Sentences with phrase «likely changes in emissions»

An interesting recent study from the University of Michigan and Ford Motor Company lays out the details of the likely changes in emissions from using an AV system on both electric and gasoline cars.

Not exact matches

Jessica Wentz, associate director and a postdoctoral research fellow at Columbia University's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, wrote in a blog post that the phrasing shift is more technically precise and likely addresses concerns about how far an agency needs to go in calculating emissions.

The simulations suggest that, for greenhouse gas emissions at or above current rates, changes in climate will very likely be larger than the changes already observed during the 20th century.

Published today in the journal Nature Geoscience, the paper concludes that limiting the increase in global average temperatures above pre-industrial levels to 1.5 °C, the goal of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, is not yet geophysically impossible, but likely requires more ambitious emission reductions than those pledged so far.

If it was predicted in the real - world seasonal forecast but not in the scenario which is stripped of emissions, then it was made more likely by climate change — a likelihood that can be calculated.

Seniors (31 %) are less likely than those under age 30 (60 %) to say the Earth is warming due to human activity, and are less inclined to favor stricter power plant emission limits in order to address climate change.

But while wildfires are estimated to contribute about 18 percent of the total PM2.5 emissions in the U.S., many questions remain on how these emissions will affect human populations, including how overall air quality will be affected, how these levels will change under climate change, and which regions are to most likely to be impacted.

Of course, the extra heat trapped by human greenhouse gas emissions is likely to play a bigger role than raindrop friction in any atmospheric changes.

California's Bay Area Air Quality Management District changed its approach after studies showed leaks from oil refineries in the area — known as fugitive emissions — were likely underrepresented in emission factors.

This further evidence of episodic emissions of volcanic CO2 as the likely driver of the extinction enhances our understanding of this event, and potentially of other climate change episodes in Earth's history.»

Along with data from the few studies like Yokelson's, Wiedinmyer used guidelines for calculating trash burning emissions produced by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to determine how much waste was being generated and burned, what exactly was in that waste, and what types of chemicals were likely generated.

And bringing net greenhouse gas emissions to zero in the second half of the century, as envisioned in the Paris Agreement, yields a likely rise of about 0.4 to 0.8 meters (1.2 to 2.6 feet) under the new projections, little changed from the IPCC - consistent projections.

Climate science has correctly (IMO) highlighted (for instance) the role of increasing CO2 emissions in causing climate change that will likely be deleterious in years and decades to come.

Presumably what you mean is that anthropogenic emissions lead to a change in anthropogenic forcing which today, relative to 1750, has a most - likely value of 2.29 W / m ^ 2 with a 95 % (I think) range from 1.13 — 3.33 W / m ^ 2.

I go beyond recommendations on adaptation to suggest that if there is no change in greenhouse gas emissions, the problem will likely exceed most countries» adaptive capacities.

While it is «likely» that anthropogenic influences are behind the changes in cold days and warm days, there is only «medium confidence» that they are behind changes in extreme rainfall events, and «low confidence» in attributing any changes in tropical cyclone activity to greenhouse gas emissions or anything else humanity has done.

Between the poles of real - time catastrophe and nonevent lies the prevailing scientific view: Without big changes in emissions rates, global warming from the buildup of greenhouse gases is likely to lead to substantial, and largely irreversible, transformations of climate, ecosystems and coastlines later this century.

a) they don't believe the premise of man - made climate change: they don't think scientific data collected to date is adequate to prove conclusively that any type of man - made event can result in either the recent fluxuations in climate or the anticipated kinds of drastic climate change, therefore CO2 control would be ineffective at solving the problem b) they don't believe CO2 alone is responsible: they think other variables are as or more likely to be the catalysts or causes for the scientific data collected to date on climate change therefore CO2 control would be ineffective at solving the problem c) they believe government efforts to curb CO2 emissions will fail resulting in an unprecedented waste of money and worse economic conditions.

It is likely that at least some of this change, particularly over Europe, is due to decreases in pollution; most governments have done more to reduce aerosols released into the atmosphere that help global dimming instead of reducing CO2 emissions.

In a passage that will likely hearten those seeing the climate change fight as a fight over capitalism, leaked version includes the pope's rejection of markets in carbon credits as a solution, warning (this is The Guardian translation) that this «could give rise to a new form of speculation and would not help to reduce the overall emission of polluting gases.&raquIn a passage that will likely hearten those seeing the climate change fight as a fight over capitalism, leaked version includes the pope's rejection of markets in carbon credits as a solution, warning (this is The Guardian translation) that this «could give rise to a new form of speculation and would not help to reduce the overall emission of polluting gases.&raquin carbon credits as a solution, warning (this is The Guardian translation) that this «could give rise to a new form of speculation and would not help to reduce the overall emission of polluting gases.»

