Sentences with phrase «much deeper emission»

But «undoubtedly there is a need for much deeper emission reductions from industrialized countries.»

Not exact matches

Just by changing the way we farm, by stopping deep tilling, mono - cropping, and chemical fertilizer use — the Climate Collaborative estimates regenerative carbon farming practices could mitigate as much as 4 billion to 6 billion tons of CO2 equivalents a year or 10 percent to 12 percent of global human - caused emissions.

The research team led by Walter Anthony focused on methane emissions from lakes, where permafrost thaws much deeper than on land.

For example, as much as 29 percent of global anthropogenic emissions of small particulate matter (tiny solid particles and liquid droplets from dust to metals that can penetrate deep into the lungs) come from trash fires, she estimates.

Presently the ocean absorbs approximately 25 % of industrial area CO2 emissions, and 93 % of the heat; much of this absorption occurs in deep waters below 200 m (Levin and Le Bris, 2015).

On the contrary, roughly 80 percent of HOT is devoted to on - the - ground reporting that focuses on solutions — not just the relatively well known options for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and otherwise limiting global warming, but especially the related but much less recognized imperative of preparing our societies for the many significant climate impacts (e.g., stronger storms, deeper droughts, harsher heat waves, etc.,) that, alas, are now unavoidable over the years ahead.

-- Much deeper cuts in gas emissions by industrialized countries that built their wealth largely by burning fossil fuels,

Another roadblock for Mr. Obama is Europe, which has been seeking commitments from rich countries for much deeper, faster cuts in emissions than the Obama administration has been willing to approve.

Leif Knutsen 35 «To stop climate change, flat CO2 emissions aren't enough, say scientists» IMHO the movement of heat into the deep ocean with heat pipes as explained in the above references is also required and can produce as much zero emissions energy as we currently derive from fossil fuels.

Some question remains as to how much of the temporary slowdown in surface warming is due to human aerosol emissions, how much due to ENSO, how much due to heat being transferred to the deep oceans, and so forth.

Unfortunately, Australia's plan, like Europe's, gave away far too much to major emitters of CO2 and does far too little to reduce emissions, aiming for a 5 percent cut in carbon by 2020, with uncertainty as to how deep the cuts may be beyond then.

And when you start to put those constraints on the models, what they show pretty clearly is that the cost of controlling emissions, making deep cuts in emissions, and stopping warming at 2 degrees is much higher.

But it doesn't take much twisting of the dials on the models to conclude that deeper emissions cuts will be a boon economically.

If you have a short burst of CO2 emissions, not much makes it into the deep ocean, and the presence of the long tail stops being of interest from a policy perspective.

«Electricity from Renewable Energy and Fossil Fuels with Carbon Capture and Sequestration», the fourth report in the CEF publication series, examines electricity generation through fossil fuel combustion with CO2 capture and sequestration («fossil / CCS»)- a process that removes as much carbon as possible from major emissions sources such as power plants, and stores it in deep geological formations.

Many states and companies have said they don't think they are able to comply with the EPA emissions regulations as they are proposed — much less deeper and faster carbon cuts.

The issue of reducing CO2 emissions goes much deeper in the economy than combating acidification or ozone depletion.

The reasons why no country has done it yet are political — industries that don't have much future complain that if the government makes deep reductions in emissions, then the sky will fall in, jobs will be lost, the industry will move overseas etc etc..

Those reductions would be beyond a baseline of total emissions from 1990, so in fact would represent much deeper cuts compared to today's emissions levels.

The clear message from climate change scientists is that these sort of emissions cuts (if not deeper ones) are very much necessary.