Sentences with phrase «recent anthropogenic emissions»

And the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5, 2013/14) asserted that «[h] uman influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history.»

Not exact matches

Recent studies indicate that mycorrhizal fungi also play a significant role in belowground carbon sequestration, which may mitigate the effects of anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

Recent studies of global warming have necessitated a more comprehensive effort to quantify the natural climate variability so that the residual change may be attributed to the anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases.

However, the FAO's most recent study offers some perspective on this issue, attributing 5 percent of anthropogenic CO2 emissions to livestock (pg.

Three IPCC climate models, recent NASA Aqua satellite data, and a simple 3 - layer climate model are used together to demonstrate that the IPCC climate models are far too sensitive, resulting in their prediction of too much global warming in response to anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions.

This instrument delivers important, and sobering, studies — such as the recent finding that as anthropogenic (human - caused) warming occurs, lakes naturally emit more methane which accelerates the warming further (or makes our cuts in emission worth more, if you want to look at the positive side).

No, scientific inquiry and results published in peer - reviewed scientific literature have shown the recent global warming is primarily due to anthropogenic GHG emissions.

The declining signal over India shown by the GPCP decadal mode is broadly consistent with gauge measurements since the 1950s — that several research groups including my own are trying to understand, perhaps relating to emissions of anthropogenic aerosol — although there are discrepancies between these gauge - based data sets themselves (see our recent review in Nature Climate Change, for example).

The change to the 12C: 13C isotope ratio of atmospheric CO2 is in the direction expected if the recent increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration were caused by the anthropogenic emission of CO2.

It seems to me that, if there is an anthropogenic impact on recent warming (a big if for me), then that impact would be long term as long as emissions continue to rise.

Richard S Courtney (00:08:00): The change to the 12C: 13C isotope ratio of atmospheric CO2 is in the direction expected if the recent increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration were caused by the anthropogenic emission of CO2.

The» federal decrees or U.N. Proclamations» have not stated any evidence in reality on the recent climate warming believed to be caused anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

I have understood that IPCC was set up by UN politicians in order to clear up the cause of recent climate warming, which was believed to be caused by anthropogenic CO2 emission to atmosphere, especially from fossile fuels.

The biassed view of the cause on recent warming and certain kind of extreme events, which are believed by UN politicians to be due to anthropogenic CO2 emissions, has to be replaced by working solutions regarded as due and fitting.

As an answer e.g. in my comment https://judithcurry.com/2013/12/16/how-far-should-we-trust-models/#comment-426153 I have stated:» In the comment of mine https://judithcurry.com/2013/12/13/week-in-review-8/#comment-425381 I have proved that the mere recent increase of anthropogenic CO2 emissions can rise only 0.005 ppm CO2 in atmosphere per year.

Polititicians, all over the world, have been made believe, that the recent increase of CO2 content in atmosphere is dominated by anthropogenic CO2 emissions caused by burning fossile fuels, and that the recent global warming is mainly attributed to the recent increase of CO2 content in atmosphere.

'» As I have proved above the recent anthropogenic increase of CO2 content in atmophere is so minimal that there is no need to cut anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

It called on the UNFCCC to use the most recent IPCC guidance and guidelines as a basis for estimating anthropogenic forest - related greenhouse gas emissions by sources and removals by sinks, forest carbon stocks and forest area changes.

event y [anthropogenic CO2 emissions rise) didn't happen before in the recent history of this planet...

In addition to that the lacking warming during the recent 15 years can not be explained by any change of CO2 content in the atmosphere, there are evidences available according to which the changes of CO2 contents in the atmosphere are dominated by natural causes, where influence of anthropogenic CO2 emissions is so minimal that it can not be found by measurements in reality.

The conclusion that timely anthropogenic CO2 emissions have rescued the biosphere from a long term glacial slide down to dangerously low photosynthesis - stopping CO2 levels (that were approached during the recent Wisconsin glaciation) is based on multiple independent lines of evidence and the vast body of peer - reviewed science.

Any warming observed prior to WWII is indicative of «global warming» (GW), but (since there were no significant human GHG emissions yet) is counterindicative of anthropogenic greenhouse warming (AGW), since something other than human GHGs caused it, raising the question: if non GH warming caused this warming, could it not also have caused the most recent extended warming period?

The loud divergence between sea - level reality and climate change theory — the climate models predict an accelerated sea - level rise driven by the anthropogenic CO2 emission — has been also evidenced in other works such as Boretti (2012a, b), Boretti and Watson (2012), Douglas (1992), Douglas and Peltier (2002), Fasullo et al. (2016), Jevrejeva et al. (2006), Holgate (2007), Houston and Dean (2011), Mörner 2010a, b, 2016), Mörner and Parker (2013), Scafetta (2014), Wenzel and Schröter (2010) and Wunsch et al. (2007) reporting on the recent lack of any detectable acceleration in the rate of sea - level rise.

