Sentences with phrase «meaning total emissions»

It's also delivered absolute emissions reduction against a 2006 baseline, meaning total emissions were down despite significant growth in floor area.

But even a per - capita peak of 10 tonnes means total emissions of 13 billion tonnes.

Do you mean the total emission from this layer or total emission of those spectrum (flux + emissivity)?

The next day headlines will celebrate the «stunning» reduction in GHG and Peter Kent will be quoted as saying that Canada has met half of its Copenhagen target (a 50 - something Mt drop would mean total emissions of around 680Mt), etc., neutralizing any criticism of Canada's inaction on climate change on a hot political year, with 7 provincial elections and, in all likelihood, a federal one.

Not exact matches

However, calculating the total greenhouse gas emissions of biofuels is no mean feat.

Even the oil sands ultimate consumption in a gasoline, diesel or jet engine only results in 500 kilograms of CO2 - equivalent per barrel of refined petroleum products, meaning total oil sands emissions from well to wheel are considerably lower than those of this nation's more than 500 power plants burning coal to generate electricity.

Its plain wording about reducing «the vast part» of emissions means, on any straightforward reading, that the total emissions are now vastly smaller than they were before.

Today, we are 9 percent of emissions [meaning farming and ranching contribute 9 percent of the total U.S. greenhouse gas pollution].

-- The term «United States greenhouse gas emissions» means the total quantity of annual greenhouse gas emissions from the United States, as calculated by the Administrator and reported to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Secretariat.

The car's performance is thus enhanced thanks to a better power - to - weight ratio and reduced total mass, which means that CO2 emissions are also lower.

Making an exception here, one thing that the OCO - 2 data «means» is that in about a single year 3 small regions on this planet can add the Equivalent of 63 % of the total annual man - made GHG emissions to the atmosphere in one go!

Around half, so if current total CO2 emissions (as carbon) are at 7.2 GtC (only looking at fossil fuels), then around 3.6 Gt of carbon stay in the atmosphere each year — and it's worth wondering what processes account for the uptake of the other half... meaning that it's possible that more CO2 could start lingering.

However, peak oil means a double whammy — it reducec GHG emissions from oil, however, there is the danger, that we switch to coal - to - liquids, gas - to - liquids, tar sands and oil shales, just because increases in energy efficiency, solar and wind output are not enough to counter population increase, decrease in oil availability, and increase in total energy consumption...

Remember the total is the sum of direct emissions from burning fuel and indirect emissions from the life cycle, which means the industrial processes required to build it.

You seem to be the only one who doesn't understand his very clear explanation of what he means by it --(a) large enough positive feedback (s) that it (or they) exceeds the total amount of CO2 equivalent of all human ghg emissions.

When we design the architecture for the next 10 or 20 years that means today when we discuss that, we encourage developed countries to consider their cumulative emissions as a total and then to take more responsibility.

Let us assume the differences between two years ago and this year are consistent and confirmed: That means we went from an amount equal to total oceanic emissions to magnitudes more (tens of meters across to a kilometer across) in just two years.

* Update Nov 28: additional commentary below by Yu Qingtai on issue of «measurable, reportable and verifiable» * Update Nov 29: Rough calculations on what the goal means for total emissions by 2020.

Climate Stabilization, Climate Change Commitment and Irreversibility: On the relationship between cumulative total emissions of CO2 and global mean surface temperature change, China, Saudi Arabia and India expressed difficulties understanding that this relationship is linear, with China, supported by Saudi Arabia, suggesting referring to «positively correlated» instead of «approximately linear.»

That means, if each scope is 100 gt CO2 eq (200 gt CO2 for S1 + S2 total) and the company wants to reduce its scope 1 and 2 emissions by 30 % through reducing only one scope, then that scope emissions have to be reduced by 60 gt CO2eq.

This means that total CO2 emissions are likely to be similar as in 2015, with the increase in fossil fuel emissions being offset by the decrease in land - use emissions.

