Sentences with phrase «of preventing dangerous climate change»

No US national climate change strategy makes any sense unless it is understood to implicitly be a position on the US fair share of a global greenhouse gas emissions reductions pathway capable of preventing dangerous climate change.

There is widespread agreement among many observers of international attempts to achieve a global solution to climate change that there is little hope of preventing dangerous climate change unless nations take their equity and justice obligations into account in setting national responses to climate change.

Yet understanding how delay makes achieving the goals of preventing dangerous climate change extraordinarily more challenging also requires some knowledge about how increasing atmospheric concentrations affect global emissions reductions pathways options.

Not exact matches

«We are quickly running out of time to prevent hugely dangerous, expensive, and perhaps unmanageable climate change,» wrote the report's authors, who include former U.N. Environment Programme chief Achim Steiner and Mexican chemist Mario Molina, who won the Nobel Prize for his role in discovering the threat that chlorofluorocarbon gases pose to the Earth's ozone layer.

Officially, the stated goal of COP15, according to United Nations organizers, is «to stabilize the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere at a level that prevents dangerous man - made climate changes.»

The challenge is to investigate the consequences and viability of different schemes, while being careful that it is not being (ab) used as an alibi not to work on emission reduction, which should be the first and foremost strategy to prevent dangerous climate change.

IMO the net result is rates of population growth will reduce, but rather slowly and not enough to be a huge factor in preventing dangerous climate change.

... demand a change in policy and practice sufficient to prevent dangerous disruption of the climate system.

With the adoption of the Kigali Amendment, the Parties to the Montreal Protocol have joined the urgent global effort to prevent dangerous anthropogenic climate change.

The 1992 U.N. treaty [Framework Convention on Climate Change] called for «stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.Climate Change] called for «stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.climate system.»

We need to rapidly reduce emissions of both of these gases to prevent dangerous climate change, not one or the other.»

And so under this existing binding international law, nations have the ability to make choices that make sense for them on how they will keep their GHG emissions at levels that in combination with the GHG emissions of other countries will prevent dangerous climate change.

In truth, the intergovernmental body entrusted to prevent «dangerous» levels of climate change has not only failed to make progress over its twenty - odd years of work (and more than ninety official negotiation meetings since the agreement was adopted), it has overseen a process of virtually uninterrupted backsliding.

Given that the mainstream scientific community now believes that the world is quickly running out of time to prevent dangerous climate change, the moral problems with waiting until all climate scientific uncertainties are resolved are unfortunately becoming obvious.

Although it is beyond the scope of this entry to explain the following in the detail such a conclusion deserves, all ethical theories would require that developed nations to reduce their emissions to levels more stringent than levels of emissions reductions necessary to prevent dangerous climate change.

There's no chance of doing it unless its tied in with a clear message that this is necessary to prevent dangerous climate change.

This will give the world an opportunity to reach the ultimate destination — a world that has prevented dangerous levels of climate change.

While it is proving difficult to shut down the oil flow from the Deepwater Horizon site, the magnitude of greenhouse gas emissions reductions needed to prevent dangerous climate change is truly civilization challenging.

Negotiations on the international climate regime have begun in Warsaw at a time when the scientific community, including the IPCC in its recent report on the Physical Basis for Climate Change Science and UNEP in its just released Emissions Gap Report, are advising the international community that the world is running out of time to prevent dangerous climate climate regime have begun in Warsaw at a time when the scientific community, including the IPCC in its recent report on the Physical Basis for Climate Change Science and UNEP in its just released Emissions Gap Report, are advising the international community that the world is running out of time to prevent dangerous climate Climate Change Science and UNEP in its just released Emissions Gap Report, are advising the international community that the world is running out of time to prevent dangerous climate cChange Science and UNEP in its just released Emissions Gap Report, are advising the international community that the world is running out of time to prevent dangerous climate climate changechange.

Requires the EPA Administrator to report to Congress by July 1, 2013, and every four years thereafter, on an analysis of: (1) key findings based on the latest scientific information relevant to global climate change; (2) capabilities to monitor and verify GHG reductions on a worldwide basis; and (3) the status of worldwide efforts for reducing GHG emission, preventing dangerous atmospheric concentrations of GHGs, preventing significant irreversible consequences of climate change, and reducing vulnerability to the impacts of climate change.

