Sentences with phrase «debate on carbon dioxide»

«In my opinion, the red team would win that debate on the carbon dioxide.»

The UK will be the deciding factor in an EU debate on carbon dioxide emissions standards for new cars tomorrow, with green groups calling on the government to hold firm.

Not exact matches

The debate about how to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide often focuses on emissions from generation of electricity and transport.

When the debate gets to that crux, here are some crucial, verifiable facts — with citations — people need to know about human - generated carbon dioxide and its effect on global warming.

This shift away from CO2 - centric emissions debates is also evident in a group blog post by analysts at the Center for American Progress, who propose a «multiple multilateralism» approach on climate that, among other things, seeks quick steps on sources of warming other than carbon dioxide — particularly sooty Arctic pollution and gases already considered under the existing ozone - protection treaty.

As signs grew that the Senate was in no mood to set up a trading system for curbing carbon dioxide emissions, as I noted how the climate policy debate had circled back lately to the emissions - capping plan for power plants that had been proposed in the 2000 Bush campaign for the presidency, I found myself thinking about the vacuum that's persisted where President Obama should have been on this issue (if he planned to live up to his campaign commitments).

The indirect impacts of climate change on people and ecosystems have long been the main focus of research and debate over rising levels of carbon dioxide.

In the first three days of the debate on the bill, according to my rough calculation, about 246 million more tons of carbon dioxide flowed into the atmosphere from human activities worldwide.

The devotees of both sides of the mainstream climate debate i.e. on the one hand those who warn against the dangers of global warming, which they attribute mainly to atmospheric emissions of carbon dioxide, and on the other those who assert that the theory of anthropogenic global warming is a fraud, resort to hysteria when they sense that their ideas are under threat.

It achieves this objective primarily through the weekly online publication of «CO2 Science,» which is freely available on the Internet at http://www.co2science.org, and contains reviews of recently published peer - reviewed scientific journal articles, original research, and other educational materials germane to the debate over carbon dioxide and global change.

THIS excellent piece focuses on an important part of the climate debate often overlooked — the heat absorption ability of the carbon dioxide molecule as its concentration increases in the atmosphere.

We are also told that the science on man - made global warming is «settled», and instead of debating the science, we should be focusing on how to urgently reduce our carbon dioxide emissions:

In an interview with Time Magazine last week, Pruitt said he planned to model his red - team, blue - team debate on Cold War - era discussions of the Soviet nuclear threat and suggested that he believed his agency did not «engage in a robust, meaningful discussion» about the threat posed by carbon dioxide before adopting the endangerment finding.

You've made yourself look foolish again here by trying to overturn a basic, well - documented and noncontroversial physical fact (the absorption spectrum of carbon dioxide) accepted by scientists on both sides of this debate.

THERE is little grey area or middle - ground in often heated debates, with the CAGW camp blaming the burning of fossil fuels, namely coal, not only for a > 1 degree celsius warming of the atmosphere since 1850, but on literally anything and everything that moves, shifts, spins or tilts upon contact with colourless, odourless, tasteless, non-reactive, trace gas and plant food carbon dioxide!

More recently, the focus of the climate debate has centered on man - made or anthropogenic warming, particularly as a consequence of the burning of natural resources like coal, oil, and natural gas and the associated carbon dioxide emissions.

For example, while policy makers have been debating the value of forests and farmland as a sponge for some human - generated carbon dioxide, the budget for a federal program monitoring atmospheric carbon dioxide with instruments on aircraft and tall radio towers has remained at $ 1.4 million a year over the last nine years.

Dr Curry said the sensitivity of climate to increasing concentrations of CO2 was at the heart of the scientific debate on anthropogenic climate change, and also the public debate on the appropriate policy response to increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

For three years, Abbott has dominated the public climate debate with a relentless negative campaign on Labor's carbon tax, a fig leaf for his long - term climate denialism that «the science isn't settled», is «highly contentious» and «not yet proven», that «it's cooling» and «it hasn't warmed since 1998» and there's «no correlation between carbon dioxide and temperature».

«One issue not raised in the debate, which centered on market concerns, was changes to the electric system to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide.

The Shultz - Baker carbon tax proposal — outlining a $ 40 per ton tax on carbon dioxide emissions (to be collected at the refinery level or well, mine, or port), with revenue returned to the American public — has been hotly debated since it was released in early February.

The debate over global warming centers on the extent to which gases released from the burning of fossil fuels — mainly carbon dioxide — are trapping the sun's heat in the Earth's atmosphere, creating a greenhouse effect.

The basic physics of greenhouse gases are simply not one of those things that are not well - enough understood and if you don't understand how greenhouse gases work you can't possibly move on to any reasonable debate about other phenomena which can and do (IMO) largely negate the effects of increasing greenhouse gases and leave us in a situation where the modest increase in carbon dioxide has vast beneficial effect by warming the planet at high latitudes where warming is welcome, not warming it at low latitudes where it is already warm enough, increasing the growth rate of green plants, and decreasing the water needs of green plants at the same time.

Although the initial debate was on the total emissivity and absorptivity of the carbon dioxide and the effect of overlapping, Neutrino decided to create a confusion so the issue of the overlapping absorption bands was forgotten.

The Climate Scientists» Register does just that by focusing solely on the most important of the climate science topics under debate — is human produced carbon dioxide leading to dangerous global warming, or not?»