Sentences with phrase «emissions mitigation required»

In 2014, these organizations decided to join forces and provide more comprehensive guidance including a method that illustrates the scale of emissions mitigation required to achieve a 2 °C pathway and the differences facing each sector to achieve reductions.

«The size of the challenge, the depth of emissions mitigation required means that we can't rely just on carrying our past successes forward.»

Not exact matches

In fact, the mitigation pledges collected under the ongoing Cancun Agreements, conceived during the 2010 climate talks, would lead to global average temperature rise of more than 2 degrees Celsius, according to multiple analyses — and may not lead to a peaking of greenhouse gas emissions this decade required to meet that goal.

The largest blow to U.S. mitigation efforts will be if Trump rescinds or weakens the Clean Power Plan — a rule that requires power plants to reduce their carbon emissions, which was finalized in 2015 but is currently tied up in court.

If adopted, it would require VW to pay billions into environmental mitigation projects, including $ 2.7 billion «to reduce emissions that have or will occur from the violating vehicles,» the EPA's Valentine said.

Cost - effective mitigation pathways to limit warming to 2 °C require reducing emissions of greenhouse gases by 40 — 70 % below current levels by 2050.

«Limiting global warming to 1.5 or 2.0 °C requires strong mitigation of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

On the other side, while there will undoubtedly be high costs to any serious attempt at mitigation, this would also require something like a global agreement (covering at least the rich world, India and China, and probably other states with large and currently poor populations) which would inevitably have to bring in issues other than greenhouse gas emissions — such as those you mention — if only because these states will say, reasonably enough, that they can not bring their populations on board without serious help in those other areas.

We estimate that the remaining emission quota to stay below two degrees Celsius requires China to reduce emissions at around 8 to 10 percent per year and this is, in many cases, greater than the mitigation challenge for the United States.

Participants reaffirmed that the risks posed by ongoing climate change require a strong commitment to mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions, adaptation to unavoidable climate change, and development of low - carbon energy sources, independent of whether climate intervention methods ultimately prove to be safe and feasible....

Given the depth of decarbonisation required for a low - carbon future and the central role that businesses will need to play, strengthening complementary measures that target business engagement can increase emissions mitigation.

The key problem with this «moral hazard» argument is the hypothesis that «cost - effective, proven, scaleable CDR solutions» are poised to proliferate at greater rates than GHG emission mitigation technologies (such as renewable energy and energy efficiency) that are required to decarbonize our economy.

In 2014 alone, reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the International Energy Agency, the UN Sustainable Solutions Network and the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate argued for a doubling or trebling of nuclear energy — requiring as many as 1,000 new reactors or more in view of scheduled retirements — to stabilize carbon emissions e.g. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Working Group III — Mitigation of Climate Change, http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg3/, Presentation, slides 32 - 33; International Energy Agency, World Energy Outlook 2014, p. 396; UN Sustainable Solutions Network, «Pathways to Deep Decarbonization» (July 2014), at page 33; Global Commission on the Economy and Climate, «Better Growth, Better Climate: The New Climate Economy Report» (September 2014), Figure 5 at page 26.

At a plausible GHG emissions price of $ 50 / t CO2eq under a future US carbon mitigation policy, such co-production systems competing as power suppliers would be able to provide low - GHG - emitting synthetic fuels at the same unit cost as for coal synfuels characterized by ten times the GHG emission rate that are produced in plants having three times the synfuel output capacity and requiring twice the total capital investment.

Posted in Advocacy, Carbon, Development and Climate Change, Energy, Events, Financing, Global Warming, Green House Gas Emissions, International Agencies, Lessons, Mitigation, News, Resilience, Technologies, UNFCC - CoP18, UNFCCC, Urbanization, Vulnerability Comments Off on Reaching 2009 International Climate Change Goals Will Require Aggressive Measures

Given that this is only one of the seven major interactive feedbacks, and that it is evidently accelerating apace, I'm forced to the unwelcome conclusion that both Carbon Recovery and Albedo Restoration modes of geoengineering are now inevitably required alongside stringent Emissions Control in a Troika mitigation strategy.

