«If we are serious about climate change, the 10 per cent of the global population responsible for 50 per cent
of total emissions need to make deep and immediate cuts in their use of energy — and hence their carbon emissions,» says Anderson.
Not exact matches
Coal - burning alone belched out 15 billion tons
of CO2 worldwide in 2012, 43 %
of total CO2
emissions; thousands
of CCS projects would be
needed by 2050 to reach targets to put a serious dent in
emissions.
-- If however, the (almost inconceivable) abrupt global
total cessation
of (fossil) C
emissions were to occur, then we could expect warming to stop without further
need for mitigation.
It shows the number
of articles along the y - axis, the
total number
of citations along the x-axis, color codes whether an individual is one
of the «concerned signers» who signed any
of 20 declarations affirming the mainstream view
of human impact on climate and the
need to limit greenhouse
emissions, was one
of the 619 contributing authors to IPCC AR4 wg1 (2007), «non-signer» who is one
of the non-AR4-wg1 authors on climate who signed neither statement a statement
of concern nor skepticism, or one
of the 495 individuals who signed any
of 16 declaration skeptical
of mainstream climate science or
of the
need for GHG cuts.
The
total amount
of carbon that would
need to be diverted from being emitted into the atmosphere is stunning: Current global atmospheric CO2
emissions total roughly 30 gigatons, or 30 billion metric tons per year.
For a powerful, visual illustration
of this phenomenon, take a look at TrillionthTonne's
emissions calculator — as our
total emissions tick rapidly up, the percent at which we
need to slash our
emissions each year rises at a disconcerting pace.
The amount
of carbon that would
need to be removed from the atmosphere and stabilized in soils, in addition to the amount required to compensate for ongoing
emissions, to attain pre-industrial levels is equivalent to approximately one - half
of the
total carbon in all
of Earth's vegetation.
The ABC again reported on the wind farm on 28th July 2008 saying that it had been opened, its
total cost was Au $ 5m ($ 2m
of which came from the Commonwealth Government), and that it was expected to «meet a third
of Kalbarri's power
needs and offset about 5 000 tonnes
of greenhouse gas
emissions a year.»
Save the average American family nearly $ 85 on their annual energy bill in 2030, reducing enough energy to power 30 million homes, and save consumers a
total of $ 155 billion from 2020 - 2030; Give a head start to wind and solar deployment and prioritize the deployment
of energy efficiency improvements in low - income communities that
need it most early in the program through a Clean Energy Incentive Program; and Continue American leadership on climate change by keeping us on track to meet the economy - wide
emissions targets we have set, including the goal
of reducing
emissions to 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and to 26 - 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025.»
Through both carbon sequestration and avoided
emissions (because water being retained by green infrastructure isn't
needing energy intensive pumping and treatment), the plan is estimated to reduce CO2 by a
total of 73,000 tons per year.
Under the City's plan to reduce citywide GHG
emissions 30 % by the year 2030, increasing the efficiency
of its buildings is projected to reduce
emissions by 12.7 million metric tons — or roughly two - thirds
of the
total reduction
needed.
Coal based power plants produce 70 percent
of our electricity
needs and 40 percent
of our
total carbon dioxide
emissions.
If action is delayed,
total investment costs will rise, the chances
of stranded assets will increase and costly negative
emission technologies will be
needed to limit planetary warming.»
To hit our 2020 target, we
need to cut
emissions by 170 million tonnes: approximately equivalent to the
total greenhouse gas output
of Alberta.
Anyway, for policy, this is a number that is in the right ballpark, and exactly the kind
of information that is
needed: degrees per
emission total.
Do the fit yourself, all you
need are the
total levels
of atmospheric carbon (about 750 Gt in 2006) and the human
emissions since 1750 and fit the line shape
of Keelings curves using as many boxes as you want.
You state with utmost certainty that half
of mans CO2
emissions are going into the ocean in order to establish this fact you would
need to know how much CO2 is produced by undersea volcanos and vents can you tell me to the nearest gigaton (very generous here) what that
total is?
To have a two thirds chance
of staying below two degrees,
total emissions from the beginning
of the industrial revolution to the time we stop burning carbon would
need to stay below 3,670 billion tonnes
of carbon dioxide, one paper in Nature Geoscience notes.
Under these facts, it is simply inconceivable that those emitting high levels
of greenhouse gases compared to others are not exceeding their fair share
of safe global
emissions given the enormity
of reductions that are
needed globally to return
total global
emissions to levels that are not already causing harm.
