Sentences with phrase «cutting ghgs»

The two - volume NAS report says cutting GHGs is the only solution.»

Growing crops for fuel — known as biofuels — represents another potential way of cutting GHGs by replacing fossil fuels (biofuels created underground by nature over millions of years).

Impact on oil and gas production: compared to a carbon tax, Alberta's policy offers emitters less of an incentive to reduce production in order to cut GHGs, notes Leach: «assuming that the facility reduced production by 10 percent, and that emissions decreased proportionately (a simplifying assumption), the facility's emissions intensity would not change, so its carbon liability per barrel of oil produced would also remain constant.»

Its self - starting leadership will be a key factor in stopping deforestation, making forest supply chains sustainable, and cutting GHG emissions from the land sector.

The analysis concludes that single serve coffee cuts GHG emissions by 640,000 tonnes each year compared to conventional drip brewing.

Bill Gill, assistant vice president for sustainability at Smithfield Foods, shares how efforts including hog waste - to - energy could help the world's largest pork producer cut GHG emissions — and costs....

Kellogg Company plans to cut GHG emissions by 65 percent across its own operations, known as Scope 1 and 2, and, for the first time work with suppliers, known as Scope 3, -LSB-...]

And as the window to avoiding a +2 °C world gets ever smaller, we should be exploring ways of removing GHGs safely from the atmosphere as well as relentlessly cutting our GHG emissions.

If global surface temperatures continue not to increase v quickly over the next decade or two then I think this could seriously slow down action to cut GHG emissions, no matter how well understood the «slow - down» is, and no matter how much additional heat is measured accumulatng in the oceans.

If others took it as seriously as they did, I suspect they could make even tougher goals to cut GHG emissions sooner.

I would guesstimate that industries on the whole could cut their GHGs cost - effectively by at least 1/4 or 1/3.

Efficiency and conservation are crucial elements to cutting GHG emissions by targets of up to 80 % by 2050!

You have avoided my points that there is no alternative if we want to the world to cut GHG emissions.

In a joint announcement, President Obama said the U.S. would cut its GHG emissions by 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025 — about double the pace the U.S. had been targeting in the 2005 - 2020 period — while President Xi Jinping said China would aim to cap its emissions increases by 2030, by which time it expected to get 20 percent of its total energy consumption from zero - emissions sources.

Canada has committed to cutting GHG emissions 30 per cent by 2030 from 2005 levels.

Then if we were to see «catastrophic» warming begin to continue, I'm sure there would be no problem for people (the West at least) to dramatically cut GHG's, and institute a «geo - engineering» of pumping out aerosols, seems we've been pretty effective so far, and it has just been a by - product.

Here's how to get rid of black carbon from electricity generation, cut GHG emissions by 13 Gt CO2 / a by 2050 (same as the Nordhaus «Optimal» carbon price policy) and achieve a lot more benefits as well.

The eighth largest economy in Latin America, Ecuador seeks to augment its work on reducing deforestation to cut GHG emissions and fight climate change, as well as to improve rural livelihoods and protect the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities.

We can cut GHG emissions, but to do so rapidly means we need to take an economically rational approach.

Because cutting GHG emissions requires interventions — such as regulation or increased taxation — that interfere with laissez - faire free - market economics, people whose identity and worldview centers around free markets are particularly challenged by the findings from climate science.

Nuclear power is the least cost and fastest way to substantially cut GHG emissions from electricity

This continues our work towards clean energy reform that will cut GHGs and reduce the dependence on foreign oil that threatens our national security and our economy.»

I went from vegetarian to vegan about 12 yrs ago, thus cutting my GHG load by the equivalent of 1.5 tons of CO2 / yr.

Similarly a nation's justification for the refusal to reduce ghg emissions is that reductions in emissions will affect the nation's economic interest is not a morally relevant justification for refusing to cut ghg emissions.

If we are sincere about cutting GHG emissions both here and in the rest of the World we have to plan to reduce our exports of coal.

But most importantly, the impact of the agreement is clear — governments have signaled an end to the fossil fuel era by committing for the first time to cut GHG emissions and avoid the most egregious impacts of climate change.

However, the list does record a significant number of people who are outspoken critics of Kyoto or of efforts to cut GHG emissions generally.

If our aim is to cut GHG emissions by 80 % by 2050 (just 41 years) wind power can not even be a part of the solution because it locks - in a large GHG producing back - up capacity.

