Sentences with phrase «emissions at current levels»

However, 19 and perhaps as many as 31 such wedges are required to reduce emissions to zero by 2060, and 9 wedges just to stabIlize emissions at current levels (Davis et al., 2013).

He says: «It's not enough to freeze greenhouse gas emissions at current levels.

By comparison, scenarios for fossil fuel emissions for the 21st century range from about 600 billion tons (if we can keep total global emissions at current levels) to over 2500 billion tons if the world increases its reliance on combustion of coal as economic growth and population increase dramatically.

So meeting the new 2025 target would essentially freeze emissions at the current level, and the size of that challenge will largely depend on how the economy behaves in the next decade.

Not exact matches

Even if emissions were immediately reduced enough to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations at current levels, climate change would continue for centuries.

Our current emissions trajectory locks Earth into a carbon dioxide level of at least 450 ppm, Ralph Keeling says.

If emissions continue at current levels, he predicts that by 2080, 39 percent of the world's lizard populations will have vanished, corresponding to a 20 percent loss in species.

In one, emissions of nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds from human activities would continue at current levels through 2050.

Some climate models suggest that, at current CO2 emissions levels, 80 percent of Arctic waters could prove corrosive to clams, pteropods and other species at the base of the polar food chain by 2060, the new statement said.

For Coral Springs, for example, which appears to be comfortably inland, the high - tide line will encompass about a quarter of the city's population some time in the distant future, if emissions continue at current levels through the year 2040.

Potential annual damages are shown on the county - level in a scenario in which emissions of greenhouse gasses continue at current rates.

The shale gas in recent exploration in the United States, that could meet the domestic demand of the country for natural gas at current levels of consumption for over 100 years, is extremely negative for the environment because it generates half the carbon emissions from coal, and pollutes the sheets underground aquifers.

Based on current scientific understanding, this requires that global greenhouse gas emissions need to be reduced by at least 50 % below their 1990 levels by the year 2050.

Oil is something like a third of current global emissions, so 100 years of oil at contemporary levels would be like locking in current emissions for 33 years.

2) don't even attempt to address the mathematically indisputable (as far as I can see) fact that grassland sequestration can not come close to offsetting the current levels of carbon emissions, much less reduce the excess carbon already in the atmosphere (at least not while said emissions continue).

According to analysts at Carbon Brief, current emission levels mean the world has just over four years at current emission levels before warming above 1.5 C is virtually guaranteed.

Chris V: your At the current rates of CO2 emissions, some of us will live to see CO2 levels that are double pre-industrial levels.

In China, CO2 emissions are projected to plateau at 9.2 Gt (only slightly above current levels) by 2030 before starting to fall back.

Detailed studies at the State Hydrology Institute in St. Petersburg allow one to assume that biogenic methane emission in the Russian permafrost zone can not increase by more than 20 %, or at the most 30 %, compared to the current level, which would cause global warming by 0.01 degrees Celsius by 2050.

That strong action be taken at all levels, including government, industry, and individuals to substantially reduce the current levels of greenhouse gas emissions and to mitigate the likely social and environmental effects of increasing atmospheric CO2.

In this notion, you break down the gap between the emissions level you want at some point in the future and the emissions level you will have at current rates of growth, and break it down into manageable fractions - wedges - that can each be addressed with specific policies.

This is true because most mainstream scientists have concluded that the world must reduce total global emissions by at the very least 60 to 80 percent below existing levels to stabilize GHG atmospheric concentrations at minimally safe atmospheric GHG concentrations and the United States is a huge emitter both in historical terms and in comparison to current emissions levels of other high emitting nations.

At current levels of CO2 emission, a tax of $ 45 to $ 50 per ton of CO2 would pay for the whole investment and provide incentives for implementing renewable technologies (5).

This is the first time since the CAT began tracking action in 2009 that policies at a national level have visibly reduced its end - of - century temperature estimate and also reduced the 2030 emissions gap between current policies and what is needed to meet the 1.5 °C temperature limit.

This is so because the world will need to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions from current levels by 80 % or greater by the middle of this century to prevent catastrophic climate change as greenhouse gas emissions increase world wide increase at 2 % per year under current trends.

While SO2 emissions may have had some small role in that period, they can't have a role in the current standstill, as the increase of emissions in SE Asia is compensated by the decrease in emissions in the Western world, thus there is hardly any increase in cooling aerosols while CO2 levels are going up at record speed and temperatures are stalled.

Jack Greer says: February 3, 2011 at 5:43 pm quote The current scientific understanding of Earth's carbon cycles that, at this time, natural carbon emission sources weighed against natural carbon sinks should result in a net reduction in atmospheric CO2 levels.

This means that at current demand levels we need to burn roughly 70 % less gas if we are to stay in this emissions intensity range.

The current scientific understanding of Earth's carbon cycles that, at this time, natural carbon emission sources weighed against natural carbon sinks should result in a net reduction in atmospheric CO2 levels.

This technical document focuses on current and projected impacts on climate due to the high levels of greenhousegas emissions, adaptation is a necessary strategy at all scales in a changing climate.

At current production rates, high - carbon tar sands oil and its byproducts throw off enough greenhouse gas emissions to mark Canada as an obstacle to stopping global warming short of catastrophic levels.

«Limiting total CO2 emissions from the start of 2015 to beneath 240 billion tonnes of carbon − 880 billion tonnes of CO2 — or about 20 years of current emissions would likely achieve the Paris goal of limiting warming to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels,» says study leader Richard Millar, a climate system scientist at the University of Oxford.

