Sentences with phrase «stabilising co2»

Stabilising CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere at any given level, already at 393 parts per million and rising at an average 2.3 ppm per year, requires annual emission be reduced more than 80 per cent below current levels eventually.

Now explain to me a policy, a set of policies, that can achieve the 50 % aim of the emergers while stabilising CO2.

The issue of stabilising CO2 is paramount - and not being biassed about the technologies of how we get there is an essential thing to grasp.

John Houghton, chairman of the IPCC's science working group, lends his personal support to the idea of stabilising CO2 in the atmosphere at twice preindustrial values, or around 1.2 trillion tonnes, by the end of the next century.

This means that even if global emissions were cut by 60 per cent now, which is what it would take to stabilise CO2 levels, we would still hit 1.6 °C of warming.

As a side note, there would be part of me that would be slightly disappointed were we to succesfully stabilise CO2 concentrations at ~ 400ppm.

Sir Stern speaks of having to spend 1 - 2 % of global GDP in the near term in order to stabilise CO2 levels at whichever point he chose.

To put this in context, the latest assessments suggest society needs to reduce carbon emissions by 3.5 Gt CO2 / yr to stabilise CO2 levels in the atmosphere at 550 ppm.

This is echoed by movements like 350.org who tell us we need to stabilise CO2 levels at 350 parts per million.

If we were to stabilise CO2 levels at around 400 ppm, we'd expect over the long - term a further warming of 2 to 3 °C, which is significantly greater than the warming predicted by climate models.

Not exact matches

The IPCC has mapped out possible futures in which CO2 levels would be stabilised at anything from current levels to 1.6 trillion tonnes, to be reached at various times over the next 200 years.

The full effects on the global climate will come later, and even if the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere stabilises at double today's levels the International Panel on Climatic Change (IPCC) estimates that by end of the 21st century the global temperature will have increased by between 1.5 °C and 4.5 °C.

In the long run, greenhouse gas concentrations need to be stabilised at a level well below 450 ppm (parts per million; measured in CO2 - equivalent concentration).

Attempting to stabilise atmospheric CO2 as soon as possible is therefore rational and prudent, especially since mucyh of what one would do to achieve that also carries with it other tangible public benefits that a business as usual scenario would forfeit.

Now that ozone depletion is likely to stabilise, the changes in the future will also likely be dominated by the CO2 (and possibly stratospheric H2O) changes.

The specious reasoning apart the claim is also spurious because as a matter of practice the current debate is less about «restricting» atmospheric CO2 — as has been noted many times here, even an aggressive program that cuts * growth * in emissions will take some time to stabilise atmospheric CO2.

Thus, the concept of an emissions budget is very useful to get the message across that the amount of CO2 that we can still emit in total (not per year) is limited if we want to stabilise global temperature at a given level, so any delay in reducing emissions can be detrimental — especially if we cross tipping points in the climate system, e.g trigger the complete loss of the Greenland Ice Sheet.

Indeed, it's almost certain we will exceed 450ppmv before we stabilise global concentrations of atmospheric CO2 and it's virtually certain that this continuing upward trend will be reflected in serious costs to the human comnunities who encounter it.

That will make it more difficult to stabilise carbon dioxide (CO2) levels in the atmosphere and to reduce the risks of extreme forms of global warming.

20.5.4 If CO2 concentration could be stabilised at its current value of 390 ppm, then Charney estimates temperature increase already in the pipe - line as 0.8 ºC.

«Much stronger policy action is needed everywhere to curb, stabilise and reduce man - made CO2 emissions in the foreseeable future.

United Nations negotiators struggle to get a global agreement for reducing the world's CO2 emissions, which would stabilise atmospheric CO2 level and keep the temperature rise below 2 °C.

The New Policy Scenario trends are in line with stabilising the concentration of greenhouse gases at over 650 parts per million (ppm) of CO2 - equivalent (eq), resulting in a likely temperature rise of more than 3.5 °C in the long term.

