Sentences with phrase «reduced global temperatures»

As such, to realize reduced global temperatures (compared to a baseline fossil fuel future), even in the second half of this century, would instead require a «rapid and massive deployment of some mix of conservation, wind, solar, and nuclear, and possibly carbon capture and storage.»

The plan would have reduced global temperatures by only 0.03 degrees Celsius and reduced sea level rise by the thickness of three sheets of paper.

Foresting all or half the world's cropland reduced global temperatures in 2100 by 0.45 °C and 0.25 °C respectively.

The new mitigation measures would also bring climate benefits, reducing global temperatures by about 0.22 °C by 2050, relative to a scenario without these measures.

His research suggested that industrial aerosols could block sunlight and reduce global temperatures enough to overcome the effects of greenhouse gases, possibly triggering an ice age.

I don't think I've run into anyone that says GHG (or UHI) measurably reduces global temperatures, although there maybe some that look at the longer - term impacts and argue that flow on effects might reduce it).

In fact, they can anticipate such a chilly reception from the nation's eco-activists that it may reduce the global temperature average.

No matter what one believes regarding climate change, these regulations would do little to reduce global temperatures.

[1] The goal of the conference was for the various countries attending to reach an agreement to limit CO2 emissions in order to reduce global temperatures.

Try this one: The CO2 emissions reduction / trading business is just a bureaucratic verbiage and no reduction will really occur, and even if it does, it will reduce the global temperature by an insignificant amount, according to the official sensitivity estimates.

The CO2 emissions reduction / trading business is just a bureaucratic verbiage and no reduction will really occur, and even if it does, it will reduce the global temperature by an insignificant amount, according to the official sensitivity estimates.

Therefore, Manacker's estimates for the cost to reduce global temperatures bu 0.5 C are probably more realistic than these.

The authors argue that, by itself, a U.S. carbon tax will not reduce global temperatures enough to justify its economic cost.

For example, checking just how much atmospheric CO2 build - up can be avoided by some countries reducing CO2 emissions, and by just how much it will reduce global temperature.

«Three years ago, Bjorn Lomborg used the UK government's own data to show that its $ 250 bn windpower scheme, which would need to be replaced every 20 - 25 years, would reduce global temperatures in 2100 by 0.0004 C (The TImes article, 30/9/08).

You can only believe there is a looming catastrophe if a) you believe that man is responsible for 100 % of the CO2 increase (that is in serious doubt), b) an increase of up to 2.0 °C is not beneficial (there is much evidence that it is beneficial), c) over the next 100 years there will not be any major advances in energy production (now we can switch to nuclear within 10 - 20 years), and d) man can realistically do anything to effect global temperatures (the US EPA estimates proposed CO2 restrictions costing tens of trillions of US dollars would reduce global temperature by 0.006 °C).

Environmentalists demand government stop global warming, but oppose remedial actions like spreading iron filings on the oceans to increase uptake of CO2 or spraying chemicals into the atmosphere to create clouds (chemtrails) to block sunlight and reduce global temperatures.

Six months after he spoke that El Nino was finished and a La Nina that followed had already reduced global temperature by 0.4 degrees Celsius.

Even supporters of legislation such as the Bingaman - Specter bill admit that as much as a trillion dollars will need to be spent to reduce global temperatures about 0.13 C. And that is a trillion for the first tenth of a degree — the law of diminishing returns means that each additional tenth will cost more.

It was stated that there has been a big break through since the Chinese agree with to reduce global temperatures by 2 degree.

«If you reduce the global temperature rise from 4.5 degrees to 2 degrees, instead of having almost half of the species being potentially lost from each grid cell we studied, that reduces to a quarter,» said lead author Rachel Warren.

Therefore the US are reducing the global temperature up to 2020 by 3 °C x 1,2 ppmV / 280 ppmV = 0,013 °C!!!

On undesirability, Hulme explains that although the approach would reduce global temperatures, it would also have significant side - effects, such as changing local rainfall patterns.

In 1971, the spiritual leader of the global warming prophets, Dr. Stephen H. Schneider from the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, claimed that this pollution would soon reduce the global temperature by 3.5 °C.1

You all say you want to reduce global temperature, if you; re being honest then look at all the options.

