Sentences with phrase «much higher greenhouse gas»

Advanced building codes in developing countries can be implemented quickly, preventing decades of much higher greenhouse gas emissions.

Not exact matches

That's why we have to look at the balance in terms of what is cheaper: Can we reduce emissions of greenhouse gases today so that we can stabilize the earth's climate, rather than adapt to the impacts of climate change and incur much higher costs over a period of time?

They don't need as much space as livestock, emit lower levels of greenhouse gases, and have a sky - high feed conversion rate: a single kilogram of feed yields 12 times more edible cricket protein than beef protein.

Yet the practice is widespread, in part because oil prices have been much higher in recent years and because it is hard to find new multimillion barrel reservoirs these days, especially in the picked over U.S. Denbury, based in Plano, Texas, controls more than 1,000 miles of CO2 pipelines and has published reserves of 17 trillion cubic feet of the greenhouse gas, used to pump more than 70,000 barrels of oil a day.

Electricity production from biomass, coal, gas and hydropower for instance induces much higher indirect greenhouse gas emissions than nuclear electricity, or wind and solar - based power supply.»

«Sparing tracts of land as natural habitat is much better for the vast majority of species than a halfway house of lower - yielding but «wildlife - friendly» farming, and we have recently shown that in the UK land spared through high - yield farming could even sequester enough greenhouse gases to mitigate the UK's agricultural emissions *,» said Balmford.

These new trucks — which employ a diesel combustion engine along with a hydraulic high - pressure accumulator that stores energy captured during braking — get 35 percent better fuel economy and generate as much as 30 percent fewer greenhouse gas emissions as compared to the non-hybrid diesel - powered vehicles they are replacing.

About 90 percent of global trade in goods travels by ship, and the vessels together emit about as much greenhouse gases as Germany, the nation with the sixth - highest emissions in the world.

The projected transition of livestock systems from pure grazing diets to diets supplemented by higher quality feeds will cut greenhouse gas emissions from land use change globally by as much as 23 % by 2030, while improving food availability and farmers» income, shows new IIASA research.

Despite much higher emissions during manufacturing, the Ford Focus Electric could reduce lifetime greenhouse gas emissions substantially.

This in combination with the drop in greenhouse gases has resulted in the acceleration of the existing ice age; now self - perpetuating as glaciers have a much higher albedo.

In 1988, James E. Hansen, the NASA climate scientist who, through much of his career, has pressed elected officials to limit greenhouse gas emissions, constructed «loaded» cardboard dice for a Senate hearing, to illustrate that we were, in essence, tipping the climate system toward ever higher odds of unpleasant events like droughts and flooding rains.

However, by then, we will be at higher levels of emissions, there will be more panic, and the costs of abruptly reducing greenhouse gas emissions will be much higher.

Much less challenging, and high profile, is the need, in a world heading toward nine billion people, to figure out how to make everything that's been learned about drought, floods, and other climate - related risks useful to the majority of the human population — people in Niger and Bangladesh who face such risks every day right now, with or without whatever climate destabilization is coming from the ongoing buildup of greenhouse gases.

Damian Carrington at The Guardian notes that «the last time so much greenhouse gas was in the air was several million years ago, when the Arctic was ice - free, savannah spread across the Sahara desert and sea level was up to 40 metres higher than today.»

The area of near - surface permafrost in the Northern Hemisphere is projected to decline by 20 % relative to today's area by 2040, and could be reduced by as much as two - thirds by 2080 under a scenario of high greenhouse gas emissions.

Much higher on the list will be the melting of those two big chunks of ice you refer to, and the subsequent release of more greenhouse gases trapped in permafrost.

CO2 also becomes a more effective greenhouse gas at higher atmospheric pressures (even if super-imposed upon several more bars of a non-greenhouse gas like N2 would generate a much stronger GHE by increasing absorption away from line centers).

Implementing a CO2 NAAQS set at 350 parts per million would require a much higher degree of economic sacrifice than would be demanded by either the Waxman - Markey cap - and - trade bill or the Copenhagen climate treaty, which aimed to stabilize CO2 - equivalent greenhouse gases at 450 parts per million by 2050.

If you want to talk about equity, look at the cumulative emissions of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, and going into the oceans and acidifying it, and the vast majority comes from the industrializied countries, the US and so forth — and the per capita emissions are much higher.

Yet compared to most countries» fleets, vehicles in the U.S. today still have much lower average MPG, higher per capita petroleum use and higher greenhouse gas production.

One reason for being confident about there being much more uncertaintly than the 97 % concensus suggests is that there is nothing like a concensus, let alone proof, of what caused (and causes) the extreme natural variations in climate throughout geological time.This variation is well documented and almost certainly has a variety of underlying causes which are likely to be very different from C02 or other MM emissions even if higher greenhouse gases levels have often been present.

It cited «plausible scenarios in which GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions from corn - grain ethanol are much higher than those of petroleum - based fuels,» and questioned the method by which EPA determined that ethanol would produce 21 percent less emissions.

But a much higher median (78 %) support their country signing an international agreement limiting greenhouse gas emissions from the burning of coal, natural gas and petroleum.

«Record - high greenhouse gas emissions and associated atmospheric concentrations are committing the planet to a much more uncertain and inhospitable future.

