Sentences with phrase «emission figures make»

«However, the CO2 emission figures make it very clear that we need to do much more to cut emissions, and this is why the climate change bill, announced in the Queen's speech, will be essential to those efforts.»

Not exact matches

What makes these figures significant is the increasing evidence that nitrogen oxides (NOx) and water vapour in these emissions play a key role in destroying ozone.

Even without figuring these surprising methane emissions, I think these fuels may possibly entail greater GHG emissions than they offset — in the manufacture of pesticides, fertilizers, farm equipment; irrigation water & energy to pump it; transporation of bauxite from S. America (harming rainforests) to make farm equipment, ag schools, secretaries, and all the paper work at each stage... the list goes on & on & on.

Lexus CT launched with great fanfare by Lexus in 2011, though despite its headline - grabbing emissions figures it has never made much of a dent in the compact premium hatchback marketplace.

Despite the weight and the W12 engine, Bentley are quoting official economy of 22.1 mpg and emissions of 292g / km, thanks in part to stop - start, cylinder deactivation and a «Sail» mode — but in the real world, especially if you use the Bentayga's performance, you might struggle to make double figures.

In practical use, this advanced hybrid technology impresses with low consumption and emission figures, but high performance: the electric motor is able to replace or support the combustion engine and makes use of energy generated while braking by converting it into electric energy, storing it and reusing it.

The headline economy and emissions figures for the Outlander PHEV make for interesting reading, with a CO2 output of 41g / km and economy of 166mpg using the official Government test method.

The Q60 GT scored an official fuel consumption figure of 7.7 L / 100 km, making it the least economical of the group (BMW for example claims 5.8 L / 100 km for its 420I), and its CO2 emissions are the highest too at 175g / km where the BMW sneaks down to 134g / km.

This increases its fuel - economy figure into triple digits and reduces emissions, making it an appealing option for company - car drivers.

Figure of 400 ppm calculated using fossil fuel emissions from G. Marland et al., «Global, Regional, and National CO2 Emissions,» in Trends: A Compendium of Data on Global Change (Oak Ridge, TN: Carbon Dioxide Information and Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2007), and land use change emissions from R. A. Houghton and J. L. Hackler, «Carbon Flux to the Atmosphere from Land - Use Changes,» in Trends: A Compendium of Data on Global Change (Oak Ridge, TN: Carbon Dioxide Information and Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2002), with decay curve cited in J. Hansen et al., «Dangerous Human - Made Interference with Climate: A GISS ModelE Study,» Atmospheric Chemistry and Physemissions from G. Marland et al., «Global, Regional, and National CO2 Emissions,» in Trends: A Compendium of Data on Global Change (Oak Ridge, TN: Carbon Dioxide Information and Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2007), and land use change emissions from R. A. Houghton and J. L. Hackler, «Carbon Flux to the Atmosphere from Land - Use Changes,» in Trends: A Compendium of Data on Global Change (Oak Ridge, TN: Carbon Dioxide Information and Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2002), with decay curve cited in J. Hansen et al., «Dangerous Human - Made Interference with Climate: A GISS ModelE Study,» Atmospheric Chemistry and PhysEmissions,» in Trends: A Compendium of Data on Global Change (Oak Ridge, TN: Carbon Dioxide Information and Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2007), and land use change emissions from R. A. Houghton and J. L. Hackler, «Carbon Flux to the Atmosphere from Land - Use Changes,» in Trends: A Compendium of Data on Global Change (Oak Ridge, TN: Carbon Dioxide Information and Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2002), with decay curve cited in J. Hansen et al., «Dangerous Human - Made Interference with Climate: A GISS ModelE Study,» Atmospheric Chemistry and Physemissions from R. A. Houghton and J. L. Hackler, «Carbon Flux to the Atmosphere from Land - Use Changes,» in Trends: A Compendium of Data on Global Change (Oak Ridge, TN: Carbon Dioxide Information and Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2002), with decay curve cited in J. Hansen et al., «Dangerous Human - Made Interference with Climate: A GISS ModelE Study,» Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, vol.

The figures also show the current «best guess» of the man - made warming to the year 2100, assuming no action is taken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The 20 - 40 x figure for cars relates for pollutants that make up a small % of total emissions so its an apples and pears comparison in terms of magnitude.