See recent publication: Tracing anthropogenic carbon dioxide and methane emissions to fossil fuel and cement producers, 1854 - 2010

By the same logic, I reject arguments based on a notion that the vast majority of the «climate science community» is only tribally driven, let alone that all evidence they produce that supports the contention that it is 90 % likely that more than 50 % of recent anomalous warming is due to anthropogenic CO2 emissions is a product of tribalism.

The observed recent rise in atmospheric CO2 concentration is caused by anthropogenic emissions of CO2.

In a recent article, we call this anthropogenic drought, which is water stress caused or intensified by human activities, including increased demand, outdated water management, climate change from anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, growing energy and food production, intensive irrigation, diminished supplies, and land use change.

So, other possible explanations the recent rise in atmospheric CO2 concentration other than the anthropogenic emissions deserve investigation.

NGOs argue for reductions to carbon dioxide emissions from human activities (i.e. anthropogenic CO2 emissions) because it is assumed that these emissions are causing the recent rise of carbon dioxide in the air.

Recent research provides a considerable body of evidence on the effect of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions on the Earth's climate (Stocker et al. 2013).

But it demonstrates how changed equilibrium conditions could have had the observed recent effect on atmospheric CO2 concentration whether or not there was a change in temperature and whether or not the anthropogenic CO2 emission existed.

However, they provide very different «projections» of future atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration for the same assumed future anthropogenic emission... (1) the cause of the recent rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration is not known, (2) the future development of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration can not be known, and (3) any effect of future anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide on the atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration can not be known

tt — Anthropogenic CO2 emissions may or may not be the cause of the recent increase in atmospheric concentrations?

Anthropogenic CO2 emissions may or may not be the cause of the recent increase in atmospheric concentrations?

It is quite clear from the paper that I was not questioning the link between anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions and warming, or even suggesting that recent temperatures are unusual in the context of short - term natural variability.»

I describe a recent resurgence in the construction of hydroelectric dams, both large and small, around the world, spurred, in substantial part, by their newfound description as a form of «clean energy» capable of mitigating the greenhouse gas emissions largely responsible for anthropogenic contributions to global climate change.

We have to prove in a way simple enough that the recent warming have not been controlled by anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

So, enjoined by a recent reCatcha to «ask mitely,» I will try at least one more time to ask if dashed line on graph # 3 in the recent Nature Geoscience article (by MacDougall, Avis and Weaver) on permafrost melt — taken together with the known fact that there are other carbon (and other) positive feedbacks — mean that, even if we stop all anthropogenic CO2 emissions next year, atmospheric CO2 levels will continue to rise indefinitely?

Hence, atmospheric GEM concentrations inferred from Greenland firn air and global anthropogenic Hg emissions have exhibited consistently similar trends during the most recent decades (Fig. 2), suggesting that the atmospheric reservoir of mercury at mid - and high - northern latitudes has been driven mainly by anthropogenic emissions during the last decades.

Mercury (Hg) is an extremely toxic pollutant, and its biogeochemical cycle has been perturbed by anthropogenic emissions during recent centuries.

As to» the truth», researchers have not expressed any evidence based on empiric observations according to which the trend of recent multidecadal global warming could have been controlled by anthropogenic CO2 emissions to atmospere.

The current approach that is generally pursued assumes essentially that past climate variability is indistinguishable from a stochastic red - noise process... Given such a null hypothesis, the official consensus of IPCC (1995) tilts towards a global warming effect of recent trace - gas emissions, which exceeds the cooling effect of anthropogenic aerosol emissions.»

On the other hand, Gavin Schmidt of NASA GISS, one of the topmost scientists involved in the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming cause, in a recent paper clearly asserts that: • 75 % of the Greenhouse effect is attributable to water vapour and clouds • 100 % of the increase in CO2 emissions since 1850 (110 ppmv) is Man - made Following these numbers through and accounting for the effect of other Greenhouse gases results in a Man - made temperature rise between 1850 and 2010 of 2.21 °C.

Charlie A - So by your understanding an abstract discussion the importance of carbon sequestration in mitigating climate change (implying sequestration of CO2 to reduce climate change), with CO2 increases coming from anthropogenic emissions (more evidence than needed) is in some fashion not implicitly stating that that AGW is the major cause of recent climate change?

In recent years, as I have said, the curve has been decaying from the exponentiality that would be expected given that aggregate anthropogenic emissions are closer to the IPCC's A2 emissions scenario than to any lesser scenario.

The most recent study (Stern, 2005) suggests a decrease in global anthropogenic emissions from approximately 73 to 54 TgS yr — 1 over the period 1980 to 2000, with NH emission falling from 64 to 43 TgS yr — 1 and SH emissions increasing from 9 to 11 TgS yr — 1.

Anthropogenic global warming under a standard emissions scenario is predicted to continue at a rate similar to that observed in recent decades.