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.
Although some developing nations can make a presentable argument that they could increase greenhouse gas
emissions without exceeding their fair share
of global
emissions, the developed nations, including the United States can not make this argument because it is known that existing
total global
emissions levels
need to be significantly reduced and the developed nations are very high emitting nations compared to most nations in the world.
The first is the
need to set any target in light
of a
total global ghg
emissions limitation or budget entailed by the
need to limit ghg
emissions to levels that will not cause dangerous climate change.
On what basis may the United States argue that it
need not reduce US ghg
emissions to its fair share
of safe global missions because China or some other developing country has not yet adopted strong climate change policies, given that any US ghg
emissions in excess
of the US fair share
of safe
total omissions is harming hundreds
of thousands
of people around the world and the ecological systems on which life depends.
In order to answer this question, the investor will
need to know the «amount
of total emissions, by type
of greenhouse gas, by source, per unit
of revenue,
emissions trading activity, amount
of emissions reductions.»
5 %
of total funds must be used to create a clean national transportation low
emissions plan, which would establish an electric vehicle strategic deployment goal for 2020 and project the near - and long - term infrastructure and standardization
needs for EVs, electricity providers, vehicle manufacturers, and electricity purchasers.
Do we compensate electricity suppliers if, rather than reducing the
total emissions target, we increase the number
of indusries that
need to obtain permits?
For a 90 percent chance, we would
need to cut
total emissions before the end
of the decade.
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.
The IPCC Special Report on Aviation demonstrates that the
total impact
of a sector is not represented by (nor scalable to) the direct
emissions of primary greenhouse gases alone, but
needs to consider a wide range
of atmospheric changes.
Determined to protect the ozone layer by taking precautionary measures to control equitably
total global
emissions of substances that deplete it, with the ultimate objective
of their elimination on the basis
of developments in scientific knowledge, taking into account technical and economic considerations and bearing in mind the developmental
needs of developing countries,
And then you
need to know ALL
of them for EVERY source
of Energy generation to get the
TOTAL CO2
emissions related to energy generation AND usage.
It shows the number
of articles along the y - axis, the
total number
of citations along the x-axis, color codes whether an individual is one
of the «concerned signers» who signed any
of 20 declarations affirming the mainstream view
of human impact on climate and the
need to limit greenhouse
emissions, was one
of the 619 contributing authors to IPCC AR4 wg1 (2007), «non-signer» who is one
of the non-AR4-wg1 authors on climate who signed neither statement a statement
of concern nor skepticism, or one
of the 495 individuals who signed any
of 16 declaration skeptical
of mainstream climate science or
of the
need for GHG cuts.
An adequate global climate change solution will
need to limit
total global ghg
emissions to levels which will prevent atmospheric concentrations
of ghgs from accumulating to dangerous levels and to do this any solution will also
need to allocate
total global
emissions levels among all nations.
UNEP pointed out in its report that the 44 GtCO2e target by 2020 is necessary to have any hope
of achieving even greater cuts
needed after 2020 when
total emissions must be limited to sharply declining
total emissions limitations.
Absolute caps in
total carbon
emissions, 90 % less than current
emission levels,
need to be accepted in every sector
of the economy.
The September, 2013, IPCC issued a report which contained a budget on
total carbon
emissions that the world
needs to stay within to give a 66 % chance
of preventing more than the 2 ° C warming that attracted world attention despite the fact that it has been widely criticized as being overly optimistic.
One
of the promises
of services such as Lyft and Uber (which are called ridesharing platforms but are more like dispatchers for freelance taxis) is that they will reduce the
need for car ownership, and that they will bring down the
total number
of cars driving in cities, thereby also decreasing vehicular
emissions.
All
of this would take tremendous energy and materials — ironically frontloading carbon
emissions just when they most
need to be reduced — and expand humanity's
total ecological impact significantly in the short term.
Even in 2020, we could already
need to dispose carbon from natural gas alone equal to half today's
emission from all fuel and later methane would cause about 75 %
of total CO2
emissions.
We don't
need more tax revenue in order to cut CO2
emissions, we
need to shift more
of the
total tax burden onto dirty energy, and to do so without harming low - and middle - income families.
To both achieve
emissions reduction goals and fully displace nuclear power, renewable energy would
need to scale up from 17 %
of the country's power supply today to a full 57 %
of total electricity generation in just nine years» time.