Not exact matches
However, urea injection may be necessary in order to meet future
emissions standards — especially for
bigger cars.
However, I agree that justifying a
big budget line item on the grounds that «further research is needed» to drive greenhouse gas
emissions policy is not justifiable.
Others do,
however, and that seems to be working, probably because at one end of the uncertainty is extreme impacts, and people have realized that the
biggest potential mistake is not doing the best to reduce
emissions while we can.
For climate activists,
however, the
biggest argument against new oil - by - rail facilities has always been the need to «keep it in the ground,» that is, not developing certain fossil fuel reserves in order to prevent harmful globe - warming
emissions.
However, reading up on Autoblog Green, it looks like it could be a
big hit in the UK, where its low
emissions ratings qualify it for exemption to the London congestion charge.
However, this leaves aside a
big question, touched on in our comments section, regarding
emissions by weight of cargo e.g. if the same amount of freight was shipped by air or by sea, which would produce more greenhouse gases?