Now, as an important aside, it is quite doubtful one could actually stabilize at 750 ppm, since work by the National Center for Atmospheric Research and the Hadley Center suggest that carbon cycle feedbacks, like the defrosting of the tundra or the die - back of the Amazon rain forest, would release greenhouse gas emissions that would take the planet to much higher levels.

Of course, on the policy side, they had made it clear they were running out the clock on engaging in meaningful action, that EPA would not be allowed to move forward on regulating greenhouse gas emissions, and that high - level political officials wouldn't openly embrace the conclusions stated by scientists, or do much to publicize key assessment reports that were finally being published.

Much of the harm these events cause in Europe comes from physical damage to its industrial life support system, as the global average temperature continues to rise as a consequence of warming driven by ever higher greenhouse gas levels in the atmosphere, in response to the profligate global consumption of fossil fuels.

The IPCC 2007 Fourth Assessment of climate change science concluded that large reductions in the emissions of greenhouse gases, principally CO2, are needed soon to slow the increase of atmospheric concentrations, and avoid reaching unacceptable levels.However, climate change is happening even faster than previously estimated; global CO2 emissions since 2000 have been higher than even the highest predictions, Arctic sea ice has been melting at rates much faster than predicted, and the rise in the sea level has become more rapid.

CO2 doesn't give» greenhouse effect» — normal / honest greenhouse has SOLID plastic or glass roof — on the other hand CO2 is only 270 - 500ppm = CO2 would be as fishnet as roof, or a postage stamp as roof # 2: normal / honest greenhouse has solidly attached roof, on the other hand, when CO2 warms up - > instantly goes high up to higher altitude, where is colder and cooling much more efficient / after all CO2 is 2/3 made from oxygen = lying that CO2 is a greenhouse gas is destructive for the society and environment.

Both wetland drying and the increased frequency of warm dry summers and associated thunderstorms have led to more large fires in the last ten years than in any decade since record - keeping began in the 1940s.9 In Alaskan tundra, which was too cold and wet to support extensive fires for approximately the last 5,000 years, 105 a single large fire in 2007 released as much carbon to the atmosphere as had been absorbed by the entire circumpolar Arctic tundra during the previous quarter - century.106 Even if climate warming were curtailed by reducing heat - trapping gas (also known as greenhouse gas) emissions (as in the B1 scenario), the annual area burned in Alaska is projected to double by mid-century and to triple by the end of the century, 107 thus fostering increased emissions of heat - trapping gases, higher temperatures, and increased fires.

As a global objective and given the highest priority it is a solution to critical problems of biodiversity loss, much needed development, food security, resilience to drought and flood and greenhouse gas emissions.

All climate protection projects share the same goal of reducing atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations, but high quality projects are capable of doing much more than just combating climate change.

You are probably also aware already that water vapor is as much if not more of a so called greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide is and there is a lot of evaporating ocean water on the planet not to mention clouds and high tropical humidity because hot air provides added space in the atmosphere for water vapor gas to become a major component of air.

The Bloomberg report shows us the results — the replacement of low - carbon nuclear power with a mix of mainly natural gas and some renewables, with much higher net greenhouse emissions.

Modelling from the Met Office in a 2012 report for the Environment Agency suggests that climate change could raise sea levels in the area between 20 and 90 centimetres by the end of the century, and warns that eventual sea level rise could be much higher if greenhouse gas emissions are not cut.

However, a separate report by climate scientists at Stanford University says the existence of the high pressure ridge, which is preventing rains falling over California, is made much more likely by ever greater accumulations of climate - changing greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere.

In light of trends showing a likely 3 °C or more global temperature rise by the end of this century (a figure that could become much higher if all feedback processes, such as changes of sea ice and water vapor, are taken into account) that could result in sea level rises ranging from 20 to 59 cm (again a conservative estimation), Hansen believes it is critical for scientists in the field to speak out about the consequences and rebuke the spin offered by pundits who «have denigrated suggestions that business - as - usual greenhouse gas emissions may cause a sea level rise of the order of meters.»

Answer: The forcing of greenhouse gases is counteracted by about 1 Watt / m2 of aerosols, leaving us with 1.5 W / m2 or thereabouts, or less than half that of a doubling of CO2 (3.7 W / m2), and thermal inertia cuts that by half again for the high end sensitivities, and not much of a cut is required for the low end sensitivites (1.5 C times fraction of forcing 1.5 / 3.7 giving about 0.6 C).

While less meat gets wasted than does fruit and vegetables, the amount of energy required to produce meat is «significantly» more than that for plant - based food production, which means that the associated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from meat production is also much higher, leading researchers to indicate that meat waste has a «greater negative environmental impact.»

Here's the second study of the year showing that the greenhouse gas emissions caused by burning natural gas obtained by hydraulic fracturing are much higher than

As solar luminosity gradually increased through time, concentrations of greenhouse gases would have to have been much higher than today.

Why are the temperatures in areas which have the highest amount of greenhouse gases at any given time (tropics) never much above 30 C (probably evaporation but does that counter the warming of the GHE?)

An interesting point that has occurred to Eli is that if there were no greenhouse gases, convection would be much higher because the temperature differences would be much higher and there would be no clouds (no water)