Sentences with phrase «lower global emission levels»

since nobody actually thinks Australia (or anybody else) reducing co2 will actually lower global emission levels.....

Not exact matches

«This Agreement, in enhancing the implementation of the [2015 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change], including its objective, aims to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change, in the context of sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty, including by: (a) Holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels, recognizing that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change; (b) Increasing the ability to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change and foster climate resilience and low greenhouse gas emissions development, in a manner that does not threaten food production; and (c) Making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate - resilient development.

In a separate report released in September, EIA analysts predicted carbon emissions for 2016 will fall to their lowest level since 1992 — three years before the United Nations held the first of its 21 global summits on climate change, called the Conference of the Parties.

On the high end, recent work suggests that 4 feet is plausible.23, 3,6,7,8 In the context of risk - based analysis, some decision makers may wish to use a wider range of scenarios, from 8 inches to 6.6 feet by 2100.10,2 In particular, the high end of these scenarios may be useful for decision makers with a low tolerance for risk (see Figure 2.26 on global sea level rise).10, 2 Although scientists can not yet assign likelihood to any particular scenario, in general, higher emissions scenarios that lead to more warming would be expected to lead to higher amounts of sea level rise.

Selective catalytic reduction (SCR) technology cuts NOx emissions to very low levels and the new XE has been engineered to meet the most stringent global regulations.

Responding to the unequivocal scientific evidence that preventing the worst impacts of climate change will require Parties included in the Annex I to the Convention as a group to reduce emissions in a range of 25 ---- 40 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020 and that global emissions of greenhouse gases need to peak in the next 10 to 15 years and be reduced to very low levels, well below half of levels in 2000 by 2050,

With global GHG emissions and concentrations continuing to increase; with climate change intensifying changes in ecosystems, ice sheet deterioration, and sea level rise; and with fossil fuels providing more than 80 % of the world's energy, the likelihood seems low that cooperative actions will prevent increasingly disruptive climate change over the next several decades.

On climate change, the bulletin scientists say it is worsening: after flattening out for some years, global greenhouse gas emissions have resumed their rise, and the levels of the polar ice caps are at new lows.

By 2100, global atmospheric CO2 levels reach 550 and 970 ppm under the lower and higher emissions scenarios, respectively.

Energy - related emissions of carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas that is widely believed to contribute to global warming, have fallen 12 % between 2005 and 2012 and are at their lowest level since 1994, according to a recent estimate by the Energy Information Administration, the statistical arm of the U.S. Energy Department.

Yet, some low - emitting developing countries can make a credible case that their current emissions levels are still below their fair share of safe global emissions.

Small islands, for example, are a paltry source of carbon emissions and yet are disproportionately affected by the consequences of global carbon overload as accelerated sea level rise threatens the very existence of low - lying islands.

Although different theories of distributive justice would reach different conclusions about what «fairness» requires quantitatively, most of the positions taken by opponents of climate change policies fail to pass minimum ethical scrutiny given the huge differences in emissions levels between high and low emitting nations and the enormity of global emissions reductions needed to prevent catastrophic climate change.

Nations collectively to begin to reduce sharply global atmospheric emissions of greenhouse gases and absorbing aerosols, with the goal of urgently halting their accumulation in the atmosphere and holding atmospheric levels at their lowest practicable value;

This is so because in addition to the theological reasons given by Pope Francis recently: (a) it is a problem mostly caused by some nations and people emitting high - levels of greenhouse gases (ghg) in one part of the world who are harming or threatening tens of millions of living people and countless numbers of future generations throughout the world who include some of the world's poorest people who have done little to cause the problem, (b) the harms to many of the world's most vulnerable victims of climate change are potentially catastrophic, (c) many people most at risk from climate change often can't protect themselves by petitioning their governments; their best hope is that those causing the problem will see that justice requires them to greatly lower their ghg emissions, (d) to protect the world's most vulnerable people nations must limit their ghg emissions to levels that constitute their fair share of safe global emissions, and, (e) climate change is preventing some people from enjoying the most basic human rights including rights to life and security among others.

This is so because: (a) it is a problem mostly caused by some nations and people emitting high - levels of greenhouse gases (ghg) in one part of the world who are harming or threatening tens of millions of living people and countless numbers of future generations throughout the world who include some of the world's poorest people who have done little to cause the problem, (b) the harms to many of the world's most vulnerable victims of climate change are potentially catastrophic, (c) many people most at risk from climate change often can't protect themselves by petitioning their governments; their best hope is that those causing the problem will see that justice requires them to greatly lower their ghg emissions, (d) to protect the world's most vulnerable people nations must limit their ghg emissions to levels that constitute their fair share of safe global emissions, and, (e) climate change is preventing some people from enjoying the most basic human rights including rights to life and security among others.

