediately increases plant growth and acts as a fertilizer is a highly oversimplified argument, since plant carbon uptake is dependent on water, temperature, and nitrogen suppy.

The only process that one could argue is minimally effected by CO2 is — the RATE of heat transfer from the Earth's surface — but with convective / conductive energy / mass transfer as the controlling mechanism — it would be immediately acted on by increased convection anyway — because Earth isn't surrounded by a glass bowl now is it — NO — just the cold depths of space!

This can only be achieved if: (1) developed nations move rapidly to demonstrate that a modern society can function without reliance on technologies that release carbon dioxide (CO2) and other non-CO2 greenhouse gases to the atmosphere; and (2) if developing nations act in the near - term to sharply limit their non-CO2 emissions while minimizing growth in CO2 emissions, and then in the long - term join with the developed nations to reduce all emissions as cost - effective technologies are developed.

Unfortunately, the Stadium Wave is only contributing approximately + / - 0.1 C temperature swings to the global temperature signal — this pales in comparison to the 0.8 C secular trend (so far) we are seeing, due to the CO2 acting as an clear and aggressive control knob on the climate.

This acts as a positive feedback on the surface warming, because water vapor itself is a powerful greenhouse gas that, like CO2, absorbs and re-emits longwave radiation back to the surface.

So long term trends act as negative feedback on CO2 levels, and therefore your physically impossible scenario is impossible indeed and has nothing to do with my writings or opinions in any way.

From the data in this post it seems like uncontrolled fossil fuel burning is actually a net global coolant due to the sulfates, so it seems that this would act as a break on CO2 based warming effects.

In the US, Republican members of Congress are asking the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to forestall any effort to regulate carbon dioxide emissions under the Clean Air Act until a full, transparent investigation has taken place on allegations that fudged data played a role in establishing the link between industrial CO2 emissions and global warming.

Eventually, building on that 1988 performance, other climate experts developed a hypothesis that CO2 acted as the proverbial control - knob thermostat for the global temperature.

Emissions data critical for targeted climate action Knowing how much CO2 is being released and from where better enables countries to act on climate commitments 7 November 2016

EPA acted on the court's decision with its 2009 «endangerment finding,» which exhaustively reviewed the science and concluded that, without action, rising CO2 emissions would likely result in dangerous warming trends harmful to human health and the economy.

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

That is why Blair and Brown were keen to be seen to be acting on climate change, and that is why, in response to that action, the Tories committed themselves to a policy of an 80 % reduction in CO2 emissions by 2050, against Labour's 60 %.

As a member of the large plaintiff group in Massachusetts v. EPA, we celebrated the Supreme Court's April 2007 decision declaring CO2 a pollutant under the Clean Air Act and ordering the Environmental Protection Agency to take the next step toward regulation by making what's called the «endangerment finding» — an agency determination that a pollutant «endangers public health and welfare,» leading directly to controls on that pollutant.

But to keep using the ash we have to burn more coal and produce more CO2 for which we have to use more ash to stop the sun for acting on and thus keep burning coal which keeps producing more CO2.....

If on the other hand you still choose to condemn billions to a CO2 death, at least start acting like it's the greatest emergency ever to be faced by the planet and humanity.

4 Aug: Crikey: Ellen Sandell: Abbott's European holiday might make him hot and bothered Abbott seems to still be confused about the science of climate change, moving between «climate change is absolute crap» and aligning himself with the climate deniers, and at other times accepting that climate change is a problem, but just not one worth acting efficiently on... All of this will be news to most Europeans, who have long accepted the science of climate change and have been measuring their CO2 emissions in tonnes through the trading scheme, and are benefiting from climate change solutions... Studies predict an increase of up to 6.1 million jobs in 2050, and the EU - wide emissions trading scheme is expected to generate between $ 143 billion and $ 296 billion over the next six years... Maybe on the plane on the way home to Australia, Abbott could use the time to catch up on some reading.

Or top CO2 climate scientist Kevin Trenberth's Joint Presidential Session on Communicating Climate Change speech titled «Communicating Climate Science And Thoughts On Climategate» when he advises fellow scientists to act contrary to scientific idealon Communicating Climate Change speech titled «Communicating Climate Science And Thoughts On Climategate» when he advises fellow scientists to act contrary to scientific idealOn Climategate» when he advises fellow scientists to act contrary to scientific ideals.

Were it a smelly pink goo, the world would have acted much sooner on CO2 pollution.

The EPA on April 17 [2009] proposed new regulations to control carbon dioxide (CO2) and five other «greenhouse gases» as «pollutants» under section 202 (a) of the Clean Air Act.

But this assumes that all the warming was caused by CO2 so, although it can only reflect the transient climate sensitivity, it acts as an upper limit on that.

On this topic critics must explain; 1) Why CO2 can not have acted as a feedback in past interglacials.

For instance since 1970s these as CO2 sinks acting sea surface areas have continuously warmed because then El Niño events of ENSO oscillation have dominated and caused the continuous sea surface warming, with a certain kind of lag, on these CO2 sinks areas.

Since basically all catastrophic forecasts depend on water vapour acting to amplify the effect of CO2 it strikes me that knowing what is happening with this gas now, a thrid of the way to a CO2 doubling, would be key to finally validating those predictions.

Internal causes rely on negative feedbacks from either water vapor (WV) or clouds; they act to decrease the warming that should be attributed to increasing CO2.

Actually, the relevant «law» is not the ever rising entropic «heat death» of the universe from CO2, but instead is Le Châtelier's principle for a reaction in physical chemistry: the disturbance of the equilibrium of greenhouse gases H2O and CO2 by CO2 injections acts to oppose the change to the equilibrium, and thus to cancel out the effect on temperature from the increase in CO2.

If Congress does not act meaningfully on the climate front, as the Obama Administration (finally) did, a Clinton EPA will continue to use its regulatory authority to reduce CO2 emissions.

How many times can official science be wrong before governments stop acting on the claim that human CO2 is causing climate change?

The study measured the «efficacy» (that is, how much each forcing affects heat accumulation in the climate for a given strength) of each forcing by comparing the global change in temperature when only that forcing was acting to change temperature with the change in global temperature when only CO2 is acting on the climate.

We can not be emitting more CO2 than is staying in the atmosphere, have nature acting on the balance as a sink, and magically have the increase in atmospheric CO2 be attributable to natural rather than anthropogenic emissions.

During the ice age cycles CO2 acted as an amplifying feedback on the warming which was initiated by changes to the earth's orbit.

So each increase in CO2 acts on a smaller and smaller amount of energy.

Since the supply of these photons is by nature limited, each increase in CO2 acts only on those photons which were not blocked by the previous increases.

With the American Clean Energy & Security Act just passed in the House, let's look at what WWF has to say about how well the G8 countries, plus five developing nations are doing in terms of climate change policy: The 2009 G8 Climate Scorecards rank the members of the G8 on a range of issues — emission trends since 1990, growth of renewable energy and renewable energy policy, emissions per capita and per unit of GDP, CO2 per kWh of electricity, industrial energy efficiency, transport policy, among others.

Follow me on Twitter More on GOP's Anti-Clean Air Act Bill 5 Leading US Health Groups Oppose Efforts to Block EPA Regulating CO2 Fred Upton Met with Energy Lobbyists in Secret Before His About Face on Climate

It's Official: EPA Finds Greenhouse Gases Endanger Public Health US Chamber of Commerce to Fight EPA on Clean Air ACt CO2 Regulation