Sentences with phrase «emissions limits needed»

At Chevron, a similar resolution sought to make the oil company's current carbon emissions reduction goals more challenging by syncing the targets with the global emissions limits needed to prevent runaway global warming.

Countries are trying to divide up by 2015 the burden of emissions limits needed to stave off the worst effects of climate change, including rising sea levels and more frequent droughts.

Not exact matches

The British think tank Chatham House says that merely applying existing recommendations from health bodies to limit meat consumption would generate a quarter of the remaining emissions reductions needed to keep global warming below 2 degrees Celsius, a key target of the Paris talks.

The province, though, needs to recognize that if an emission - constrained world is going to limit the royalty revenue it collects from extracting fossil fuels, then it will be better off with a tax regime that adds money to provincial coffers when fuel is burned.

Other downstream implications of CCS or other policy will depend on how they affect the relative price of electricity... and more expensive emissions reductions will make electricity more expensive than it needs to be, thereby limiting potential uptake of electrification.

«It's already too late for our breaking the European legal limits, but if we are to clean up London's dirty air we need this zone now, with a zero emission target.

Worldwide, carbon storage has the capability to provide more than 15 percent of the emissions reductions needed to limit the rise in atmospheric CO2 to 450 parts per million by 2050, an oft - cited target associated with a roughly 50 - percent chance of keeping global warming below 2 degrees, but that would involve 3,200 projects sequestering some 150 gigatons of CO2, says Juho Lipponen, who heads the CCS unit of the International Energy Agency in Paris.

If such mechanisms kick in, even bigger cuts in emissions will be needed to limit warming.

So, additional preventive measures need to be considered in addition to the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions, to help coastal regions especially in transition and developing countries to adapt and to limit damage costs.»

To avoid multiple climate tipping points, policy makers need to act now to stop global CO2 emissions by 2050 and meet the Paris Agreement's goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels, a new study has said.

The acid test will come in 2015, when nations will meet in Paris to agree to limits on emissions beyond 2020 — when deep cuts will be needed if the planet is to have any chance of avoiding «dangerous» climate change.

It has been estimated that to have at least a 50 per cent chance of keeping warming below 2 °C throughout the twenty - first century, the cumulative carbon emissions between 2011 and 2050 need to be limited to around 1,100 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide (Gt CO2).

To limit warming to 1.5 degrees, CO2 emissions need to fall, on average, by 20 % for every tenth of a degree of warming.

Human - induced warming is already close to 1 degree, so to limit warming to 2 degrees, CO2 emissions need to fall, on average, by 10 % of today's emission rate for every tenth of a degree of warming from now on.

The resulting model would therefore minimize the effect AGHG emissions on future global temperatures and the need to limit these emissions.

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.

If the carbon fee had begun in 1995, we calculate that global emissions would have needed to decline 2.1 % / year to limit cumulative fossil fuel emissions to 500 GtC.

More than 170 nations have agreed on the need to limit fossil fuel emissions to avoid dangerous human - made climate change, as formalized in the 1992 Framework Convention on Climate Change [6].

Sticking with the same engine and design has limited the need for expensive crash and emissions testing, and most of the rest of the hardware has already been long since paid for.

For diesel - fueled cars to pass emissions - muster in the US, they need complex and expensive clean - up systems, which has so far limited their appeal.

In addition, Efficient Dynamics measures such as brake energy regeneration and needs - based control of auxiliary units ensure that the average fuel consumption on the EU test cycle is limited to 9.6 litres per 100 kilometres and CO2 emissions to 224 grams per kilometre.

Apart from looking absolutely fantastic with ridiculously flared wheel arches, lifted ride height and huge dual - purpose tyres, the AT35 will pull the UK legal limit of 3.5 tonnes, will carry a tonne in its load bay and, for the record, it meets Euro 6 emissions regs without needing regular, annoying AdBlue top - ups.

Commute share cuts travel expenses and reduces carbon emissions, decreases traffic congestion and limits the need for parking spaces.

In Andrew Revkin's article today entitled «In Greenland, Ice and Instability», there is the quote: Eric Rignot, a longtime student of ice sheets at both poles for NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, said he hoped the public and policymakers did not interpret uncertainty in the 21st - century forecast as reason for complacency on the need to limit risks by cutting emissions.

Small - scale solar, which can essentially be done anywhere at mid and lower latitudes, has fairly limited effects on ecological habitats (though I'd like to see better resource extraction for silicon, copper, etc), concentrates resource needs to a local level, harnesses an «unlimited» resource, is a great compliment to other renewables, and once operational has no emission footprint.

Some people have unwisely taken that logic to the extreme and suggested that if the US and other innovating nations just pushed hard on technology that there wouldn't be much need for emission limits, cap and trade or carbon taxes.

Limiting emissions of greenhouse gases is a long - term challenge that needs to be addressed in ways that achieve results; building and living resiliently in tornado zones is a real - time imperative, with or without a push from climate change.

