Sentences with phrase «by cumulative carbon emissions»

The most useful article for the reader unfamiliar with the literature is probably, «Warming caused by cumulative carbon emissions towards the trillionth tonne.»

The trillion tonnes idea seems to have come from a 2009 Nature paper by Myles Allen et al. «Warming caused by cumulative carbon emissions towards the trillionth tonne».

Warming caused by cumulative carbon emissions towards the trillionth tonne.

Allen et al, «Warming caused by cumulative carbon emissions towards the trillionth tonne».

Not exact matches

By framing the issue in terms of a carbon budget based around cumulative emissions, the IPCC's most recent report showed that it doesn't necessarily matter what short - term emissions reduction targets are adopted, or which country cuts emissions by a particular amount relative to another nation's pledgeBy framing the issue in terms of a carbon budget based around cumulative emissions, the IPCC's most recent report showed that it doesn't necessarily matter what short - term emissions reduction targets are adopted, or which country cuts emissions by a particular amount relative to another nation's pledgeby a particular amount relative to another nation's pledges.

Finally, to revisit the question originally posed @ 203: Assuming the IEO2011 Reference case of «1 trillion metric tons of additional cumulative energy - related carbon dioxide emissions between 2009 and 2035», and given that this case equates to following RCP8.5 until 2035 as previously demonstrated @ 408, what increase in average global surface temperature relative to pre-industrial would result by 2035?

Assuming the IEO2011 Reference case of «1 trillion metric tons of additional cumulative energy - related carbon dioxide emissions between 2009 and 2035», and given that this case equates to following RCP8.5 until 2035 as previously demonstrated @ 408, what increase in average global surface temperature relative to pre-industrial would result by 2035?

It's a big job, but it's one that has to be done anyway, since if the whole world tries to pull itself into prosperity by burning carbon at the rate the US does, then we run out of coal even at the highest estimates by 2100, and you wind up with no fossil energy and the hellish climate you get from 5000 gigatonnes cumulative emission.

In other words — by 2014 we'd used more of the carbon budget than any of the RCPs had anticipated and if we are not confident that the real world is cooler than the models at this level of cumulative emissions, this means that available emissions for 1.5 degrees should decrease proportionately.

In contrast, the CO2 emissions emitted by a coal plant represents a cumulative contribution to the atmospheric stock of carbon.

By «committed» or «locked in» warming or sea level in a given year, we refer to the long - term effects of cumulative anthropogenic carbon emissions through that year: the sustained temperature increase or SLR that will ensue on a time scale of centuries to millennia in the absence of massive and prolonged future active carbon removal from the atmosphere.

By aggregating savings since 2008, this equates to a cumulative 8,178,000 tonnes of carbon emissions that have been avoided over the entire period.

They could cut cumulative carbon dioxide emissions by 34 billion metric tons, more than the total emissions from fossil fuels in this country over six years.

This means that only two emission targets — the peak rate and cumulative carbon emissions — are needed to constrain two key indicators of CO2 - induced climate change (peak warming and peak warming rate), as evidenced by the maximum - likelihood estimation method used above.

But hailing the carbon saved by the US since 2005, while ignoring what it added before that would fail to acknowledge the cumulative nature of the carbon emissions burden on the atmosphere.

Wasdell said that the draft submitted by scientists contained a metric projecting cumulative total anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions, on the basis of which a «carbon budget» was estimated — the quantity of carbon that could be safely emitted without breaching the 2 degrees Celsius limit to avoid dangerous global warming.

Overall, although natural gas is a non-renewable fossil fuel that emits carbon dioxide, the cumulative emissions saved by fuel switching over the next decade from coal to natural gas are likely to prove far cheaper than the removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere in future decades.

The first paper, by Goodwin et al. (2014) in Nature Geoscience, investigates the question of why transient surface warming on the timescale of decades to centuries, due to cumulative carbon emissions, is nearly - linear.

This will result in the smallest total cumulative carbon emissions for a given cost by 2050 or so.

Primary energy demand until 2035, from «Facing China's Coal Future», figure 1, page 7, Increases in carbon emissions by fuel type for regions with highest absolute emissions growth, 2008 - 2035 from IEO2011, figures 115, page 143, and «Cumulative carbon dioxide emissions by region», figure 116, also on page 143, same link as above.

1 ppm CO2 = 2.12 Gt C (CDIAC) 2.12 Gt C = 7.76 Gt CO2 (C to CO2 ratio of 3.67, ThinkProgress) thus 1 ppm CO2 = 7.76 Gt CO2 «1 trillion metric tons of additional cumulative energy - related carbon dioxide emissions between 2009 and 2035» (IEO2011, p. 143) = 129 ppm of additional CO2 (divide 1,000 Gt CO2 by 7.76)