To get a figure here (based on the IPCC synthesis report) I gather we need to make an assumption about future emissions long in the future, and as far as I remember the way this works is that we assume say constant emissions between now and 2100, and then a drop to zero, or rising emissions to 2100 and then a drop to zero, or emissions falling to zero tommorrow, or something along these lines.

Again, this loss does not show up in the FAO's figures, and the resulting emissions are considered to be natural, not man - made.

Adding land - use CO2 emissions to the energy - and industry - related emissions does not make significant changes to the distribution of emissions across regions (Figures 5 - 14 and 5 - 15).

The IEA make estimates for CO2 emissions for these sectors however, which can then be deducted from IPCC budgets to make them comparable — refer to Figure 2 below.

Posted by Olive Heffernan on behalf of Paty Romero Lankao It does make sense to compare the per capita CO2 emissions of Mexico City and Los Angeles (see figure below) to illuminate the debate on shared but differentiated responsibilities on greenhouse gases emissions and show that just as urban centers register different levels and paths of economic development, cities do not contribute at the same level to global warming.

It does make sense to compare the per capita CO2 emissions of Mexico City and Los Angeles (see figure below) to illuminate the debate on shared but differentiated responsibilities on greenhouse gases emissions and show that just as urban centers register different levels and paths of economic development, cities do not contribute at the same level to global warming.

In figure 3b, at the upper end of the curve, where cumulative totals are large, the existence of an emissions floor seems to make little difference to the peak temperature.

The figure makes two points: First, the longer we wait, the steeper the required emission cuts.

The change of the heat content of the globe (mainly in the oceans) is dH / dt = S (1 - a)-- E, where S is the solar radiation, a the albedo, E the global infrared emission; such a relation is likely and there are historical series for H (figure 13 - A), E (figure 14 - A) for S and a; whether global averaging makes sense is debatable.

In calculations for Slate, Michael Shellenberger, one of the founders of the «ecomodernist» philosophy that advocates for a technology - focused approach to tackling climate change that includes support for nuclear power, figured out that «under Sanders» proposal to not re-license nuclear plants, U.S. carbon emissions would increase by a minimum of 2 billion tons, about the same amount as the U.S. produces each year making electricity.»

That makes two years running where transportation emissions exceed power generation emissions in the US (Figure 4).

The figure also makes clear, however, that barring an unforeseen reversion of the U.S. or EU to exponential emissions growth, the future fate of the climate is largely determined by what China does.

So, changing Harrywr2's capacity figures to make them equivalent on the basis of emissions avoided, to replace 100 million tons of coal would require: 25 GW nuclear, or 60 - 70 GW of hydro, or ~ 190 GW of wind (100 GW / 53 %)

However, for such an ambitious target as 1.5 C, 0.3 C can make a substantial difference when calculating how much remaining CO2 we can still emit without pushing us over 1.5 C of warming when the remaining budget is calculated by simply subtracting off estimates of cumulative emissions to date from the ESM - based budgets for 1.5 C relative to preindustrial (i.e. the horizontal difference between the cross and the vertical dashed black line in the figure above).

The game has a fantastic premise: You're in charge of global decision - making, and you have to figure out how to reduce emissions enough to prevent catastrophic climate change, and prepare humanity to adapt to the warming we'll see irregardless.

Repeated a number of times is the stat about how much improvement has been made: Greenhouse gas emissions per unit of output from tar sands production have dropped 39 % since 1990 according to official figures — with a laundry list of improvements undertaken to reduce this aspect of their environmental impact.

Carbon offsetting — IOP records details of overseas business flights taken by its staff and makes a financial donation, based on those figures, to a company that takes steps to limit the potentially harmful effects of carbon dioxide emissions on the environment.

Even small changes in the lifecycle emissions figures for gas would eventually affect policy and incentives for the utility industry, and ultimately make a big difference in how gas stacks up against its alternatives.

(G&A are also inconsistent on a number of fronts, including applying the 20 - year GWP for methane to livestock but using the 100 - year GWP for other anthropogenic methane emissions, and making an adjustment to emissions figures for the year 2000 to account for increases in livestock tonnage between 2002 and 2009, but not making similar adjustments for rising fossil fuel consumption over the same time).