Sentences with phrase «peak their emissions so»

Other developing countries should likewise send clear signals of when they intend to peak their emissions so that global emissions decline dramatically by midcentury.

Not exact matches

At the same time, the regulatory proposals would seek to reduce emissions from pollutants that lead to smog from so - called peaking units.

China vowed to peak its emissions by 2030, and several recent analyses say it is on track to do so years before that.

«If you reduce emissions of methane or black carbon, it would help you trim the peak warming that will be achieved in the next century or so,» Solomon says.

Okay, one little nit - picky issue with Q2 is that O2 and N2 actually DO absorb infrared radiation, just at shorter wavelengths than matter for the Earth's infrared emission spectrum (3 - 27 microns, with a peak around 9 microns or so).

The big emitters in Durban, so the BBC tells me, aren't even thinking of a DEAL before 2015, far less emissions peaking.

Meanwhile, SO has its emission peak near the protostar.

This excess emission has been suggested to stem from debris di... ▽ More (abridged) Infrared excesses associated with debris disk host stars detected so far peak at wavelengths around ~ 100 -LCB- \ mu -RCB- m or shorter.

To reach our 2025 goal, we'll need to more rapidly slow the growth of power sector greenhouse gas emissions so they peak within 10 to 15 years, and decline thereafter.

[Comment 25] To reach our 2025 goal, we'll need to more rapidly slow the growth of power sector greenhouse gas emissions so they peak within 10 to 15 years, and decline thereafter.

In order to stay below 2 ºC, global emissions must peak and decline in the next 10 to 15 years, so there is no time to lose.

Okay, one little nit - picky issue with Q2 is that O2 and N2 actually DO absorb infrared radiation, just at shorter wavelengths than matter for the Earth's infrared emission spectrum (3 - 27 microns, with a peak around 9 microns or so).

Especially so when a peak in emissions as late as 2020 is what many now advocate and is so far the best (but I think inadequate) policy being visibly advocated to go along with a 2050 reduction target.

So, even conservative estimates of committed warming indicate that we have to urgently reduce radiative forcing, in other words peak global GHG emissions as soon as possible and then reduce them as quickly as possible by reducing our use of fossil fuels drastically, if we want to have a chance at keeping warming under 2C.

The G - 77 ′ s position is that emissions from developed countries are already projected to peak in the next 10 years, so a global emissions peak in the same time period means the burden falls to developing countries, while for developed countries it'd be business as usual.

From 2015 to 2040, further gains in efficiency and CO2 emissions intensity will be significant, helping slow global energy - related CO2 emissions so that they will likely peak before 2040.

Emissions reductions larger than about 80 %, relative to whatever peak global emissions rate may be reached, are required to approximately stabilize carbon dioxide concentrations for a century or so at any chosen target level (see Figure 3Emissions reductions larger than about 80 %, relative to whatever peak global emissions rate may be reached, are required to approximately stabilize carbon dioxide concentrations for a century or so at any chosen target level (see Figure 3emissions rate may be reached, are required to approximately stabilize carbon dioxide concentrations for a century or so at any chosen target level (see Figure 3).»

To counter this business - as - usual scenario, the Stern Review proposes a climate stabilization regime in which greenhouse gas emissions would peak by 2015 and then drop 1 percent per year after that, so as to stabilize at a 550 ppm CO2e (with a significant chance that the global average temperature increase would thereby be kept down to 3 °C).

International controls on the emission of ozone - depleting halogens are now in place, so that their abundance in the stratosphere is expected to peak around the year 2000.

Global greenhouse gas emissions, they declared, «must peak and decline in the next 10 to 15 years, so there is no time to lose.»

Even so, China's intention to peak its emissions by 2030 has been described as conservative by environmentalists and envoys who say it can probably reach the milestone earlier.

That changed today during the 2016 China - US Climate - Smart / Low Carbon Cities Summit in Beijing, when Chengdu formally announced its commitment to control carbon dioxide emissions so that they reach a peak around 2025 and decline after that — a target five years ahead of China's national aim to peak carbon emissions by 2030.

The emission pathway is so large that the yellow emissions floor does not affect it until 2240, and as a result the yellow and black temperature trajectories are indistinguishable until after temperatures have peaked.

Emissions before 2010 are not allowed to vary across emission pathways, so there can be no contribution to the spread in peak warming from this historical time period.

Firstly, let's assume global emissions peak in 2020, so that after that year any increase in emissions from poor countries must be more than offset by declines in rich countries.

To have a fair chance of keeping below 2 °C, global emissions would have to peak by 2020 or so before falling.

The text states that to achieve the temperature goal: «Parties aim to reach global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible, recognizing that peaking will take longer for developing country Parties, and to undertake rapid reductions thereafter in accordance with best available science, so as to achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century».

The implication is that Chinese carbon dioxide emissions may peak before 2020, given that these emissions have historically tracked coal demand so closely.

Even so, its commitment to reach peak emissions as soon as that year is significant.

The Montreal Protocol has been noted by NOAA and UNEP to be successful at reducing emissions of ozone depleting substances, so successful that by 2008 the total tropospheric abundance of chlorine had declined to 3.4 parts per billion from a peak of 3.7 ppb.

The answer lies in arithmetic: The remaining global emissions budget is so small that, despite a relatively ambitious program of northern emission reductions, southern emissions must still peak soon, and then drop almost as rapidly as global emissions themselves.

Emission reductions larger than about 80 % relative to whatever peak global emissions rate may be reached are required to approximately stabilize carbon dioxide concentrations for a century or so at any chosen target level.»

China said it would increase the share of non-fossil fuels (wind and solar) as part of its primary energy consumption to about 20 % by 2030, and peak emissions by around the same point, though it would «work hard» to do so earlier.

We're at about 30 billion tons of carbon dioxide emissions a year — and notwithstanding the global economic slowdown, probably poised to rise 2 % per year (the exact future growth rate is quite hard to project because it depends so much on what China does and how quickly peak oil kicks in).

Firstly, assume that global emissions peak in 2020, so that after that year any increase in emissions from poor countries must be more than offset by declines in rich countries.

«EU emissions have been basically going down for two decades, so we can comfortably say it has peaked.»

So while it is politically significant that China has set a year that its emissions will peak, whether the pledge represents any new commitment to action remains to be seen.

China says it will make emissions peak by 2030 — but doing so will require building enough clean energy to power the whole of the US