With only two scheduled days of negotiations left, there has been no measurable movement on emissions reductions targets or finance for climate adaptation and mitigation of the scale the urgent situations requires.

To achieve an absolute reduction in emissions from the industry sector will require a broad set of mitigation options going beyond current practices.

Preventing a major humanitarian disaster will require a serious reduction in greenhouse gas emissions through mitigation.

So we had a look at that and worked on it and many things we have done have followed from that, both on the impact side, mitigation, emission reduction, modelling, climate finance, a lot of the central organising principle has become about how to take the steps required to enable countries to deal sustainably with the challenges of meeting the 1.5 C limit.

In the context of mitigation, the discount rate matters because it could be argued that even though delayed mitigation is more costly than cutting emissions now (because steeper cuts are required), those delayed (greater) expenses are not «worth as much» as today's costs because they are discounted.

We can clarify the nature of emission trajectories further by picking a carbon budget and examining the required trajectories as a function of the time when we commence mitigation.

If nations fail to base their climate change policies on what equity, ethics, and justice require of them on mitigation of their greenhouse gas emissions and funding for adaptation, losses, and damages, then the global response to climate change will not likely be ambitious enough to avoid catastrophic climate impacts while deepening existing injustices in the world.

Bolivia draws strongly and explicitly upon ethical justifications for requiring deep cuts in national ghg emissions by other nations, together with financial contributions and holistic mitigation and adaptation measures, capable of both reducing poverty and vulnerability to climate change yet has not identified an equity framework that could be applied at the global scale.

But along with emissions - reduction mitigation to reduce the rate and magnitude of climate change as expeditiously as possible, a comprehensive risk - management climate policy will necessarily require a strategic and multifaceted effort at preparedness to limit vulnerabilities and increase resilience to impacts that can't be avoided.

Concentrating on the result of the equation can be useful to understand what would be required for adapting, but our mitigation efforts should be focused on controlling emissions and not degrees celsius

While the introduction of a tax - based mitigation system would take the world significantly forward, the Review has come to the view that only an international agreement that explicitly distributes the abatement burden across countries by allocating internationally tradable emissions entitlements has any chance of achieving the depth, speed and breadth of action that is now required in all major emitters, including developing countries.

If we don't want to screw up our climate, it is time to put the fruitless debates on climate - engineering techniques to rest, and focus on the only real solution, which is a tremendous challenge requiring all our intellectual resources: The mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions.

Ultimately, from the perspective of policy makers and the general public, the impacts of climate change and the required mitigation and adaptation efforts are largely the same in a world of 2 or 4 C per doubling of CO2 concentrations where carbon dioxide emissions are rising quickly.

I would also very much like to see some costings of the emissions pathway being championed by the Worldwatch Institute — costings both of the climate change impacts which would still occur, and of the efforts required to reduce emissions to the proposed degree — because I think this particular mitigation scenario can be as valuable in getting us on track as has been James Hansen's promotion of 350ppm as a target.

(b) that the cost of emissions reductions at the required scale is likely to be manageable (1 % of global annual GDP to be invested in mitigation according to some economists), provided that meaningful action is taken immediately; and

Mitigation scenarios (also known as climate intervention or climate policy scenarios) are defined in the TAR (Morita et al., 2001), as scenarios that «(1) include explicit policies and / or measures, the primary goal of which is to reduce GHG emissions (e.g., carbon taxes) and / or (2) mention no climate policies and / or measures, but assume temporal changes in GHG emission sources or drivers required to achieve particular climate targets (e.g., GHG emission levels, GHG concentration levels, radiative forcing levels, temperature increase or sea level rise limits).»

committed low levels of government expenditure on research and development in key areas like energy supply, juxtaposed with the rising importance of low - emissions energy technologies for Australia's mitigation effort, suggest that current funding levels do not reflect the priority required to meet the rapidly changing pattern of demand established by an emissions trading scheme.