Sentences with phrase «less carbon dioxide because»

As climate change affects forests, they'll store less carbon dioxide because drought stresses them and hinders their ability to grow, making man - made global warming even worse.

Not exact matches

As with carbon dioxide emission rankings, less developed nations tend to score better on electricity consumption because access to electrical power is not as widely available.

That is because more than 80 percent of their industrial waste is carbon dioxide; by contrast, the figure is less than 20 percent in the power plants, said Wang Yongsheng, engineer of Shenhua's carbon capture and storage project.

Because there is no combustion, fuel cells run extremely cleanly: Their emissions are just water and carbon dioxide, and they produce less than half as much CO2 per kilowatt - hour as do traditional power plants.

But the aged drink had lost much of its fizz, containing much less carbon dioxide than modern champagne, likely because it had diffused out through the cork during its centuries under the sea.

«But the energy costs would be lower because you'd need less to remove the carbon dioxide.»

That's a huge boon to humanity, because the more carbon dioxide a landscape can store, the less will be left as a greenhouse gas that drives planetary warming.

That was because their warming effect is less straightforward than for carbon dioxide.

«Because the carbon dioxide levels fluctuate greatly due to the flow conditions in the fjord, organisms may be adapted to elevated levels and suffer less than their counterparts in other waters», the biologist supposes.

While larger planets could have sufficient gravity to attract a massive hydrogen - helium atmosphere, smaller planets — like Mars or Mercury that have less than half the Earth's mass — located in or near their star's habitable zone may lose their initial life - supporting atmosphere because of low gravity and / or the lack of plate tectonics needed to recycle heat - retaining carbon dioxide gas back into the atmosphere (Kasting et al, 1993).

Because everyone in this global community will be affected by climate change, it will be for our own benefit if we manage to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in such a way that global warming is limited to less than 2 degrees Celsius», says Prof. Ulf Riebesell, marine biologist at GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel and coordinator of BIOACID.

But because they are released in tiny traces, they currently contribute less than 1 percent of the climate - warming effect from human - generated carbon dioxide.

Nevertheless, global temperatures were less then than they were in 2015 — and that is because background heating caused by increasing carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere are higher today than they were in 1997 - 98.»

Because the day's heat takes longer on average to pass through all those layers than it did when there was less carbon dioxide, Earth's average temperature has gone up.

John Sterman, a professor at the MIT Sloan School of Management, published a paper earlier this year that argued burning pellets would release more carbon dioxide than coal in the short term because it was a less efficient source of energy.

And in fact when you look at the scientific literature, it's an interesting disconnect because the modelers who study emissions and how to control those emissions are generally much more comfortable setting goals in terms of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas concentrations because that comes more or less directly out of their models and is much more proximate or more closely connected to what humans actually do to screw up the climate in the first place, which is emit these greenhouse gases.

Until then, it would appear that it is your assertion that the carbon dioxide filled bottle heated faster and become hotter than the air filled bottle because the carbon dioxide has a higher mass than does air, i.e., «Much smaller mass means they can hold much less heat, just as a smaller cup holds less boiling water.»

Even Obama administration officials have said gas was a «bridge fuel» to a green energy economy because it emits less carbon dioxide than coal when burned for power.

The rise of shale gas has had an environmental benefit as well — greatly reduced carbon dioxide emissions, because generating electricity by burning natural gas emits less than half as much carbon dioxide as burning coal.

As the temperature increased in the past, oceans also released more carbon dioxide because warm water holds less carbon dioxide than cold water.

In a natural deglaciation, temperature rise does indeed precede carbon dioxide increase, because warmer water holds less CO2 and it bubbles out of the ocean.