Preindustrial levels were about 280 parts per million (ppm), we're at nearly 400 ppm now and at current emission rates, we're due to hit 560 ppm soon after 2050.

At first glance, this framework puts a heavy burden of proof on those claiming that the current spike in CO2 levels is mostly derived from industrial emissions — despite the apparent similarity of the curves over the last 50 - 100 years.

The company expects energy demand to grow at an average of about 1 % annually over the next three decades — faster than population but much slower than the global economy — with increasing efficiency and a gradual shift toward lower - emission energy sources: Gas increases faster than oil and by more BTUs in total, while coal grows for a while longer but then shrinks back to current levels.

How do the wealth transfers from your proposal compare with an alternative of a emissions charge set at the level of your fee that finances a «general» tax reduction structured to maintain the current vertical equity structure in Alberta as much as possible?

The researchers set the experiment to create a carbon dioxide level of 560 parts per million (ppm), which at current emission rates we're due to reach soon after 2050.

They have told the public, politicians, and the press that «global warming» (alias «climate change») is primarily due to human - caused emissions of carbon dioxide, and that if this continues at current levels that this will result in catastrophic global warming.

At the current allowable levels of sulfur in marine bunker fuels, pollutant emissions (particulates, black carbon, NOx, SOx, and CO2) from... Read more →

(PBL 2012) Yet to stabilize carbon dioxide concentrations at about 450 ppm by 2050, global emissions will have to decline by about 60 % from current levels.

Limiting warming to 2 °C or less will require reductions in global ghg emissions below current emissions by as much as 80 percent by mid-century for the entire world and as we explained in the a recent article on «equity» at even greater reduction levels for most developed countries.

«Climate science» as it is used by warmists implies adherence to a set of beliefs: (1) Increasing greenhouse gas concentrations will warm the Earth's surface and atmosphere; (2) Human production of CO2 is producing significant increases in CO2 concentration; (3) The rate of rise of temperature in the 20th and 21st centuries is unprecedented compared to the rates of change of temperature in the previous two millennia and this can only be due to rising greenhouse gas concentrations; (4) The climate of the 19th century was ideal and may be taken as a standard to compare against any current climate; (5) global climate models, while still not perfect, are good enough to indicate that continued use of fossil fuels at projected rates in the 21st century will cause the CO2 concentration to rise to a high level by 2100 (possibly 700 to 900 ppm); (6) The global average temperature under this condition will rise more than 3 °C from the late 19th century ideal; (7) The negative impact on humanity of such a rise will be enormous; (8) The only alternative to such a disaster is to immediately and sharply reduce CO2 emissions (reducing emissions in 2050 by 80 % compared to today's rate) and continue further reductions after 2050; (9) Even with such draconian CO2 reductions, the CO2 concentration is likely to reach at least 450 to 500 ppm by 2100 resulting in significant damage to humanity; (10) Such reductions in CO2 emissions are technically feasible and economically affordable while providing adequate energy to a growing world population that is increasingly industrializing.

Given the reluctance, at virtually all levels, to openly engage with the unprecedented scale of both current emissions and their associated growth rates, even an optimistic interpretation of the current framing of climate change implies that stabilization much below 650 ppmv CO2e is improbable....

23 Thousands of years ago Temperature change (° c) Carbon dioxide (ppmv) Temperature Change through time Compares to the present temperature Current Level Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration and Temperature change Current Level 2100 CO2 Concentration in the atmosphere (Antarctic Ice Core) If nothing is done to slow greenhouse gas emissions... CO 2 concentrations will likely be more than 700 ppm by 2100 Global average temperatures projected to rise at 2.5 - 10.4 degrees If nothing is done to slow greenhouse gas emissions... CO 2 concentrations will likely be more than 700 ppm by 2100 Global average temperatures projected to rise at 2.5 - 10.4 degrees

At 400 ppm we are cooked, and we are currently near 390 ppm, anybody who seriously suggests that what we are putting up with now at current GHG emission levels is living in a fantasy land and ignoring the long tail that these emissions bring, they will be around for hundreds of yearAt 400 ppm we are cooked, and we are currently near 390 ppm, anybody who seriously suggests that what we are putting up with now at current GHG emission levels is living in a fantasy land and ignoring the long tail that these emissions bring, they will be around for hundreds of yearat current GHG emission levels is living in a fantasy land and ignoring the long tail that these emissions bring, they will be around for hundreds of years.

With the greenhouse gases already accumulated in the atmosphere, it would take less than 30 years for it to be inevitable that temperature would in time reach 2 °C above the pre-industrial level if the global greenhouse - gas emissions stayed at their current rate.

«We're reducing emissions at the same time, but tightening the current ozone standard to near unachievable levels would serve as a self - inflicted wound to the U.S. economy at the worst possible time.

If you can do so without being driven by desire simply to mock viewpoints different from yours, look at the ultra-slow effect of the thermohaline current, in addition to questionable ice - core CO2 measurements; the evidence is in different sensitive comparisons of delta CO2 levels with delta emissions levels, as well as isotope studies; nothing watertight proven but a lot of highly suggestive coherent evidence that it's bad science to neglect.

These include 117 U.S. cities, with total average U.S. city pledges at 68 % GHG emissions reductions below their current levels by 2050.

Earlier this week a study out of the University of Copenhagen's Niels Bohr Institute found that sea level rise could last 500 years if greenhouse - gas emissions continue at their current pace.