Sentences with phrase «actual ghg emissions»

When accounting for actual GHG emissions, the IPCC average «Best» model projection of 0.2 °C per decade is within the uncertainty range of the observed rate of warming (0.15 ± 0.08 °C) per decade since 1990.

As this figure shows, even without accounting for the actual GHG emissions since 1990, the warming projections are consistent with the observations, within the margin of uncertainty.

-- The main issue is that our actual GHG emissions have pretty much exceeded or are in the «worse - case» scenarios projected in the past.

In fact, despite the almost universal acceptance by nations of the 2 °C warming limit, the actual ghg emission targets and timetables chosen by almost all nations do not meet the levels of emissions reductions specified by IPCC as necessary to keep atmospheric concentrations below 450 ppm and thereby achieve the 2 °C warming limit.

Not exact matches

Peter Kent: But that will do nothing to get GHG actual emissions down.

There is no way to humanely reduce population growth, leading to an actual decrease in population, leading to an actual decrease in anthropogenic GHG emissions, in that time frame.

Why don't you take up an earlier suggestion from Ross McKitrick and endorse (in summary here) that GHG emissions be taxed proportional to the actual global temperature change?

The actual GHG radiative forcing in 2011 was approximately 2.8 W / m2, so to this point, we're actually closer to the IPCC FAR's lower emissions scenarios.

PS IPCC had predicted warming of 0.15 to 0.3 C per decade in TAR and 0.2 C per decade in AR4 — yet in actual fact, lolwot, we saw «no warming» despite unabated human GHG emissions.

In actual fact, the rate of human CO2 emissions (the principal GHG) increased to 1.9 % per year (based on CDIAC data).

The steepness of these curves superimposed on actual national ghg emissions levels is an indication of the enormity of the challenge for the international community because the emissions reduction curves are much steeper than reductions that can be expected under projections of what current national commitments are likely to achieve if fully implemented.

As per the Revised IPCC Guidelines for national GHG inventory (1996), the potential emission values are used only in case of unavailability of the actual emission values.

It's pretty hard to «overinterpret» a 10 + year stop in global warming (actual slight cooling instead), despite unabated human GHG emissions and concentrations reaching record levels, plus IPCC model - based predictions of 0.2 C per decade warming.

The actual temperature trend was essentially the same as Hansen's «Scenario C», which assumed total phase - out of GHG emissions from 1990 to 2000

The actual amount of emissions reductions that are needed between now and 2020 is somewhat of a moving target depending on the level of uncertainty that society is willing to accept that a dangerous warming limit will be exceeded, the most recent increases in ghg emissions rates, and assumptions about when global ghg emissions peak before beginning rapid reduction rates.

The only appropriate test is to examine whether the relationship embodied in the physics of the models holds between actual emissions and observed temperatures, not between observations from actual emissions and «what if» scenarios with wholly different GHG histories.

The SAR included various human GHG emissions scenarios, so far its scenarios IS92a and b have been closest to actual emissions.

In this case, your unsupported generalization that «the electorate could not care less» about climate change was rebutted with actual opinion polls showing that significant majorities of «the electorate» do, in fact, care a good deal, and consider the issue a priority for the President and the Congress, and support policies to regulate GHG emissions and to hold fossil fuel corporations responsible for the full costs of their products.

If you were to provide actual data showing the GHG emissions from a single trip to a mall to purchase a household - worth of LED lightbulbs exceeds the GHG reductions achieved by operating those LEDs for their rated lifetime instead of incandescents, your argument might be worth listening to.