Sentences with phrase «avoid catastrophic»

In fact a high deductible health plan is needed in order to open an HSA, and these two tools can work together to keep health care costs under control and avoid catastrophic expenses.

Make sure you take advantage of them to avoid a catastrophic data loss.

It is a driver's responsibility to vigilantly watch for pedestrians, even in places where they are unexpected, to avoid catastrophic pedestrian collisions.

From 2000 - 2010, fossil fuel emissions increased by an annual average of 3.1 %, significantly above the 2 % target set to avoid catastrophic consequences, says the report, Rapid growth in CO2 emissions after the 2008 - 2009 global financial crisis».

Heintz: The window of opportunity to avoid catastrophic climate change narrows with each day.

While the world's leading scientific bodies tell us we need to act immediately to avoid catastrophic climate disruption, Obama has set his own target date at 2050, long past any opportunity for voters to hold him accountable.

To be clear, while the bill falls quite short of what scientists said several years ago was the minimum required to avoid catastrophic climate change, real - world changes are changing scientific understanding and heightening concerns.

Governments will today adopt only a 20 % unilateral target, despite recommending that 30 % is the level of reduction necessary to avoid catastrophic climate change.

Replacing it in a generation — which we must do if we are to avoid catastrophic climate disruption — is daunting.»

[2] The new data raises doubt on how serious EU Member States are in their attempts to avoid catastrophic climate change, the impacts of which are increasingly felt across the globe already today, mostly by poor people in developing countries who had no role in creating the problem.

With Passive House as a basis for all Net Zero Energy Buildings — and energy - plus buildings — the energy revolution is possible, and we can avoid catastrophic climate change!»

Finally, regulations like these need to be enacted in other states to ensure the United States does all it can to avoid catastrophic climate change.

And that time left STILL requires spending «trillions of dollars globally» to avoid catastrophic change.

Greenpeace believes that G8 states need to slash emissions by at least 80 percent by 2050 to avoid catastrophic global warming.

They put forward the claim that it is necessary to avoid catastrophic increases in global temperatures, but never really consider the lack of actual benefits and the huge costs involved.

But some environmentalists remain skeptical that offsets can reduce greenhouse gases to avoid catastrophic warming of the atmosphere.

«Speaking candidly about the prospects of the industrialized world being able to reduce its GHG emissions and avoid catastrophic warming, the only three living diplomats responsible for leading past and present UN global warming talks had this to say:

Already, we are seeing the impact of this signal as one country after another retreats from the aggressive targets needed to avoid catastrophic climate change.

But I don't see how it will produce steep reductions in GHG emissions within 5 - 10 years, and a nearly complete phase - out of fossil fuel use within 10 - 20 years at most, which is what is needed to avoid catastrophic warming, if indeed it is not already too late to do so.

Now a question: which amount of fossil are we allowed to burn to avoid a catastrophic warming, following you?

«There is a small, shrinking, window of opportunity to avoid catastrophic disruption of natural ecosystems and human society.

Such a basic economic restructuring in time to avoid catastrophic climate disruption will be challenging, but how can we face the next generation if we do not try?

Second, as the executive secretary of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change points out, divesting from the fossil - fuel industry acknowledges the fact that the majority of known fossil - fuel reserves must be left unburned if we are to avoid catastrophic climate disruption.

These four features combine to create a policy - making «tragedy» where traditional analytical techniques are ill equipped to identify solutions, even when it is well recognized that actions must take place soon to avoid catastrophic future impacts.

We are nowhere near being able to stabilize emissions at levels that many people believe will be necessary to avoid catastrophic impacts on human societies and the environment.

It is genuinely difficult to wrap your head around the scale of action needed to avoid catastrophic changes in the climate.

To avoid catastrophic climate change we need to take action now.

Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), urged voluntary action by businesses and individuals to avoid catastrophic climate change: «It is going to require action today and tomorrow and everyone needs to get on board from governments and corporations to cities, regions and individuals.»

«The task for us is to avoid catastrophic climate change,» she declared at an event that focused on REDD +, the UN programme to combat deforestation.

Studies show we must refrain from burning most fossil fuel reserves to avoid catastrophic warming.

Martin Konecny, EU Funds Campaigner at Friends of the Earth Europe, said: «To avoid catastrophic climate change, Europe needs to drastically cut its greenhouse gas emissions.

The current aviation / EU ETS plan is the first piece of new climate legislation since EU Ministers agreed that the EU needs to cut its carbon dioxide emissions by 30 percent by 2020 in order to avoid catastrophic climate change [5].

They claim that it is necessary in order to avoid catastrophic changes in climate, but the scientific case for this does not survive application of the scientific method.

In March 2007, EU Ministers agreed a 2020 target to unilaterally reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent from 1990 levels; agreed that a 30 percent cut by industrialized countries is needed to avoid catastrophic climate change; and committed to reducing emissions by 30 % if other developed countries do the same and if economically more advanced developing countries contribute adequately according to their respective responsibilities and capacities: Brussels European Council, 5/9 March 2007.

What the poponents are proposing is an attempt to arrest a human - induced trend and to hope that that is enough to avoid catastrophic consequences.

The time up to 2030 is the only chance to take sufficient action to avoid catastrophic climate change.

Emissions of greenhouse gases will need to fall severely if we are to avoid catastrophic levels of warming.

To avoid catastrophic climate change we need to dramatically reduce emissions.

They are meeting to try and agree to a global legally binding climate treaty to keep global warming below 2 degrees Celsius, which is the agreed upon target that scientists say the world can not exceed if we are to avoid catastrophic runaway climate change.

If nations fail to base their climate change policies on what equity, ethics, and justice require of them on mitigation of their greenhouse gas emissions and funding for adaptation, losses, and damages, then the global response to climate change will not likely be ambitious enough to avoid catastrophic climate impacts while deepening existing injustices in the world.

If to avoid catastrophic climate change nations must increase their commitments to reduce ghg emissions to levels required of them based upon ethics and justice, how are nations actually considering or ignoring ethics and justice in formulating their climate change policies and what lessons can be learned from this?

They would show that instead of dragging the world down to the level of what is (not) possible in the USA, President Obama and his team are going to pull the US up to what the science and the world demands to avoid catastrophic climate change.

We need to drastically cut our emissions if we are to avoid catastrophic climate change.

Humans have the means to drastically cut greenhouse gas emissions and avoid the catastrophic consequences of global warming, a major climate report released today concludes.

Miyoko Sakashita, from the Center for Biological Diversity, said: «This report affirms that climate pledges made in Copenhagen fall far short of the action necessary to avoid catastrophic climate impacts.

In the last two entries we examined the failure of the US media to communicate about: (1) the strong scientific position on climate change, and (2) the magnitude of greenhouse gas emissions reduction necessary to avoid catastrophic climate impacts.

Still, overall much remains to be done if the world is to avoid catastrophic warming.

They claim that CO2 emissions reductions are necessary in order to avoid catastrophic global warming, subsequently changed to catastrophic climate change, and most recently to increases in extreme weather.

Leading water scientists have issued one of the sternest warnings yet about global food supplies, saying that the world's population may have to switch almost completely to a vegetarian diet over the next 40 years to avoid catastrophic shortages.

As a part of the Push Europe campaign, our colleagues at Young Friends of the Earth Europe and other youth groups across Europe are encouraging the European Union to take a stronger stance at the climate negotiations by increasing EU greenhouse gas emission reduction targets to 30 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, a significant step towards the 40 percent reduction that would provide a real chance to avoid catastrophic climate change.