Experts from UNEP and other organisations keep pointing out that every dollar invested in cutting GHG emissions and adapting to climate change gets double the bang for the buck because the results directly support the only sustainable future possible, which is captured in the international community's 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

We plan to cut GHG emissions by 65 percent across our operations, known as Scope 1 and 2, and, for the first time work with suppliers, known as Scope 3, to help reduce their emissions by 50 percent by 2050.

In fact, some very low emitting nation's and people may be able to argue that they need not yet cut their ghg emissions because they have not yet exceeded their fair share of safe global emissions.

Not exact matches

Suncor reports that it has cut its greenhouse - gas emissions (GHGs) per barrel by 45 % over the same period.

Also, the model offers companies the possibility of buying others» emissions reductions — now, making sure that such GHG cuts are additional, i.e. would not have happened even without regulation, is tricky, argues the Pembina Institute.

This can bring overall GHG emissions cuts to a total of 780,000 tonnes compared to conventional drip brewed coffee — a 23 % GHG reduction.

The city has already reduced its GHG levels by 19 percent, but this next round of emissions cuts, warned the Mayor, would be far more difficult.

But cutting global (GHG) emissions by 50 percent by 2050 is a major challenge that would require curbs on the smokestacks of power generators and the tailpipes of vehicles as well as a halt to deforestation, among other efforts.

It shows the number of articles along the y - axis, the total number of citations along the x-axis, color codes whether an individual is one of the «concerned signers» who signed any of 20 declarations affirming the mainstream view of human impact on climate and the need to limit greenhouse emissions, was one of the 619 contributing authors to IPCC AR4 wg1 (2007), «non-signer» who is one of the non-AR4-wg1 authors on climate who signed neither statement a statement of concern nor skepticism, or one of the 495 individuals who signed any of 16 declaration skeptical of mainstream climate science or of the need for GHG cuts.

I have proposed that we develop the process of pyrolysis to be used on organic wastes to cut the reemitting of GHGs from the wastes that are basically a biofuels crop wasted that usurp no land or water from food production.

And IPCC AR5 also assessed the 2011 forcing from CH4 at +0.74 Wm ^ -2 to +1.20 Wm ^ -2, a GHG with a short shelf - life that would see atmospheric levels tumbling if the sources were cut off.

It's not the cutting of GHG emissions that are the real issue: it's the cutting into the 35 % and growing overload of carbon dioxide already on the globe that has to be addressed for getting some control of global warming.

We have to cut into the 35 % and growing overload GHGs, mainly carbon dioxide, In that comment I have outlined several actions that can be taken with many benefits in cutting into the natural biorecycling of GHGs from organic wastes.

I happen to agree with Secular Animist and others that we need to cut CO2 and other ghg emissions to as close to zero as quickly as possible at thsi point no matter what further bad news from science comes along wrt said tipping points and feedbacks.

s possible we may not be able to reverse this, even with big GHG cuts, but I have to keep doing my best with the hope it's not too late — and would keep doing my best, even if scientists finally do tell me it's too late (hoping they're wrong).

While we might HOPE FOR THE BEST — that there will be a cooling trend (less sun irradiance, etc) to exactly counteract our AGW trend (even so there is the negative effects of CO2, even without the warming — ocean acidification, crop loss to weed, etc)-- we should then be trying to AVERT THE WORST with even more drastic GHG cuts.

In my case, I cut my household GHG emissions by about two - thirds, from a relatively frugal base, with four changes: replaced an older car with a Prius, stopped buying grain - fed meat, bought wind power from my local electric utility, moved to a house with a ground - source heatpump.

The «emissions reductions» approach, including cap - and - trade systems and other economic incentive mechanisms as well as direct regulatory controls, will require power plants, cars, and many other GHG sources to become more «efficient» by cutting their discharges.

And the reason those 21st century emissions fail to make much of an impression on global temperature is because the atmospheric levels of GHG begin to decline when our emissions are cut (the cut required depending on the gas in question).

Any program that reduces current emissions by some percent but doesn't contribute to cutting long - term atmospheric GHGs will not produce tangible climate change benefits except the lame claim that «things would be even worse» if we do nothing.

Now we are told that preventing dangerous climate change, requires GHG emission cuts which must be fabulously costly — and that (by the way) there is a 10 % chance that GHG emissions are not responsible for climate change.

Those actions will cut the adding of more GHGs slowing the worsening of global warming, but will not reverse the present effects occurring.