Sentences with phrase «effect on carbon dioxide emissions»

The trouble is that the carbon tax proposed by the Greens would have no effect on carbon dioxide emissions.

Unfortunately, RECs are almost entirely non-additional (e.g. the wind turbines producing them in Iowa would have been built independent of the REC income stream), so buying RECs has no real effect on carbon dioxide emissions.

«Those will have profound effects on carbon dioxide emissions,» Stavins said, «because they'll reduce investment in new coal and slow the use of existing coal.»

Not exact matches

In addition to the effect on soil from tilling, emissions from the farm tractors increases carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere.

On 28 May, a Japanese governmental advisory body laid out options for the mix of energy sources in 2030, along with projected effects on the economy and carbon dioxide emissionOn 28 May, a Japanese governmental advisory body laid out options for the mix of energy sources in 2030, along with projected effects on the economy and carbon dioxide emissionon the economy and carbon dioxide emissions.

But the impact these gases have on the climate has until now not been as widely studied as the effects of carbon dioxide emissions.

For example, he has said in recent years that vast carbon dioxide emissions might ultimately cause a runaway greenhouse effect like on Venus that would boil the oceans and make Earth uninhabitable, the Times reported.

While examining ways that carbon dioxide could escape underground storage, Kang wondered about the effect of old wells on methane emissions.

7It is particularly ironic that Lomborg would offer such a ridiculously precise estimate of the cost of the impacts of climate change from carbon dioxide emissions, inasmuch as the entire thrust of his books chapter on «global warming» is that practically nothing about the effects of greenhouse gases is known with certainty.

In the time since the 2007 version of this report, the human effect on the climate has grown more than 40 percent stronger, thanks to continued emissions of greenhouse gases and more precision in measurements, with carbon dioxide leading the charge.

If the human population continues to grow, more pressure will be put on carbon dioxide emissions — leaving future generations vulnerable to the effects of climate change.

Why It Matters: Passing laws to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, methane emissions, or industrial particles could have an important effect on climate change.

A failure to reduce carbon dioxide emissions significantly within the next decade will have large adverse effects on the climate that will be essentially irreversible on human time scales.

If we are in a global warming crisis today, even the most aggressive and costly proposals for limiting industrial carbon dioxide emissions and all other government proposals and taxes would have a negligible effect on global climate!

Rate of percentage annual growth for carbon dioxide has certainly increased since the beginning of the 21st century, but this should result in a significant change in the rate of warming any more quickly than the differences between emission scenarios would, and there (according to the models) the differences aren't significant for the first thirty - some years but progressively become more pronounced from then on — given the cummulative effects of accumulated carbon dioxide.

[UPDATE 5:30 p.m. Voices added below] Most concerns about growing emissions of carbon dioxide have focused on the gas's heat - trapping effect on climate.

But even when carbon dioxide does make its way out of the atmosphere, Earth's natural systems can release other carbon dioxide molecules that were previously stored in the oceans / land back into the atmosphere, making the full effect of carbon dioxide emissions on surface temperatures much longer than this 5 - 200 year average.

Back in 1969, smart people made some predictions regarding the effect carbon dioxide emissions would have on the climate by the year 2000.

Humans» use of fossil fuels, and the resulting carbon dioxide air emissions, has no material effect on climate.

It then goes on to speak of how the horrible effects of air pollution can be averted by enacting measures to lower carbon dioxide emissions, which, again, is demonstrably false.

«The human impact on global climate is small, and any warming that may occur as a result of human carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gas emissions is likely to have little effect on global temperatures, the cryosphere (ice - covered areas), hydrosphere (oceans, lakes, and rivers), or weather.

(Sec. 340) Requires the EPA Administrator to report to Congress on an analysis of the effects of different carbon dioxide reduction strategies and technologies on the emissions of mercury, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxide, which cause acid rain, particulate matter, ground level ozone, mercury contamination, and other environmental problems.

Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to Congress a report that analyzes the effects of different carbon dioxide reduction strategies and technologies on the emissions of mercury, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxide, which cause acid rain, particulate matter, ground level ozone, mercury contamination, and other environmental problems.

The established science shows carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, that humans produce greenhouse gas emissions, and that humans have had some effect on Earth's climate.

From the article: «The tax, which rose from 10 Canadian dollars per ton of carbon dioxide in 2008 to 30 dollars by 2012, the equivalent of about $ 22.20 in current United States dollars, reduced emissions by 5 to 15 percent with «negligible effects on aggregate economic performance,» according to a study last year by economists at Duke University and the University of Ottawa.»

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.

Fluxes of methane, carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide in boreal lakes and potential anthropogenic effects on the aquatic greenhouse gas emissions

«A major new scientific study concludes the impact of carbon dioxide emissions on worldwide temperatures is largely irrelevant, prompting one veteran meteorologist to quip, «You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide.»

Given the high uncertainty about the net effect of human carbon dioxide emissions on global temperatures, we only see natural changes in climate.

These numbers raise a key question of huge importance if nations are to avoid the worst effects of climate change: Is the world on a path toward «decoupling» economic activity from carbon dioxide emissions?

