Sentences with phrase «serious about emissions»

«The only reason that China is now looking at getting serious about its emissions is because they saw that we were going to do it, too.

For example, in setting its emission goals, the European Union devised not one, but two separate targets: A 20 per cent reduction by 2020 if they continued to go it alone, and a 30 per cent reduction if countries like China and the U.S. also got serious about emissions.

If humanity gets truly serious about emissions reduction — and by serious I mean «World War II serious» in both scale and urgency — we could go to near - zero global emissions in, say, two decades and then quickly go carbon negative.

Researchers believe that global warming is already responsible for some 150,000 deaths each year around the world, and fear that the number may well double by 2030 even if we start getting serious about emissions reductions today.

If the country is serious about its emission reduction targets, it should speed up the auctioning scheme.

Not exact matches

But while that is a crucial national conversation, the heated pipeline debate sometimes means we pay a lot less attention to the kinds of things we should build in Canada if we're serious about reducing carbon emissions.

Caroline Lucas, leader of the Green party, said: «If we are serious about meeting UK and EU targets on climate emissions, we must halt airport expansion and say no to new airports - the government urgently needs to change its position on an extra runway at Heathrow and expansion at Stansted.»

«And communities asked to accept intrusive new renewable energy infrastructure such as wind farms will ask how serious the government is about reducing greenhouse gas emissions when it is still prepared to allow carbon intensive opencast mining.»

«This pioneering flight will enable those of us who are serious about reducing our carbon emissions to go on developing the fuels of the future,» Sir Richard Branson, president of Virgin Atlantic, said in a statement.

And this is really a serious thing to think about because, Africa, for example, is way down there, barely off the graph, and India too, which is now in the top ten CO2 emitters, is nowhere near the global per capita emissions.

«This is one more reason why we need to get serious about reducing carbon dioxide emission sooner rather than later,» said Langdon.

From an op - ed McCain wrote for The Financial Times March 19, 2008: «Americans and Europeans need to get serious about substantially reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the coming years or we will hand over a much - diminished world to our grandchildren.

The study shows that by century's end, absent serious reductions in global emissions, the most extreme, once - in -25-years heat waves would increase from wet - bulb temperatures of about 31 C to 34.2 C. «It brings us close to the threshold» of survivability, he says, and «anything in the 30s is very severe.»

Still, he noted, climate negotiators are not generally experts in finance, and if nations are serious about raising big bucks to protect low - lying islands from sea level rise, to develop distributed solar generation or to do other much - needed work toward both mitigating emissions and building resilience against weather disasters, the conversation needs to shift.

If the EU is serious about reducing emissions by 80 - 90 percent by 2050, then the issue of how to finance the development and implementation of innovative process technology must be brought to the table now.»

«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.

In an interview with «Fox News Sunday» host Chris Wallace, Trump said he's «very open - minded» on whether climate change is underway but has serious concerns about how President Obama's efforts to cut carbon emissions have undercut America's global competitiveness.

If we have become serious enough about climate and resources to be moving significantly toward negative emissions then the glibal world view will have needed to have already shifted.

I think that if we are serious about the need to cut greenhouse gas emissions we'd show it by drastically cutting air and highway travel beginning with a freeze on all non-essential travel by air.

That's all fine, but this also means that the climate talks, which head to Durban, South Africa, next year, are not the place to watch for the breakthroughs — social, financial or technological — that will be required if the world is serious about providing some 9 billion people mid-century with the suite of services that come with abundant energy (mobility, communication, illumination, desalinated water and more) while also greatly cutting emissions from burning fossil fuels, which still dominate the global energy mix.

I'm not sure this bodes well for the global thinking, and interaction, that'd have to take place if the world were to get serious about curbing the growth of greenhouse gas emissions.

Last week I posted a «Your Dot» contribution from Raymond T. Pierrehumbert, a University of Chicago climate scientist concerned that policy makers and the public keep in mind the primacy of carbon dioxide emissions if they are serious about limiting the chances of propelling disruptive human - driven global warming.

I often hear nuclear advocates proclaiming that «nuclear is THE solution to global warming» and that «no one can be serious about dealing with global warming if they don't support expanded use of nuclear power» but I have never heard any nuclear advocate lay out a plan showing how many nuclear power plants would have to be built in what period of time to have a significant impact on GHG emissions.

One longstanding assertion of proponents is that the bill would finally inspire China and India to act by proving that the United States is serious about stepping forward on climate; but to satisfy Americans worried about jobs pushed abroad by the domestic emissions cap, the bill includes an eventual border tariff on imports from countries that have not taken action to limit emissions.

April 8, 10:16 a.m. Update: I've added a followup piece, «Adding a Price to Blunt Energy Waste,» highlighting one expert's view of the role, in the United States, of getting serious about using pricing to blunt waste and emissions.

