Sentences with phrase «not slow global warming»

Reducing emissions of these other pollutants might not slow global warming as much as previously thought

Not exact matches

But it wasn't until she wrote this poignant post, «Mothers Needed to Protect the Earth,» that I really started thinking harder about harnessing the power of the Green Mom blogosphere to draw attention to climate change and to advocate changes to slow the rate of global warming.

1.5 and 2 °C are not hard and fast limits beyond which disaster is imminent, but they are now the milestones by which the world measures all progress toward slowing global warming.

«Our findings mean that nature is not as efficient in slowing global warming as we previously thought,» said Kees Jan van Groenigen, research fellow at the Center for Ecosystem Science and Society at NAU and lead author of the study.

Thus, a main conclusion of the study is that «a future grand solar minimum could slow down but not stop global warming.»

A slow - down in global warming is not a sign that climate change is ending, but a natural blip in an otherwise long - term upwards trend, research shows.

The Montreal Protocol had no impact on cleaning the air, it stopped the growth of CFCs which are powerful greenhouse gases (in addition to their role in depleting stratospheric ozone), therefore it slowed global warming, rather than increasing it, and we aren't trying to save ground - level ozone.

First, most climate simulations, including ours above and those of IPCC [1], do not include slow feedbacks such as reduction of ice sheet size with global warming or release of greenhouse gases from thawing tundra.

[1] CO2 absorbs IR, is the main GHG, human emissions are increasing its concentration in the atmosphere, raising temperatures globally; the second GHG, water vapor, exists in equilibrium with water / ice, would precipitate out if not for the CO2, so acts as a feedback; since the oceans cover so much of the planet, water is a large positive feedback; melting snow and ice as the atmosphere warms decreases albedo, another positive feedback, biased toward the poles, which gives larger polar warming than the global average; decreasing the temperature gradient from the equator to the poles is reducing the driving forces for the jetstream; the jetstream's meanders are increasing in amplitude and slowing, just like the lower Missippi River where its driving gradient decreases; the larger slower meanders increase the amplitude and duration of blocking highs, increasing drought and extreme temperatures — and 30,000 + Europeans and 5,000 plus Russians die, and the US corn crop, Russian wheat crop, and Aussie wildland fire protection fails — or extreme rainfall floods the US, France, Pakistan, Thailand (driving up prices for disk drives — hows that for unexpected adverse impacts from AGW?)

It's that he doesn't think governments need to pass any new regulations to «stop» (or even slow down) global warming.

Decreasing greenhouse gases and our carbon footprint will slow the rate of global warming, but it will not fully resolve the problem of global warming.

But this does not mean that global warming has slowed down or even stopped.

Terrell Johnson, reporting on a recent NASA publication concluding that deep ocean temperatures have not increased since 2005 (http://www.weather.com/science/environment/news/deep-ocean-hasnt-warmed-nasa-20141007): «While the report's authors say the findings do not question the overall science of climate change, it is the latest in a series of findings that show global warming to have slowed considerably during the 21st century, despite continued rapid growth in human - produced greenhouse gas emissions during the same time.»

BUT Reversing the Atlantic ocean current due to fresh water ice melt, is a local phenomenon, not global AND it does little to reduce the slow steady heat / energy buildup globally — so warming will continue.

The world seems to be awakening to the fact that if we all continue on the «business as usual», burn - fossil - fuels - until - they're - gone trajectory, we can't stop or slow global warming.

So saving as many animals and plants as we can, trying to slow down global warming (we can't stop it) is our attempt to try to be around when the experiment ends.

This would serve multiple purposes, of (a) weaning us from dependence on foreign oil and simultaneously depleting terror - exporting countries of their revenue stream, (b) reducing other pollutants besides CO2, (c) encouraging a more gradual and less economically disastrous transition from an economony based on a finite resource, (d) slow global warming, (e) move us in the direction of a VAT tax rather than an income tax (actually, personally I don't think e is such a great thing, but as many conversative groups favor it, I don't see why they would oppose a revenue - neutral tax on fossil fuels.

Global warming, on the other hand, is far less of an immediate threat, many of its effects can not be reversed no matter what we do, the cost of attempting such a reversal could destroy the economies of emerging nations and make their development impossible — and it is a slow moving threat, that governments can plan to deal with over time.

The biggest impacts of global warming will be from the shifts in the frequency and duration of extreme events, not the slow rise in the average temperature, it concluded.

My own view is, (a) if we wind up at the lower end of the IPCC expected warming, maybe we shouldn't be spending large sums to avert it, whereas if we are likely to land at the high end, the costs miht start to get fairly grave (b) nobody has a very good idea how much it would really cost to avert, or slow, global warming (hope this doesn't contradict (a)-RRB-.

Those actions will cut the adding of more GHGs slowing the worsening of global warming, but will not reverse the present effects occurring.

Nature is kicking back on us because we're just slow learners about hurricane infrastructure preparations as well as not paying enough attention to the real world consequences of human - induced global warming and climate change.

-- A report from John Fleck examines why the annual distribution of four tons of toxic lead on the streets of Albuquerque, N.M., is not news, and Keith Kloor discusses what this «slow drip» pollution problem has to do with global warming.

I wish it were the case that the rate of global warming has significantly slowed and that we don't have to «be scared» of more extreme weather events, droughts and flooding.

One is that the effect of global warming is slow, will warm both north and south poles equally, the change will get significant around 2060, and superimposed on top of that there is a lot of large (not not well - quantified) amplitude «weather» noise.

They have evidence that the soils may not store carbon as efficiently as they had once assumed, and that, to slow global warming, it may not be enough to just save the trees.