In other words, to promote our own security, the United States and other rich countries may have to forge a partnership with China, India and others to develop a full range of creative ideas, technologies and policies to prevent dangerous climate change.

«(3) an analysis of the status of worldwide greenhouse gas reduction efforts, including implementation of the Safe Climate Act and other policies, both domestic and international, for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, preventing dangerous atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, preventing significant irreversible consequences of climate change, and reducing vulnerability to the impacts of climate Climate Act and other policies, both domestic and international, for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, preventing dangerous atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, preventing significant irreversible consequences of climate change, and reducing vulnerability to the impacts of climate climate change, and reducing vulnerability to the impacts of climate climate change.

Under the guise of preventing «dangerous manmade climate change» and compensating poor countries for alleged «losses and damages» due to climate and weather caused by rich country fossil fuel use, they had planned to control the world's energy supplies and living standards, replace capitalism with a new UN-centered global economic order, and redistribute wealth from those who create it to those who want it.

In fact the decision at COP 2o in Lima in December of 2014 encouraged the United States and all countries to explain why its INDC was fair and sufficiently ambitious to prevent dangerous climate change.

If you concede that climate skeptics have not proven in peer - reviewed journals that human - induced warming is not a very serious threat to human health and ecological systems, given that human - induced warming could create catastrophic warming the longer the human community waits to respond to reduce the threat of climate change and the more difficult it will be to prevent dangerous warming, do you agree that those nations most responsible for rising atmospheric ghg concentrations have a duty to demonstrate that their ghg emissions are safe?

In this regard, the staggering enormity of the current challenge to the world to prevent dangerous climate change is rarely commented on in the US media despite the fact the 25 year delay in facing this problem has now made the problem a civilization challenging problem.

If you concede that climate skeptics have not proven in peer - reviewed journals that human - induced warming is not a very serious threat to human health and ecological systems, given that human - induced warming could create catastrophic warming the longer the human community waits to respond to reduce the threat of climate change and the more difficult it will be to prevent dangerous warming, do you agree that those responsible for rising atmospheric ghg concentrations have a duty to demonstrate that their ghg emissions are safe?

Although President Obama defended the new rules on the basis that they were necessary to prevent dangerous climate change, that time was running out to do so, and that the rules would protect human health of US citizens, the speech failed to develop some of the obvious profound implications for climate policy of the conclusion that climate change is a moral problem, although President Obama did assert twice in the speech that climate change is a moral problem.

One of the reasons the world is now running out of time to prevent dangerous climate change is because fossil fuel companies and their allies in the US Congress has prevented the United States from taking serious action on climate change since 1992 when the George H. W Bush administration agreed in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change that the United States should adopt policies and measures to prevent dangerous anthropocentric interference on climate change on the basis of equity and common but differentiated responsibiclimate change is because fossil fuel companies and their allies in the US Congress has prevented the United States from taking serious action on climate change since 1992 when the George H. W Bush administration agreed in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change that the United States should adopt policies and measures to prevent dangerous anthropocentric interference on climate change on the basis of equity and common but differentiated responsibilchange is because fossil fuel companies and their allies in the US Congress has prevented the United States from taking serious action on climate change since 1992 when the George H. W Bush administration agreed in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change that the United States should adopt policies and measures to prevent dangerous anthropocentric interference on climate change on the basis of equity and common but differentiated responsibiclimate change since 1992 when the George H. W Bush administration agreed in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change that the United States should adopt policies and measures to prevent dangerous anthropocentric interference on climate change on the basis of equity and common but differentiated responsibilchange since 1992 when the George H. W Bush administration agreed in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change that the United States should adopt policies and measures to prevent dangerous anthropocentric interference on climate change on the basis of equity and common but differentiated responsibiClimate Change that the United States should adopt policies and measures to prevent dangerous anthropocentric interference on climate change on the basis of equity and common but differentiated responsibilChange that the United States should adopt policies and measures to prevent dangerous anthropocentric interference on climate change on the basis of equity and common but differentiated responsibiclimate change on the basis of equity and common but differentiated responsibilchange on the basis of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities.

At the same time, we also now know that preventing dangerous climate change impacts may require some form of carbon removal to supplement traditional mitigation actions.