Our emissions are sufficient (in total) to cause ~ 4 ppm increase, which means that the rest of the carbon cycle is shifting ~ 2 ppm into other climate containers.

-- The term «United States greenhouse gas emissions» means the total quantity of annual greenhouse gas emissions from the United States, as calculated by the Administrator and reported to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Secretariat.

So China built many hundreds of coal plants in the last 15 years, and they lead the world in fossil fuel burned and CO2 emissions (accounting for 30 % of total world emissions), but this does not mean that the increase in capacity in China even correlates with fossil fuel burned?

The IPCC AR5 (2013) is now the most cited «total» carbon budgets — meaning energy sector emissions plus land use, land use change and forestry plus industrial sector emissions.

Finally, we represent the climate — carbon - cycle feedback by adding an extra, temperature - dependent component to the total anthropogenic emissions emitted each year (Ea): where T ′ is the temperature anomaly above an exponentially weighted running mean with a time constant of 100 years, and b5 is the adjustable carbon - cycle feedback parameter.

Note that the «Net emissions / removals» mean «total emissions» in the case of sectors including energy, industrial processes, solvent and other product use, agriculture and waste while it refers to «net emissions / removals» for LULUCF and Other sectors.

The IPCC predicts, as its central estimate, 1.5 K warming by 2100 because of the CO2 we add this century, with another 0.6 K for «already - committed» warming and 0.7 K for warming from non-CO2 greenhouse gases: total 2.8 K (the mean of the predictions on all six emissions scenarios).

So that means a total loss of storage in the world's rainforests of 24.5 Pg of carbon per degree of warming - equivalent to 2.5 times 2007's carbon emissions.

The electricity sector's share of greenhouse gas emissions in Ontario in 2012 was only about 9 percent of total emissions, compared to the transportation sector with 34 percent and the industrial sector with 30 percent (Ontario, Auditor General 2015), meaning that further environmental gains in the electricity sector are inherently limited.4 In any event, this impact needs to be compared to other alternatives, such as further enhancing transmission connections and expanding power purchase agreements with neighbouring jurisdictions, in particular Quebec and Manitoba, which have substantial clean hydroelectric resources.

And that means these fertilized soils make up a potential 32 percent of the state's total NOx emissions — and it's all flying under the radar.

To put this target into context, this means that over the next ten years, emissions must increase less in total than they did in just one year between 2009 and 2010.

It means that more CO2 from the total CO2 emissions to the atmosphere has remained in the atmosphere to increase its CO2 content, in order to reach a new dynamic balance between CO2 emissions and absorptions.

Given historical climate and physics, the only way that implicit endorsement means «implicitly endors [ing] that humans are a cause of warming» where «a» is something less than primary (that is, over half) is if there is some as - yet undiscovered sink absorbing human CO2 emissions and, simultaneously, an as - yet undiscovered source of CO2 that is releasing it into the atmosphere - and moreover, the CO2 from this mysterious source just happens to possess a carbon isotope signature that matches fossil fuel CO2 as a total coincidence.

China has indeed promised large reductions in its own carbon intensity, but these actually just means it continues on a path already set and that its total emissions would continue to grow with its economy.

do you mean annual increase due to mans emissions, or percentage of total atmospheric content emitted by man per year, or if we took a snapshot of the atmosphere how much in it is there due to mans» emissions since industrialisation?

In total, that means 63 % of respondents favor an energy plan that reduces carbon emissions and spurs clean energy development at an unspecified additional cost to themselves — and only 31 % oppose it.

One result of such unrealistically low projections of future migration to the developed countries is to produce lower estimates of future total emissions of the developed countries, which means the developed countries are not required to make as much effort today to lower their own emissions.11

The 12 - month moving mean of the mean global total column water vapor (q tot; blue), and the bulk emission level altitude (Z T254K; black) from ERAINT.

I pull this number out of my mind meaning that the N2 - O2 spectrum corresponds to a blackbody with 100um peak, which would correspond to a body at about 40K with total emission of 45mW / m2.

Cap - and - trade means a declining «cap» on total emissions, while allowing trading of pollution permits.