Models indicate that cloud - feedback would not substantially slow global warming, but because of the uncertainty, it has been an area of significant scientific interest.

Global warming is not likely to slow down if we keep harming the environment the way we have in the past.

The article found current CO2 emissions aren't falling rapidly enough to slow global warming largely because most public policy has focused exclusively on developing wind and solar power, which may actually increase emissions.

Richard Allan, reader in climate science at the University of Reading, said: «Global warming is not «at a standstill» but does seem to have slowed down since 2000 in comparison to the rapid warming of the world since the 1970s.»

This finding, announced in September by the EU Joint Research Center and the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, doesn't mean that the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has yet decreased, but it could mean that we may be able to meet the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement in slowing global warming.

This is not Emanuel, it is the writer: «This planetary engine is slowing down as global warming pushes land and ocean temperatures closer together.»

Scientists now know why global warming has slowed down and it's not good news for us.

While the warming of average global surface temperatures has slowed (though not nearly as much as previously believed), the overall amount of heat accumulated by the global climate has not, with over 90 percent being absorbed by the oceans.

While the warming of global surface temperatures in recent years has slowed in large part due to the more efficient heat transfer to the deep oceans, that can't last forever.

It wasn't that long ago the story was global warming was slowing trade winds.

I'm not for a moment suggesting this makes global warming go away, only it might slow the rate of change down - a bit - in the short term (perhaps the average transit time of deep currents).

Putting it all together, we have an increasingly clear picture that while the warming of global surface temperatures has slowed over the past decade, it has not slowed as much as previously thought.

And we also know that the correlation between global average temperature and atmospheric CO2 is statistically not very robust, so that something else must also «be at work» to cause the gradual warming (or «slow thaw», as you've dubbed it).

The expected result is not only cleaner skies and possibly slowing the rate of global warming, but also creating millions of new jobs in an array of rapidly expanding green - energy sectors.

However, another important recent paper by Kevin Cowtan and Robert Way showed that the global surface temperature rise has not slowed as much as some previously thought; in fact, the surface warming since 1997 happened more than twice as fast as previous estimates.»

From ridiculous and patently false claims that global warming has slowed, that the world can't be warming because winter still exists, that (seriously) plants like carbon dioxide so we're just feeding them; these people's only purpose is to slow any real progress on fixing the planetary mess we're in.

This might not come as a surprise, as only some GOP politicians accept that global warming — which a carbon tax is meant to slow — is real.

CO2 limits won't cool the planet, but they can make the difference between continued accelerating global warming to catastrophic levels vs. slowing and eventually stopping the warming at hopefully safe levels

To point out just a couple of things: — oceans warming slower (or cooling slower) than lands on long - time trends is absolutely normal, because water is more difficult both to warm or to cool (I mean, we require both a bigger heat flow and more time); at the contrary, I see as a non-sense theory (made by some serrist, but don't know who) that oceans are storing up heat, and that suddenly they will release such heat as a positive feedback: or the water warms than no heat can be considered ad «stored» (we have no phase change inside oceans, so no latent heat) or oceans begin to release heat but in the same time they have to cool (because they are losing heat); so, I don't feel strange that in last years land temperatures for some series (NCDC and GISS) can be heating up while oceans are slightly cooling, but I feel strange that they are heating up so much to reverse global trend from slightly negative / stable to slightly positive; but, in the end, all this is not an evidence that lands» warming is led by UHI (but, this effect, I would not exclude it from having a small part in temperature trends for some regional area, but just small); both because, as writtend, it is normal to have waters warming slower than lands, and because lands» temperatures are often measured in a not so precise way (despite they continue to give us a global uncertainity in TT values which is barely the instrumental's one)-- but, to point out, HadCRU and MSU of last years (I mean always 2002 - 2006) follow much better waters» temperatures trend; — metropolis and larger cities temperature trends actually show an increase in UHI effect, but I think the sites are few, and the covered area is very small worldwide, so the global effect is very poor (but it still can be sensible for regional effects); but I would not run out a small warming trend for airport measurements due mainly to three things: increasing jet planes traffic, enlarging airports (then more buildings and more asphalt — if you follow motor sports, or simply live in a town / city, you will know how easy they get very warmer than air during day, and how much it can slow night - time cooling) and overall having airports nearer to cities (if not becoming an area inside the city after some decade of hurban growth, e.g. Milan - Linate); — I found no point about UHI in towns and villages; you will tell me they are not large cities; but, in comparison with 20-40-60 years ago when they were «countryside», many small towns and villages have become part of larger hurban areas (at least in Europe and Asia) so examining just larger cities would not be enough in my opinion to get a full view of UHI effect (still remembering that it has a small global effect: we can say many matters are due to UHI instead of GW, maybe even that a small part of measured GW is due to UHI, and that GW measurements are not so precise to make us able to make good analisyses and predictions, but not that GW is due to UHI).

Wouldn't it be ironic if in the interest of global warming we mandated massive switches to energy, which is a finite resource, which slows the winds down, which causes the temperature to go up?

Focusing on the relatively short time periods where the rate of warming is slower in order to claim that global warming is not happening is a misleading way to use statistics, yet one that has been the focus of attention.

You May Also Like: Longest Global Coral Bleaching On Record Isn't Over Yet Scientists Turned Back the Clock on Climate Change Study Calls For Leaner «Carbon Budget» to Slow Warming

Reducing global warming by 0.5 °C may not sound like much, but when it comes to climate change, every tenth of a degree matters, and slowing near - term warming is particularly important to avoid triggering feedback loops that could accelerate further warming.

Although there has been a slower rate of atmospheric warming during the past 18 years, this does not undermine the fundamental physics of global warming, the scientific basis of climate models or the estimates of climate sensitivity.