This past November, the UNEP released the 2014 edition of their annual «Emissions Gap Report,» which highlighted the important role that carbon dioxide removal («CDR») solutions are likely to play in preventing climate change.

In other words: Increased fertilizer use alone would likely mean that either of those projects would increase greenhouse gas emissions overall and thus make climate change even worse.

It has become increasingly clear that the Administration's climate action plan, of which the Clean Power Plan is a critical part, is characterized by modest, gradual emissions reductions, that will likely be insufficient to curtail dangerous climate change without significant ratcheting in the near future.

In particular, BECI can play a critical role in catalyzing the additional multidisciplinary academic work around carbon removal needed to address the growing scientific consensus (from institutions, such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the National Research Council, and the Global Carbon Project) that preventing further climate change likely requires carbon removal in addition to reductions in carbon emissionIn particular, BECI can play a critical role in catalyzing the additional multidisciplinary academic work around carbon removal needed to address the growing scientific consensus (from institutions, such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the National Research Council, and the Global Carbon Project) that preventing further climate change likely requires carbon removal in addition to reductions in carbon emissionin catalyzing the additional multidisciplinary academic work around carbon removal needed to address the growing scientific consensus (from institutions, such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the National Research Council, and the Global Carbon Project) that preventing further climate change likely requires carbon removal in addition to reductions in carbon emisChange, the National Research Council, and the Global Carbon Project) that preventing further climate change likely requires carbon removal in addition to reductions in carbon emischange likely requires carbon removal in addition to reductions in carbon emissionin addition to reductions in carbon emissionin carbon emissions.

In a Nov. 28 filing to the Utah Public Service Commission, PacifiCorp noted that just two weeks earlier the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners adopted a resolution acknowledging that climate change legislation is likely to occur, and likely to target carbon dioxide emissions.

Continued greenhouse gas emissions are likely to be associated with changes in rainfall patterns, desertification, more frequent storms and rises in sea level, all of which have implications for human movement.

After incorporating these «indirect emission» effects from changes in land use, often into areas valuable as carbon sinks, the analysis found that biofuels produced from vegetable oils are likely to be worse for the climate than fossil fuels.

This is the belief backed up by the scientific evidence; in the most recent report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in September 2013, scientists agreed that it is «extremely likely» that human emissions of greenhouse gases are causing the planet to warm.

Continued greenhouse gas emissions at or above current rates would cause further warming and induce many changes in the global climate system during the 21st century that would very likely be larger than those observed during the 20th century.

To pursue a 2oC pathway to address the risks of climate change, the need for efficiency gains is likely to ramp up significantly, meaning that capturing the most cost - effective efficiency gains will become even more important in order to spare society an unnecessary economic burden associated with high - cost options to reduce emissions.

We find that across - the - board emissions reductions in domestic fuel burning in developing Asia and in surface transportation in North America are likely to offer the greatest potential for substantial, simultaneous improvement in local air quality and near - term mitigation of global climate change.

However, a clear understanding of how national emissions reductions commitments affect global climate change impacts requires an understanding of complex relationships between atmospheric ghg concentrations, likely global temperature changes in response to ghg atmospheric concentrations, rates of ghg emissions reductions over time and all of this requires making assumptions about how much CO2 from emissions will remain in the atmosphere, how sensitive the global climate change is to atmospheric ghg concentrations, and when the international community begins to get on a serious emissions reduction pathway guided by equity considerations.

Looking at all of the various inputs to global climate - including CO2 and SO2 emissions from man, and natural cycles like La Nina / El Nino, as well as changes in the sun - they believe that the rising sulfate emissions is the most likely factor to have cause the global warming slowdown, between 1998 and 2008.

However, early estimates from the Global Carbon Project (GCP) using preliminary data suggest that this is likely to change in 2017 with global emissions set to grow by around 2 %, albeit with some uncertainties.

> Advances in climate change modelling now enable best estimates and likely assessed uncertainty ranges to be given for projected warming for different emission scenarios.

C: increase in atmospheric CO2 from pre-industrial to present is anthropogenic (D / A) S: best guess for likely climate sensitivity (NUM) s: 2 - sigma range of S (NUM) a: ocean acidification will be a problem (D / A) L: expected sea level rise by 2100 in cm (all contributions)(NUM) B: climate change will be beneficial (D / A) R: CO2 emissions need to be reduced drastically by 2050 (D / A) T: technical advances will take care of any problems (D / A) r: the 20th century global temperature record is reliable (D / A) H: over the last 1000 years global temperature was hockey stick shaped (D / A) D: data has been intentionally distorted by scientist to support the idea of anthropogenic climate change (D / A) g: the CRU - mails are important for the science (D / A) G: the CRU - mails are important otherwise (D / A)

«President Trump's withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, combined with the repeal of domestic actions resulting in halting the decline in U.S. emissions, will likely make it more difficult and costly overall to meet the Paris Agreement temperature goal of holding warming well below 2 °C, and limiting it to 1.5 °C,» said Bill Hare, a climate scientist and CEO of Climate Analytics, a group that analyzes climate change scenarios.