But I really like how he describes the sometimes uncomfortable need to fracture old alliances and cross longstanding battle lines if you're serious about finding ways to cut greenhouse gas emissions that can work in the real world.

In a distributed statement, Fatih Birol, chief economist at the energy agency and the director of the annual World Energy Outlook, said that trends in emissions meant the world was running out of time if leaders were serious about meeting targets pledged in recent sessions of climate treaty negotiations.

If Kansas is serious about CO2 emissions, I would hope they'd consider negotiating a similar deal, new capacity to replace old capacity.

(Other than then pausing to scoff at the idea that we should get serious about reducing carbon emissions.)

In the long run I don't think we will succeed in getting transportation of oil by trying to stop oil production on a site - by - site basis, we are going to have to put a high price on transportation fuels that have high carbon emissions and get much more serious about driving energy innovation they can get the transportation system off carbon.

Of course, if you're serious about stabilizing atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, achieving the American goal in 2020 is just step one in what would have to be a centurylong 12 - step (or more) program to completely decouple global energy use from processes that generate heat - trapping emissions.

As soon as we show that we're serious about reducing our own carbon emissions, as China's biggest customer of consumer products, we will be able to join forces with the EU and demand that our products be made in a way that doesn't pollute our atmosphere.

On Sunday, the new president of the island nation, Mohamed Nasheed, prodded the world to get serious about cutting emissions of heat - trapping greenhouse gases by pledging, in a short piece in England's Observer newspaper, to make the Maldives the first carbon - neutral country within a decade:

We will know if the Obama Administration is truly serious about pursuing a 28 % reduction in America's GHG emissions by 2025 only if we see President Obama issuing formal directions to the EPA to use its full regulatory authority to the maximum extent currently allowed by law in suppressing US carbon emissions.

If companies or individual building owners are serious about combating climate change and / or reducing carbon emissions then their is NO possible way to continue to use any form of combustion based, fossil fuel, systems of any kind!

If we are serious about wanting to cut CO2 emissions, we need to get rational.

You write: «Are people here serious about thinking that the CO2 rise in the past 50 years is due to oceans and not human emissions??? ``

«Are people here serious about thinking that the CO2 rise in the past 50 years is due to oceans and not human emissions???»

Further reading: • Blog post: With New Joint Announcement with Canada, US Gets Serious About Cutting Methane Emissions

Anticipating EPA's finalized Clean Power Plan rule, CRS concluded by raising serious doubts about whether RGGI is stringent enough that states could count their participation as compliance with EPA's emission reduction requirements.

The Independent Online reports that an unprecedented coalition of blue - chip US companies and environmental lobby groups will urge President Bush next week to get serious about global warming, calling for caps on carbon dioxide emissions that would cut greenhouse gases by 10 - 30 per cent over 15 years.

«Getting serious about climate change requires wrangling about the cost of emissions goals, sharing the burdens and drawing up international funding mechanisms,» they add, so it makes sense to shift from a simple but esoteric measure of global - temperature change to a range of indicators to which larger numbers of people are likelier to relate — indicators the authors argue are thus likelier to spur policies that have a real climate - curbing impact.

Yet serious questions remain, including about the company's reliance on yet - to - be-developed technologies to achieve negative emissions — read more here and here and here.

However, a clear understanding of how national emissions reductions commitments affect global climate change impacts requires an understanding of complex relationships between atmospheric ghg concentrations, likely global temperature changes in response to ghg atmospheric concentrations, rates of ghg emissions reductions over time and all of this requires making assumptions about how much CO2 from emissions will remain in the atmosphere, how sensitive the global climate change is to atmospheric ghg concentrations, and when the international community begins to get on a serious emissions reduction pathway guided by equity considerations.

In China, the government is also getting serious — revealing more details about its pilot emissions trading scheme, canvassing a flat carbon tax on certain industries, and also announcing that it would impose emission caps on certain provinces and cities, including the powerhouse economy of Guangdong, and the key commercial hubs of Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai, Chongqing and Shenzhen, in preparation for the ETS.

Federal policy action is important if we are serious about reducing emissions.

Some (otherwise serious) people have come up with the idea that current offsetting is all about resisting climate change by reducing emissions in the developing world and they reckon it would be better if instead offsetting was about helping people cope with the impacts of climate change.

In particular, I hope that impugning models as a means of rejecting serious concerns about the future consequences of anthropogenic CO2 emissions will be seen as misguided — based on the false assumption that without models, the edifice of climate prediction will collapse.

One thing that is different about the climate change issue is that most of the uncertainty is in when rather than if CO2 emissions will cause serious environmental and economic damage.

The Chinese government has already set out ambitious plans to cut the country's reliance on coal — an additional cap on CO2 suggests the country's leaders are serious about tackling their emission problem,» he said.