The need for a direct push on energy innovation is particularly acute given scant evidence, in Cancún treaty talks or elsewhere, that countries where nearly all of the growth in such emissions is coming in the next few decades are willing to restrain this flow for the sake of limiting long - term climate change.

But, we need one of these approaches to provide the right market pricing context and thus signals / motivations so that people (companies, the government, individuals, etc.) make investments and other choices within a context that limits and discourages carbon dioxide emissions.

I've written an essay for Wednesday's Op - Ed page offering a short look at extreme weather in a warming world and the two prongs of the climate challenge — the need to limit human vulnerability to the worst the climate system can throw at us and to curb emissions that are steadily raising the odds of unwelcome outcomes, particularly extreme heat and either too much, or too little, water.

[UPDATE, 5/26: The meeting has ended with what appears to be some agreement on ways for rich countries to help poorer ones limit vulnerability from climate change, but with no shift in views on who needs to cut emissions how much and how fast.

Greenpeace breaks down the request in Shell's revised permit application: One ship, the Noble Discoverer (pictured above) needs the requirement for NOx emissions increased by 400 % and have the limits on ammonia emissions removed altogether.

Taking account of their historic responsibility, as well as the need to secure climate justice for the world's poorest and most vulnerable communities, developed countries must commit to legally binding and ambitious emission reduction targets consistent with limiting global average surface warming to well below 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels and long - term stabilization of atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations at well below below 350 p.p.m., and that to achieve this the agreement at COP15 U.N.F.C.C.C. should include a goal of peaking global emissions by 2015 with a sharp decline thereafter towards a global reduction of 85 percent by 2050,

The turning point must come soon: If global warming is to be limited to a maximum of 2 °C above preindustrial values, global emissions need to peak between 2015 and 2020 and then decline rapidly.

I'd like to think he's read our stories on such climate engineering options, including one last year in our Energy Challenge series by Bill Broad (with some help from me) in which the president of the National Academy of Sciences, the atmospheric chemist Ralph Cicerone, endorsed the need to aggressively study such options, even as the world works to limit emissions.

New talks over reviving the first climate treaty, the 1992 framework convention, and the Kyoto Protocol — a 1997 addendum that doesn't constrain the world's biggest gas emitters, the United States and China — remain focused on committing countries to limits on emissions, but not on advancing the technology needed to meet those limits, these critics say.

She has also spoken up frequently about the need to restrict emissions of carbon dioxide, both to limit climate disruption and protect sea life.

The primary challenge is the need to limit future emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2).

Limiting risk needs substantial emission cuts and adaptation

«taking more action now [to reduce GHG emissions] reduces the need for taking more extreme action later to stay within the 2 °C limit.»

It confirms that limiting warming to below 1.5 C by 2100 is feasible, but strong early mitigation is needed and opportunities are being lost with every decade that emissions rise.

The bill would limit emissions for plants that come online between 2009 and 2014, and new plants permitted after Jan. 1, 2015 would need to emit less than 1,100 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt - hour of output.

2010: Governments agree emissions need to be reduced so that global temperature increases are limited to below 2 degrees C.

Driven by the climate science, the international community is increasingly concerned about the need to set a long - term emission reduction strategy so as to me et a target that will prevent dangerous climate change, or at least, as some dangerous climate change appears unavoidable, limiting the damage.

IPCC AR5 summarizes the scientific literature and estimates that cumulative carbon dioxide emissions related to human activities need to be limited to 1 trillion tonnes C (1000 PgC) since the beginning of the industrial revolution if we are to have a likely chance of limiting warming to 2 °C.

The report finds that under a Paris - compliant cap for the EU - ETS, carbon prices would need to average $ 45 - $ 55 / tonne for a sustained period to drive coal and lignite power plants out of the market and keep emissions in line with the Paris Agreement, which seeks to limit temperature rise well below 2 ˚C of warming versus pre-industrial times.

If you are silly enough to contemplate a 2 ˚C rise, then just to have a 66 per cent chance of limiting warming at that point, atmospheric carbon needs to be held to 400ppm CO2e and that requires a global reduction in emissions of 80 per cent by 2050 (on 1990 levels) and negative emissions after 2070.

And after another quick scan, I find table SPM.6 from the Synthesis which says emissions would need to peak sometime before the middle of the century to limit temperature rises to under 4 degrees (with a peak by 2015 to achieve less than 2 degrees warming)... I think most would agree that some degree of «drastic action» is going to be required to achieve a peak in emissions within this time frame, particularly while we have guys like you running around, would you not?

By setting clear, «science - based» emissions reduction targets, companies ensure their plans for carbon reduction meet the level of ambition needed to limit the increase in global average temperature to well below 2 °C.

«We need to put a price on carbon to accelerate these market trends,» Gore told the Chicago Tribune, referring to a proposed federal cap - and - trade system that would penalize companies that exceeded their carbon - emission limits.