Sentences with phrase «reported emission figures»

The reported emission figures cover only Norwegian territory, including domestic air and sea traffic.

Not exact matches

That figure — the amount by which Canada expects to miss its fourth international emissions commitment in a row — has grown by half since Ottawa's last report to the UN only 18 months earlier.

This system allows us to report energy and water consumption, greenhouse gas emissions and waste generation at a global and site level, as an absolute figure or per unit of production.

«However, an exact figure for global CO ₂ emissions resulting from the infant formula industry is not known,» says Alison Linnecar, author of the report, «partly because the CO ₂ emissions per liter vary between countries.

They took particular issue with one excerpt in the book claiming the buses were «reported to be falling short in their fuel consumption and emission figures, in some cases worryingly.»

From what I understand from the report the 168 kg of CO2 figure is calculated based on the paper - books emissions that are saved while using the Kindle (in average).

(We use 2012 figures because that is the starting point for what we actually need to accomplish; all emissions numbers are from EPA's 2014 Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990 — 2012, which is the most recent official U.S. report to the Paris emissions numbers are from EPA's 2014 Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990 — 2012, which is the most recent official U.S. report to the Paris Emissions and Sinks: 1990 — 2012, which is the most recent official U.S. report to the Paris process.)

In 2014 alone, reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the International Energy Agency, the UN Sustainable Solutions Network and the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate argued for a doubling or trebling of nuclear energy — requiring as many as 1,000 new reactors or more in view of scheduled retirements — to stabilize carbon emissions e.g. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Working Group III — Mitigation of Climate Change, http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg3/, Presentation, slides 32 - 33; International Energy Agency, World Energy Outlook 2014, p. 396; UN Sustainable Solutions Network, «Pathways to Deep Decarbonization» (July 2014), at page 33; Global Commission on the Economy and Climate, «Better Growth, Better Climate: The New Climate Economy Report» (September 2014), Figure 5 at page 26.

... Yesterday, after the full report was released, the sceptical climate change blog Climate Audit reported that the 77 per cent figure had been derived from a joint study by Sven Teske, a climate change expert employed by Greenpeace, which opposes the use of nuclear power to cut carbon emissions.

The report surveys a range of ways in which farm emissions can be lowered and its baseline figures have been read for the technical potential of each technique in 2010, with adjustments (see attachment).

To get a figure here (based on the IPCC synthesis report) I gather we need to make an assumption about future emissions long in the future, and as far as I remember the way this works is that we assume say constant emissions between now and 2100, and then a drop to zero, or rising emissions to 2100 and then a drop to zero, or emissions falling to zero tommorrow, or something along these lines.

But as the Authority's report shows (in Figure 3 of its report, see below), Australia's per capita emissions and emissions intensity at 2025 would still be much higher than those of the United States and more than twice Europe's, under their respective targets.

Of the studies compiled here, ebullition was measured in only 52 % of cases in which reservoir CH4 emissions were reported (figure 1).

Of the factors examined, CH4 emissions were best predicted by chlorophyll a concentrations (positive correlation, p < 0.001, R2 = 0.50, n = 31); CO2 emissions were best predicted by reported mean annual precipitation (positive correlation, p = 0.04, R2 = 0.11, n = 33); and N2O emissions were most strongly related to reservoir NO3 — concentrations (positive correlation, p < 0.001, R2 = 0.49, n = 18, table 3, supplemental figure S6).

CO2 emissions along the BECCS supply chain can be separated into four key components, as shown by the figure below, but the way they are reported is far from simple.

The chapter relating to global temperature and sinks in the RCEP 2000 report uses a graph to consider the effect of CO2 on the atmosphere, under several different scenarios relating to CO2 emissions policies (left figure).

Critics argued that, according to the IPCC's own analysis, the cost of action (the third report's number) outstripped the cost of inaction (the figure in the last report) to the extent that it may not be worth rolling out policies to reduce emissions.

That figure — the amount by which Canada expects to miss its fourth international emissions commitment in a row — has grown by half since Ottawa's last report to the UN only 18 months earlier.

The scientists report a 29 per cent increase in global CO2 emissions from fossil fuel between 2000 and 2008 (the latest year for which figures are available), and that in spite of the global economic downturn emissions increased by 2 per cent during 2008.

Total greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture account for around 15 % of total global emissions, from the IPCC 5th Assessment Report, Working Group 3, Chapter 11, Figure 11.4

Two new reports, yet to be published but reported on by the BBC, show that contrary to previously published figures carbon emissions in the UK have not only not fallen since the early 1990s, they have actually increased dramatically.

It also reports that emissions from the type of hydraulic fracturing being used in the nation's bountiful new shale gas reserves, like the Marcellus, are almost 9,000 times higher than it had previously calculated, a figure that begins to correspond with Robert Howarth's research at Cornell.

Note that the results are quite in line with what the UK's Hadley Center recently reported (see Hadley Center: «Catastrophic» 5 — 7 °C warming by 2100 on current emissions path, but this is a better figure than Hadley's, I think).

If you look at page 5 of that Synthesis Report, there is a figure (shown here) with nice graphs and charts showing global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions.

The NewScientist.com news service reports some recent conclusions of the Global Carbon Project: «Far from slowing down, global carbon dioxide emissions are rising faster than before Though alarming, the figures confirm expectations.