In order to have a reasonable chance of achieving the goal, the concentration of greenhouse gases would probably need to be stabilised at a level no higher than 450 ppm CO2 - eq.

RCP4.5 is a «stabilisation scenario» where policies are put in place so atmospheric CO2 concentration levels off around the middle of the century, though temperatures do not stabilise before 2100.

Tim Lambert links to this article by Eric Pooley in Slate's The Big Moneye which points out that, for all the disagreement among economists regarding the details of climate change policy, there is substantial consensus on the following main points (i) the cost of action to stabilise atmospheric concentrations of CO2 and other greenhouse gases will be of the order of 1 per cent of GDP (ii) a strong mitigation policy is preferable to business as usual

Correct the physics mistakes and there is virtually zero CO2 - AGW and the aerosol effect has stabilised hence no more warming.

Discussion so far has focused on stabilising global CO2 concentrations at 450 ppm by 2050.

Doug: there is no CO2 effect because it's the working fluid of the control system that stabilises lower atmosphere temperature.

Where also is the proof that CO2 does not stabilise at precisely the same level regardless of man's activities as it is a production and use system which is and always has been self balancing in the longer term?

Edmonds, J. and M.A. Wise, 1999: Exploring a technology strategy for stabilising atmospheric CO2.

So you would start with a condition, then you add in more CO2 and let the temperature stabilise.

The huge scientific uncertainty about the cost of inaction has obscured a surprisingly strong economic consensus about the economic cost of stabilising global CO2 concentrations at the levels currently being debated by national governments, that is, in the range 450 - 550 ppm.

It is the «peaking year» for CO2 emissions in one of several categories of scenarios, where CO2 is stabilised at various concentrations or less, thereby stabilising average global temperature at an amount above the «preindustrial average».

If the sun stays quiet we should soon see the level of atmospheric CO2 stabilise and then begin a slow decline but since there is a long term lag of some 800 years shown in the historical record between temperature and CO2 amounts we may still be seeing CO2 consequences from the Mediaeval Warm Period which could skew the figures away from those expected from current solar variations.

Correct the physics mistakes and there is virtually zero CO2 - AGW; the aerosol effect has stabilised hence no more warming.

«the cost of action to stabilise atmospheric concentrations of CO2 and other greenhouse gases will be of the order of 1 per cent of GDP»

However the planet is still hot, the oceans are hot, and the atmospheric CO2 concentration has not stabilised.

at RealClimate), with a 2 % to 20 % chance of a temperature increase of 5 degrees centigrade (Meinhausen 2006, cited in the Stern Review, page 9) if global greenhouse - gas concentrations were stabilised at the equivalent of 430ppm CO2.

«On our current path, we will find it extremely difficult to rein in carbon emissions enough to stabilise the atmospheric CO2 concentration at 450 parts per million and even 550 ppm will be a challenge,» says Josep Canadell, executive director of the Global Carbon Project.

[62][63][64] The spread of land plants is thought to have reduced CO2 concentrations during the late Devonian, and plant activities as both sources and sinks of CO2 have since been important in providing stabilising feedbacks.

Note that the AOGCM experiments consider stabilisation of CO2 concentrations only, and do not take into account changes in other gases, effectively assuming that concentrations of other gases are stabilised immediately.

Although only CO2 stabilisation is explicitly considered here, it is important to note that the other gases also eventually stabilise in these illustrations.

CO2 is increasing faster, but CH4 has stabilised, and CFCs are falling faster, aerosol changes are potentially important but not very well characterised.

Even the maximum CO2 concentration to stabilise at is not an ideal metric.

This coupled with increased use of renewable energy will achieve at least a stabilising of the CO2 level to what we hope is a «safe» level.

The Golden Rules Case puts CO2 emissions on a long - term trajectory consistent with stabilising the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse - gas emissions at around 650 parts per million, a trajectory consistent with a probable temperature rise of more than 3.5 degrees Celsius (°C) in the long term, well above the widely accepted 2 °C target.