Sentences with phrase «assuming global greenhouse gas»

Future projections for the same cities are drawn from climate models that estimate temperature and humidity assuming global greenhouse gas emissions continue unabated.

Not exact matches

This language would have been superfluous and without legal effect if, as Waxman assumes, EPA already had authority since 1970 to regulate carbon dioxide as an «air pollutant» or greenhouse gases in general based on their» global warming potential.»

U.S. officials at U.N. climate negotiations here said Tuesday that they would not embrace any overall binding goals for cutting global greenhouse gas emissions before President Bush leaves office, essentially putting off specific U.S. commitments until a new administration assumes power in 2009, according to several participants.

At Jim Hansen's now famous congressional testimony given in the hot summer of 1988, he showed GISS model projections of continued global warming assuming further increases in human produced greenhouse gases.

Unlike the scenarios developed by the IPCC and reported in Nakicenovic et al. (2000), which examined possible global futures and associated greenhouse - related emissions in the absence of measures designed to limit anthropogenic climate change, RCP4.5 is a stabilization scenario and assumes that climate policies, in this instance the introduction of a set of global greenhouse gas emissions prices, are invoked to achieve the goal of limiting emissions and radiative forcing.

Also, the court ruled that there is enough evidence to assume a sufficient causal link between the Dutch greenhouse gas emissions, global climate change, and the effects (now and in the future) on the Dutch living climate.

In the climate models, increases in greenhouse gases such as methane, and CFCs, are assumed to also cause some global warming, while increases in aerosols are assumed to cause global cooling.

«The target European governments have agreed on for reducing greenhouse gas emissions is based on outdated science, and assumes a 50:50 chance at best of staying below 2 °C global temperature increase.

In determining any nation's fair share of safe global emissions, the nation must either assume that all humans have an equal right to use the atmosphere as a sink for greenhouse gases, or identify another allocation formula based upon morally relevant criteria.

In the experiment, greenhouse gas emissions in the coming century were assumed to follow a trajectory that climate modelers refer to as the A1B scenario, in which global economic growth is rapid and driven by a balanced portfolio of energy sources, including fossil fuels, renewables, and nuclear.

One of the methods anthropogenic global warming advocates (scientists and bloggers) use to illustrate the assumed effects of greenhouse gases on global temperatures is to illustrate the divergence between the linear trends of global temperatures and a scaled ENSO index such as NINO3.4 SST anomalies.

The premise assumes the proposition that «Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.»

E.g., research assumes greenhouse gas emissions cause warming without explicitly stating humans are the cause»... carbon sequestration in soil is important for mitigating global climate change» (4a) No position Does not address or mention the cause of global warming (4b) Uncertain Expresses position that human's role on recent global warming is uncertain / undefined «While the extent of human - induced global warming is inconclusive...» (5) Implicit rejection Implies humans have had a minimal impact on global warming without saying so explicitly E.g., proposing a natural mechanism is the main cause of global warming»... anywhere from a major portion to all of the warming of the 20th century could plausibly result from natural causes according to these results» (6) Explicit rejection without quantification Explicitly minimizes or rejects that humans are causing global warming»... the global temperature record provides little support for the catastrophic view of the greenhouse effect» (7) Explicit rejection with quantification Explicitly states that humans are causing less than half of global warming «The human contribution to the CO2 content in the atmosphere and the increase in temperature is negligible in comparison with other sources of carbon dioxide emission»»

There is the «business as usual» case that assumes 4 degrees of global warming is inevitable, so we should use the cheapest and most plentiful energy sources available regardless of the fact that burning these fuels will raise atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations 40 percent higher than current levels.

The second paper, by Hagos et al. (2016) in Geophysical Research Letters uses output from a global climate model to examine changes to atmospheric river events over western North America, assuming large, business - as - usual anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions.

I can't find the context of the text fragment used as an example of the «minimizes» subset of Level 6 in Table 2 but the most likely reading of the fragment by itself is that it assumes that humans are causing atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations to increase and that this is causing or contributing to global warming, so the fragment does say (or at least imply) something about human attribution.

E.g., research assumes greenhouse gas emissions cause warming without explicitly stating humans are the cause», with the example of» `... carbon sequestration in soil is important for mitigating global climate change»

Based on the study of past climate sensitivity, the researchers found global mean temperatures were likely to exceed those of the past eight glacial cycles during the 2020 - 50 period, assuming greenhouse gases continue on a business - as - usual pace.