Sentences with phrase «emissions per dollar»

Public financing for energy alternatives should be focused on fostering innovation and achieving the largest possible reduction in heat - trapping emissions per dollar invested — not on promoting the growth of an industry that has repeatedly shown itself to be a highly risky investment.

The world's fourth - largest greenhouse gas emitter, India committed to reduce its carbon emissions per dollar of gross domestic product 20 percent to 25 percent by 2020 (compared to 2005 levels).

Time and treasure devoted to that is probably the most effective thing to do, but the avoided emissions per dollar may not be easy to calculate.

The report's innovative feature, Blank said, is its analysis not just of total emissions, but emissions per dollar of economic output - what the agency calls «CO2 intensity.»

Green investments are spurring significant growth across the U.S economy while decreasing industry's overall emissions per dollar of goods and services, according to two reports released Wednesday by the federal government.

Not exact matches

A billion - dollar scheme to reduce household emissions in the Czech Republic costs five times as much per ton of carbon dioxide (CO2) as some European industries need to spend to achieve the same cuts, government data showed.

Current cost estimates for sending the gas deep underground are in the range of tens of dollars per metric ton of CO2, so sequestering one gigaton (Gt) a year — roughly one sixth of U.S. emissions — would cost tens of billions of dollars annually.

During the emissions trading scheme's trial period, which began in 2005 and ends later this year, confusion in the market caused prices to gyrate from almost $ 40 per ton of CO2 to about a dollar today.

Still, economists predict such a system would result in a price that averages in the tens of dollars per ton of emissions.

Did you know that British Petroleum has implemented Kyoto - sized cuts in its own emissions 8 years ahead of schedule and claims to be saving hundreds of millions of dollars (per year, I believe)?

It also doesn't work out because emissions - per - dollar decrease with higher GDP, as the economy moves from energy - intensive heavy industry towards services.

So, the dollar per avoided emissions metric doesn't give a complete picture there either.

Total CO2 emissions in the US have steadily increased ever since we began measuring them — and all the current administration is willing to do is say their should be voluntary programs to reduce CO2 per dollar of GDP (not per capita, not total emissions).

He then described Mr. Bush's chosen way of measuring progress — by tracking the amount of carbon dioxide emissions per unit of gross domestic product (tons per dollar)-- and said the country was on track to reach Mr. Bush's goal, set in 2002, of an 18 percent drop in greenhouse «intensity» by 2012.

Pfizer, the pharmaceutical company, achieved its initial goal by reducing global greenhouse gas emissions by 43 percent per million dollars of revenue from 2000 to 2007.

On the plus side, emissions levels have come close to 1990 levels, and we have seen real reductions in emissions per capita and per dollar of state GDP.

Comparison of the RCP4.5 to other 4.5 W / m2 stabilization scenarios in literature for a global population assumptions, b global GDP assumptions, c emissions of CO2 from all energy and industrial sources, and d price of carbon in 2005 US dollars per ton of CO2

Multiplying the total budget amounts by the observed emission reductions dollars per ton benefits is all that is necessary to estimate how much CO2e is expected to be reduced.

Reputable studies have suggested that the whole thing wouldn't cost very much, either: To offset the warming caused by all current CO2 emissions would require an outlay of at most $ 100 billion dollars per year.

«(iii) achieve the earliest and maximum emission reductions within a reasonable period per dollar invested;

(D) give the highest priority to investments that promote technologies that will achieve the maximum greenhouse gas emission reductions within a reasonable period of time per dollar invested and the earliest reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

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.»

Global emissions prices rise to about $ 6 per ton of CO2 (in current dollars) in 2025 and to about $ 20 per ton by 2050.

Other key variables such as per capita emissions, energy and carbon intensity of the economy (tonnes C per dollar of real GDP), and cumulative emissions are also displayed.

Plan of action - CO2 emissions tax, deregulate low polluting technology and remove current barriers of new technology per usual pick and choose government interference, facilitate standards to coordinate national and international energy development, subsidize ultra low polluting power generators and fuel to poor countries, investment dollars awarded to highest rate of return for CO2 emission reduction upon global market, rate tax expenditures and promising technology by independent accounting agency bonded to ensure loss of political and personal cronyism influence.

If we add up all of these costs, which we did in a study published in 2012 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, we find thousands of dollars of damages per vehicle (gasoline or electric) that are paid by the overall population rather than only by those releasing the emissions and consuming the oil.

In the near term, HEVs and PHEVs with small battery packs are more robust, offering more air - emission and oil - displacement benefits per dollar spent.

However, because HEVs and PHEVs with smaller battery packs provide more air - emissions reduction and oil displacement per dollar spent and offer lifetime costs competitive with conventional vehicles, it is not clear that directing near - term subsidies toward vehicles with large battery packs would produce superior results on any of these objectives.

HELE coal - fired generation mitigates more CO2 emissions than renewables per dollar of investment.