Applying valence framing to enhance the effect of information on transport - related carbon dioxide emissions.

This means the IPCC is tasked with finding a human effect of human carbon dioxide emissions on the climate, whereas NIPCC looks at climate change «in the round,» without bias.

This position does not appear to be supported by any observational evidence, much like the highly exaggerated claims concerning the effects of human carbon dioxide emissions on climate.

Burtraw, D., K. Palmer, R. Bharvirkar, and A. Paul, 2002: The effect on asset values of the allocation of carbon dioxide emission allowances.

Various organizations have published forecasts of the economic impacts of the Clean Power Plan (CPP), EPA's regulation that limits carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, with studies arriving at markedly different conclusions about the effect of the policy on electricity affordability and the overall economy.

[10] One set of simulations evaluates wind energy replacing coal power with different technologies serving as the back - up power to wind, in order to evaluate their effect on fuel use and carbon dioxide emissions.

Over the past decade, ExxonMobil shareholders have offered resolution after resolution calling for the oil and gas company to take positive steps toward reducing carbon dioxide emissions and to be more open and transparent regarding the effect its products have on our global climate system.

The Australian federal government's effort to levy a tax on carbon - dioxide emissions to battle supposed «climate change» is facing massive resistance from voters, despite a flurry of pro-carbon-tax propaganda and government - funded reports touting alleged benefits of the scheme while downplaying its harmful effects.

Lead author James Hansen, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, New York, concludes: «If global emissions of carbon dioxide continue to rise at the rate of the past decade, this research shows that there will be disastrous effects, including increasingly rapid sea level rise, increased frequency of droughts and floods, and increased stress on wildlife and plants due to rapidly shifting climate zones.»

However, they provide very different «projections» of future atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration for the same assumed future anthropogenic emission... (1) the cause of the recent rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration is not known, (2) the future development of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration can not be known, and (3) any effect of future anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide on the atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration can not be known

Although such arguments continue to rage, there is no doubt that there is a significant body of scientific opinion (as well as published peer - reviewed literature [5]-RRB- that is sceptical of the alarmist claims by green activists about the effect of carbon dioxide emissions on the climate.

«If global emissions of carbon dioxide continue to rise at the rate of the past decade,» said Dr. Hansen, «this research shows that there will be disastrous effects, including increasingly rapid sea level rise, increased frequency of droughts and floods, and increased stress on wildlife and plants due to rapidly shifting climate zones.»

A far more balanced analysis of the effect of carbon dioxide emissions on climate was given to the House of Commons» committee on climate change by Professor Richard Lindzen [2], Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, on 22nd February 2012.

A failure to reduce carbon dioxide emissions significantly within the next decade will have large adverse effects on the climate that will be essentially irreversible on human time scales.

«Effect of encapsulated calcium carbide on dinitrogen, nitrous oxide, methane, and carbon dioxide emissions from flooded rice

E.g., research assumes greenhouse gas emissions cause warming without explicitly stating humans are the cause»... carbon sequestration in soil is important for mitigating global climate change» (4a) No position Does not address or mention the cause of global warming (4b) Uncertain Expresses position that human's role on recent global warming is uncertain / undefined «While the extent of human - induced global warming is inconclusive...» (5) Implicit rejection Implies humans have had a minimal impact on global warming without saying so explicitly E.g., proposing a natural mechanism is the main cause of global warming»... anywhere from a major portion to all of the warming of the 20th century could plausibly result from natural causes according to these results» (6) Explicit rejection without quantification Explicitly minimizes or rejects that humans are causing global warming»... the global temperature record provides little support for the catastrophic view of the greenhouse effect» (7) Explicit rejection with quantification Explicitly states that humans are causing less than half of global warming «The human contribution to the CO2 content in the atmosphere and the increase in temperature is negligible in comparison with other sources of carbon dioxide emission»»

Welcomes the agreement achieved by the Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol on its work pursuant to decisions 1 / CMP.1, 1 / CMP.5 and 1 / CMP.6 in the areas of land use, land - use change and forestry (decision - / CMP.7), emissions trading and the project - based mechanisms (decision - / CMP.7), greenhouse gases, sectors and source categories, common metrics to calculate the carbon dioxide equivalence of anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks, and other methodological issues (decision - / CMP.7) and the consideration of information on potential environmental, economic and social consequences, including spillover effects, of tools, policies, measures and methodologies available to Annex I Parties (decision - / CMP.7);

In particular, the research indicates that seasonal and regional changes in temperature and, to a certain degree, precipitation can be estimated solely on the basis of carbon dioxide emissions, which makes it simpler to study the effects of climate change.

This week, however, the blog Moonbattery found a very interesting memo from Romney's office in 2005 announcing tough new regulations on emissions... Governor Mitt Romney today announced that Massachusetts will take another major step in meeting its commitment to protecting air quality when strict state limitations on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from power plants take effect on January 1, 2006.

The one thing we are reasonably sure of is that twiddling about with emissions of carbon dioxide will have no discernable effect on global mean temperature.