In policy circles, including popular calculations of
emissions trajectories necessary to avoid a high chance of exceeding 2 degrees C. of warming, the hot tail has not been trimmed (unless I'm missing something?).
Not exact matches
As a self - proclaimed «climate leader» the UK government has a critical role to play in closing the «
emissions gap» — the gap between the current global
trajectory of greenhouse gas
emissions and the actions
necessary to limit warming to 1.5 ˚C and «well below» 2 ˚C (and hence reduce the risks of disaster), they write.
As a self - proclaimed «climate leader» the UK government has a critical role to play in closing the»em issions gap» — the gap between the current global
trajectory of greenhouse gas
emissions and the actions
necessary to limit warming to 1.5?
Long - term strategies create a framework within which the implications of short - to - medium - term decisions that impact both greenhouse gas
emission trajectories and development pathways can be coherently planned and adjusted where
necessary.
First, the complicated models that develop
emissions scenarios don't seem to be
necessary for forcing the climate models; simply specifying a value of CO2 concentration (with the other greenhouse gases and anthropogenic aerosol) at 2100 along with a simple time
trajectory is sufficient to force the climate model.
Based on these scenarios, there is a gap between the level of
emissions that countries have committed to and the
emissions trajectory that climate scientists predict is
necessary to keep global warming within 1.5 ºC or 2ºC.