These features include: (a) it is a problem caused by some nations and people emitting high - levels of ghgs in one part of the world who are harming or threatening tens of millions of living people and countless numbers of future generations throughout the world who include some of the world's poorest people and who have done little to cause the problem, (b) the harms to many of the world's most vulnerable victims of climate change are potentially catastrophic, (c) many people most at risk from climate change often can't protect themselves by petitioning their governments; their best hope is that those causing the problem will see that justice requires them to greatly lower their ghg emissions, and, (d) to protect the world's most vulnerable people, nations must act quickly to limit their ghg emissions to levels that constitute their fair share of safe global emissions.

The company expects energy demand to grow at an average of about 1 % annually over the next three decades — faster than population but much slower than the global economy — with increasing efficiency and a gradual shift toward lower - emission energy sources: Gas increases faster than oil and by more BTUs in total, while coal grows for a while longer but then shrinks back to current levels.

• Reduces the risk of climate disruption by lowering carbon emissions to a level, and at a pace, recommended by the global scientific community;

Projections from process - based models of global mean sea level (GMSL) rise relative to 1986 — 2005 as a function of time for two scenarios — RCP2.6, a low emissions scenario, and RCP 8.5, a high emissions scenario.

Although different theories of distributive justice would reach different conclusions about what «fairness» requires quantitatively, most of the positions taken by opponents of climate change policies fail to pass minimum ethical scrutiny given the huge differences in emissions levels between high and low emitting nations and individuals and the enormity of global emissions reductions needed to prevent catastrophic climate change.

The climate problem is VERY serious To reduce risks to a tolerably low level, we need to reduce emissions immediately and rapidly While this is not prohibitively expensive in a conventional economic sense, it is not free, and it is potentially very redistributive Global cooperation requires a solution that is «fair enough»

Over the remainder of this century, aggressive and sustained greenhouse gas emission reductions by the United States and by other nations would be needed to reduce global emissions to a level consistent with the lower scenario (B1) analyzed in this assessment.15

«global emissions of carbon dioxide have to be reduced to very low levels, well below half of levels in 2000, in order to stabilize their concentrations in the atmosphere» Decision FCCC / KP / AWG / 2006 / L.4

«By the end of this century, global sea level is expected to rise by more than 2 feet in a low emissions scenario or nearly 3.5 feet in a higher emissions scenario.

The IEA estimates that carbon dioxide emissions could be reduced to a level that would limit long ‐ term global temperature increases to 2 °C through broad deployment of low ‐ carbon energy technologies, including CCS.

Without a global agreement to lower GHG emissions to combat climate change and rising sea levels, the Maldives could disappear from maps forever in spite of Nasheed's efforts.

In considering the full range of IPCC scenarios, global net emissions would need to begin in approximately 2070 under scenarios seeking to keep temperature increases at the possible lowest levels, and progressively later for high - temperature stabilization levels;

For the lowest emissions scenario RCP2.6 (which involves drastic emissions reductions starting in a few years and leading to zero global emissions by 2070, after that active removal of CO2 from the atmosphere) the best estimate sea - level rise by the year 2100 given by IPCC is 44 cm.

Limiting global temperature rise to 2 °C above pre-industrial levels will require billions of dollars in investments each year to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and shift to low - emissions development pathways.

Scientists to explore emission pathways that could lead to lower levels of global warming with IPCC study due in 2018

Median projections of global mean sea level over the course of this century for low, median, and high emissions futures.

As for sea level rise: we see 30 years of steep global temperature rise during a time when, according to Spencer Weart, whose views on this matter are shared by most if not all climate scientists, «the temperature rise up to 1940 was... mainly caused by some kind of natural cyclical effect, not by the still relatively low CO2 emissions...» (from «The Discovery of Global Warming,» by Spencer Weart — https://history.aip.org/climate/coglobal temperature rise during a time when, according to Spencer Weart, whose views on this matter are shared by most if not all climate scientists, «the temperature rise up to 1940 was... mainly caused by some kind of natural cyclical effect, not by the still relatively low CO2 emissions...» (from «The Discovery of Global Warming,» by Spencer Weart — https://history.aip.org/climate/coGlobal Warming,» by Spencer Weart — https://history.aip.org/climate/co2.htm)

It does make more sense that a long period of atmospheric cooling would lead to a lowering of sea level, but that correlation has NOTHING to do with CO2 emissions, which were skyrocketing while global temperatures either fell or remained steady.

Paolo Frankl, Head of IEA's Renewable Energy Division, commented: «Given that global energy demand for heat represents almost half of the world's final energy use - more than the combined global demand for electricity and transport - solar heat can make a significant contribution in both tackling climate change and strengthening energy security, The IEA's Solar Heating and Cooling Roadmap outlines how best to advance the global uptake of solar heating and cooling (SHC) technologies, which, it notes, involve very low levels of greenhouse - gas emissions.

The low level of ambition of the US, EU, Russia, China et al is why global emissions are set on a pathway much more aligned with a 4 °C to 6 °C future (~ RCP8.5) than the 2 °C of our rhetorical targets.