But the question is whether through the emission of GHGs (principally CO2) we are «changing the conditions of our existence» perceptibly, in a net negative or positive way and, if so, is this change likely to have dramatic results?

Rising population and over-grazing by livestock was the first theory but studies now show the drought resulted from changes in ocean surface temperatures Folland et al (1986) Giannini et al (2003) which are likely due in part to the sulphate aerosol pollution of Europe and North America Rotstayn & Lohmann (2002) Biasutti & Gainnini (2006) and thus it is the cleaning of emissions from power stations that has likely allowed the rains to return.

If you don't accept the evidence on human - driven climate change and its likely harmful consequences, there is no need to support «comprehensive» legislation that would put a price on carbon through some framework to drive reductions in emissions.

This question is designed to expose the fact that because delays in ghg emissions based on costs to the polluter makes the enormous threat of climate change much more difficult to solve and more likely that serious harms and damages will be experienced, therefore arguments for delays in reducing ghg emissions based upon cost raise moral and ethical issues because the delays are making the problem much worse, more difficult to solve, and great harms inevitable.

In summary, a strong case can be made that the US emissions reduction commitment for 2025 of 26 % to 28 % clearly fails to pass minimum ethical scrutiny when one considers: (a) the 2007 IPCC report on which the US likely relied upon to establish a 80 % reduction target by 2050 also called for 25 % to 40 % reduction by developed countries by 2020, and (b) although reasonable people may disagree with what «equity» means under the UNFCCC, the US commitments can't be reconciled with any reasonable interpretation of what «equity» requires, (c) the United States has expressly acknowledged that its commitments are based upon what can be achieved under existing US law not on what is required of it as a mater of justice, (d) it is clear that more ambitious US commitments have been blocked by arguments that alleged unacceptable costs to the US economy, arguments which have ignored US responsibilities to those most vulnerable to climate change, and (e) it is virtually certain that the US commitments can not be construed to be a fair allocation of the remaining carbon budget that is available for the entire world to limit warming to 2 °C.

The workshop was intended to collect experienced views on how to characterize and communicate information about climate - related hazards, risks, and opportunities that will support decision makers in their efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, reduce vulnerability to likely changes in climate, and increase resilience to those changes.

The other problems are that there is no way to model abrupt changes in the Pacific state and actual emissions are overwhelmingly likely to diverge from IPCC emission scenarios.

However, it is unlikely that the world will address climate change in this wholly cooperative fashion — more likely, it will be years before developing countries are willing to comprehensively price their emissions, and even when they do, it may be at a lower rate than prevailing in the European Union and United States.

To summarize: available evidence indicates that the differences between projected emissions using MER exchange rates and PPP exchange rates are small in comparison to the uncertainties represented by the range of scenarios and the likely impacts of other parameters and assumptions made in developing scenarios, for example, technological change.

Ironically, other researchers have repeatedly demonstrated that a switch from a meat to a plant - based diet is likely to become more important than ever in combating climate change and reducing emissions from agriculture.

Climate change raises questions of both distributive and retributive justice because: (a) Climate change is a problem caused by some people that inflicts harm on others; (b) Some of the poorest people in the world are extremely vulnerable to its impacts and can do little to protect themselves from those impacts; (c) The adverse impacts to some of the world's poorest people are likely to be catastrophic; and (d) Huge reductions from status quo emissions are necessary to prevent catastrophic warming.

In nations with high levels of carbon emissions per capita, including the U.S., Australia, Canada and Russia, publics are less likely to express strong worries about climate change.

Thawing permafrost also delivers organic - rich soils to lake bottoms, where decomposition in the absence of oxygen releases additional methane.116 Extensive wildfires also release carbon that contributes to climate warming.107, 117,118 The capacity of the Yukon River Basin in Alaska and adjacent Canada to store carbon has been substantially weakened since the 1960s by the combination of warming and thawing of permafrost and by increased wildfire.119 Expansion of tall shrubs and trees into tundra makes the surface darker and rougher, increasing absorption of the sun's energy and further contributing to warming.120 This warming is likely stronger than the potential cooling effects of increased carbon dioxide uptake associated with tree and shrub expansion.121 The shorter snow - covered seasons in Alaska further increase energy absorption by the land surface, an effect only slightly offset by the reduced energy absorption of highly reflective post-fire snow - covered landscapes.121 This spectrum of changes in Alaskan and other high - latitude terrestrial ecosystems jeopardizes efforts by society to use ecosystem carbon management to offset fossil fuel emissions.94, 95,96