These would theoretically bounce the sunlight back into space, and reduce the global temperature.

The proposal will reduce global temperature by 2100 by around 0.6 °C.

In what he calls a «global disaster» now unfolding in northern latitudes as the sea area that freezes and melts each year shrinks to its lowest extent ever recorded, Prof Peter Wadhams of Cambridge University calls for «urgent» consideration of new ideas to reduce global temperatures.

The Spice team - drawn from a number of universities as well as Marshall Aerospace - calculates that 10 or 20 giant balloons at a 20 km altitude could release enough particles into the atmosphere to reduce the global temperature by around 2C.

Solar Radiation Management The other part is deploying some sort of Solar Radiation Management to quickly reduce global temperatures.

Scientists from the US, UK and Australia suggest a form of climate engineering called solar radiation management, which involves pumping aerosols into the stratosphere to reduce global temperatures − and especially the warming of the tropic seas.

Not exact matches

«If we're to keep global temperatures from rising to dangerous levels, we need to drastically reduce emissions and greatly increase forests» ability to absorb and store carbon.»

If we persist on our current trajectory, the potential for temperatures to increase in the next few decades could reduce the global area suitable for production of coffee by as much as half by 2050.

Separate research published by the Met Office today shows emissions of CO2 will need to be reduced close to zero by the end of this century if a rise in the mean global temperature beyond 2C is to be avoided.

WHEREAS, in furtherance of the united effort to address the effects of climate change, in 2010 the 16th Session of the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCC met in Cancun, Mexico and recognized that deep cuts in global greenhouse gas emissions were required, with a goal of reducing global greenhouse gas emissions so as to hold the increase in global average temperature below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels;

«This Agreement, in enhancing the implementation of the [2015 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change], including its objective, aims to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change, in the context of sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty, including by: (a) Holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels, recognizing that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change; (b) Increasing the ability to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change and foster climate resilience and low greenhouse gas emissions development, in a manner that does not threaten food production; and (c) Making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate - resilient development.

The document cites a goal of holding the global rise in average global temperatures to 2 ºC but does not specify a long - term goal for reducing emissions.

But global temperatures would decrease even further if a comprehensive climate policy was enacted to generally reduce greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (green line).

At least two studies have been published since 2010 that suggest reducing soot and methane would cut human - caused global temperature increases by half of a degree Celsius, or about 1 degree Fahrenheit, by 2050.

Last year, 175 countries agreed to reduce emissions via the Paris Agreement, which — optimistically — could hold global temperatures to an increase of 1.5 degrees Celsius since pre-industrial levels.

Singer, founder of the Science and Environmental Policy Project, concludes that since global warming would raise maximum summer temperatures modestly while raising winter minimum temperatures significantly, it «should help reduce human death rates.»

«It quickly became clear that keeping global temperatures under 1.5 °C had a clear benefit for Australia in terms of reducing extreme events and the costs that come with them,» Dr King said.

Scientists from the UNIGE explain the global temperature drop by a stratospheric injection of large amounts of sulphur dioxide reducing the intensity of solar radiation reaching the surface of Earth.

However, in the 2013 Fifth Assessment Report (AR5), the IPCC concluded that «Modelling indicates that SRM methods, if realizable, have the potential to substantially offset a global temperature rise, but they would also modify the global water cycle, and would not reduce ocean acidification.»

And although companies are pledging to do more than ever to reduce emissions, «disparity [exists] between companies» strategies, targets and the emissions reductions» that climate scientists say will be necessary to limit the rise in average global temperatures to 2 degrees Celsius.

Indeed, the team estimates that this cooling effect could reduce by two - thirds the predicted increase in global temperatures initiated by a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide.

The results of this work open up the possibility of reducing methane emissions and of contributing to a reduction in global temperatures which is caused by greenhouse gases.

So reducing emissions of it would have a nearly immediate impact on global temperatures.

Stirling co-author and Professor of Ecology, Alastair Jump, said: «By pinpointing specific traits in trees that determine how at risk they are from drought, we can better understand global patterns of tree mortality and how the world's forests are reacting to rising temperatures and reduced rainfall.

Aerosols are already known to reduce global warming: The vast clouds of sulfates thrown up in the 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines, for example, reduced average global temperatures by about half a degree Celsius.