Sentences with phrase «because human carbon dioxide emissions»

Reading just that people might easily be led to believe that because human carbon dioxide emissions are so small, they won't be noticed against the background noise of natural exchanges, when that is patently untrue with CO2 concentrations stable within a few ppm around 280 ppm for the last few thousand years until mass fossil fuel burning started.

Because human carbon dioxide emissions exceed removal rates through natural carbon «sinks,» keeping emission rates the same will not lead to stabilization of carbon dioxide.

Not exact matches

That is because human activities going back 150 years have emitted long - lasting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, meaning that sharp reductions in future emissions are needed to avoid harmful climatic impacts.

The amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the air is now at its highest level in human history, largely because of coal - burning power plants and vehicle emissions.

Sea snails that leap to escape their predators may soon lose their extraordinary jumping ability because of rising human carbon dioxide emissions, a team of international scientist...

«Ocean warming is occurring because of human carbon dioxide emissions, which warm the earth as a whole,» Weber says.

For decades, we humans apparently (somehow) thought that, because carbon dioxide emissions are invisible to the naked eye, they either don't matter or aren't really there.

The enhanced Greenhouse Effect we are now measuring is a human fingerprint because the source of it is the continued emission of greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide, produced by industrial activity.

And in fact when you look at the scientific literature, it's an interesting disconnect because the modelers who study emissions and how to control those emissions are generally much more comfortable setting goals in terms of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas concentrations because that comes more or less directly out of their models and is much more proximate or more closely connected to what humans actually do to screw up the climate in the first place, which is emit these greenhouse gases.

In a sharp change from its cautious approach in the past, the National Academy of Sciences on Wednesday called for taxes on carbon emissions, a cap - and - trade program for such emissions or some other strong action to curb runaway global warming.Such actions, which would increase the cost of using coal and petroleum — at least in the immediate future — are necessary because «climate change is occurring, the Earth is warming... concentrations of carbon dioxide are increasing, and there are very clear fingerprints that link [those effects] to humans,» said Pamela A. Matson of Stanford University, who chaired one of five panels organized by the academy at the request of Congress to look at the science of climate change and how the nation should respond.

Reductions in some short - lived human - induced emissions that contribute to warming, such as black carbon (soot) and methane, could reduce some of the projected warming over the next couple of decades, because, unlike carbon dioxide, these gases and particles have relatively short atmospheric lifetimes.The amount of warming projected beyond the next few decades is directly linked to the cumulative global emissions of heat - trapping gases and particles.

NGOs argue for reductions to carbon dioxide emissions from human activities (i.e. anthropogenic CO2 emissions) because it is assumed that these emissions are causing the recent rise of carbon dioxide in the air.

The main evidence for catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (CAGW), the principal alleged adverse effect of human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), is climate models built by CAGW supporters in a field where models with real predictive power do not exist and can not be built with any demonstrable accuracy beyond a week or two because climate and weather are coupled non-linear chaotic systems.