To achieve this, it must advise governments and others on how to address the biggest energy challenge of the twenty - first century: preventing dangerous climate change.

President Obama managed to get fairly wide spread support for the Copenhagen Accord on the last day of the Copenhagen negotiations despite the fact that the United States was not able to commit to emissions reductions at levels to prevent dangerous climate change.

Though scientific consensus must always be open to responsible skepticism given: (a) the strength of the consensus on this topic, (b) the enormity of the harms predicted by the consensus view, (c) an approximately 30 year delay in taking action that has transpired since a serious climate change debate began in the United States in the early 1980s, (d) a delay that has made the problem worse while making it more difficult to achieve ghg emissions reductions necessary to prevent dangerous climate change because of the steepness of reductions now needed, no politician can ethically justify his or her refusal to support action on climate change based upon a personal opinion that is not supported by strong scientific evidence that has been reviewed by scientific organizations with a wide breadth of interdisciplinary scientific expertise.

Therefore, from the standpoint of the environmental sufficiency goal, the Cancun agreements fail to satisfy the requirement that any post-Kyoto regime must assure that the international community is on a ghg emissions reduction pathway that will prevent dangerous climate change harms.

The magnitude of greenhouse gas emissions reductions that are necessary to prevent dangerous climate change.

Greenpeace India campaigns to protect India's forests, for clean air and water, to promote renewable energy especially solar power, to prevent the dangerous impacts of climate change and nuclear power, for safe food and ecological farming and to protect freedom of speech.

The US Media's Grave Communication Failure On The Magnitude Of GHG Emissions Reductions Necessary To Prevent Dangerous Climate Change

Communication Failures On The Magnitude Of The GHG Emissions Reductions Necessary To Prevent Dangerous Climate Change

And so, those most responsible for climate change have failed under the Cancun agreements to assume responsibility to prevent dangerous climate change - extending a twenty year record of failure in so doing.

Climateworks Foundation says of its work, «Our mission is to help prevent dangerous climate change and promote global prosperity through the support of public policy,»...

To many others, Cancun was another tragic lost opportunity for the international community to prevent dangerous climate change, as well as, the most recent in a series of moral failures of those most responsible for climate change to commit to steps necessary to protect those who are most vulnerable to climate change's harshest impacts.

For many the Copenhagen Accord was seen as a tragic failure because it failed to: (a) achieve once again enforceable ghg emissions reduction commitments from developed countries sufficient to prevent dangerous climate change, (b) identify dedicated sources of funding for adaptation or capacity building in vulnerable developing countries, or (c) stop the deforestation that is a major contributor to climate change.

This post will explain that although some hope for a global solution to climate change is still alive due to decisions adopted in Cancun, one must see Cancun in the context of a twenty - year failed attempt to prevent dangerous climate change.

For this reason, any reliance on natural gas combustion as a method of reducing CO2 emissions must provide for ramped up commitments to non-fossil fuel sources of energy at levels needed to prevent dangerous climate change.

The civilization challenging nature of the magnitude of greenhouse gas emissions reductions needed to prevent dangerous climate change

This is so because of the huge differences in per capita emissions between developed and developing countries and the need to reduce total global emissions by 60 to 80 % from global total emissions to prevent dangerous climate change.

The following chart depicts what US states emissions commitments should be to prevent dangerous climate change in light of the most recent climate change science and the need to take justice into account in setting ghg emissions targets.

Yet, since the world averages 6.5 CO2 tons of per capita emissions while countries like the United States are emitting 19 tons per capita, and the world must reduce per capita emissions to perhaps less than 2.0 tons per capita to prevent dangerous climate change, it is very unlikely that many groups or people in developed countries can make a respectable argument that they are already below their fair share of safe global emissions.

One is the issue of global carbon budgets for the entire world needed to prevent dangerous climate change.

This latest report was made at the conclusion of these negotiations during which almost no progress was made in defining equity under UNFCCC by the Ad Hoc Working Group on Durban Platform For Enhanced Action (ADP), a mechanism under the UNFCCC that seeks to achieve a adequate global climate agreement, despite a growing consensus among most observers of the UNFCCC negotiations that nations need to align their emissions reductions commitments to levels required of them by equity and justice if the world is going to prevent extremely dangerous climate change.