Sentences with phrase «than a greenhouse gas problem»

Not exact matches

Granted, there are more benefits to reducing particulate and greenhouse gas emissions than just climate change, i.e. PM 2.5 which can be stuck in the human lung and cause cancer / respiratory issues, SO2 which contributes to acid rain (we've already eliminated the majority of this problem), as well as soot (nobody wants the surrounding area covered in ash).

Will Steffen of the Swedish Academy of Sciences says the message for policy makers is clear: «We need to get on top of the greenhouse gas emissions problem sooner rather than later.»

This is the same problem as for volcanoes except that it takes thousands of years for an ice age to develop and human prevention of this happening with greenhouse gasses will be very uncertain to predict for more than one hundred years so an odds calculation would, necessarily, require exact specification of conditions.

How do his views comport with the problem, especially the urgency to stop increasing greenhouse gas emissions by no later than 2015 — 2020 and begin a steep annual decline afterward?

The climate downside to this trend is methane «slip» — emissions of unburned methane, a far more potent greenhouse gas than CO2 (per pound), a problem that marine engine manufacturers are beginning to tackle.

If CO2 is not a greenhouse gas; than what's the problem?

Using an airplane to detect greenhouse gas emissions from freshly drilled shale gas wells in Pennsylvania's Marcellus basin, Cornell and Purdue scientists have found that leaked methane is a tougher problem — between a hundred - and a thousandfold — than previously thought, according to a study published April 14 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

They found that greenhouse gas reductions in some locations would reduce air - quality problems and improve residents» health far more than in others.

Of the fossil fuels, natural gas emits less carbon dioxide than oil (though the gas itself, methane, is a powerful greenhouse gas and there are serious leakage problems with its use).

They include: (1) a 35 year US delay on climate action has made the problem extraordinarily challenging to solve, (2) US greenhouse gas (ghg) emissions are more than any country responsible for rise in atmospheric concentrations to present dangerous levels, (3) US ghg emissions not only threaten the US with climate disruption but endanger many of the poorest people around the world, (4) the Obama administration's pledge to reduce ghg emissions is far short of the US fair share of safe global emissions.

Part of our research does suggest that the accumulative impact of greenhouse gas output on future world temperatures may be lower than the IPCC estimates — which is good news if true — but the point is to tackle the problem in a variety of different ways.»

Let's first tackle the most explicit problem: emissions of methane, which is the primary component of natural gas and is a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide.

The problems begin when human activities distort and accelerate the natural process by creating more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere than are necessary to warm the planet to an ideal temperature.

If we are going to make a dent in greenhouse gas emissions then policies should be targeting the real problem areas rather than skirting around the edges.

Clearly, anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are a serious problem, but these are better estimated directly [37] than by calculating a «number of planets» needed to offset emissions.

And as Judith Curry points out about the current climate, there are many problems with the claim that «more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was caused by the anthropogenic increase in greenhouse gas concentrations and other anthropogenic forcings together» — far from speaking for itself, the statement needs unpacking and its premises interrogating.

Greenhouse Gas Intensity Has Improved, But It Will Remain a Big Problem Which leaves us with greenhouse gas intensity of tar sands production, which even in the most conservative prior estimates is several times higher than for conventional oil pGreenhouse Gas Intensity Has Improved, But It Will Remain a Big Problem Which leaves us with greenhouse gas intensity of tar sands production, which even in the most conservative prior estimates is several times higher than for conventional oil productiGas Intensity Has Improved, But It Will Remain a Big Problem Which leaves us with greenhouse gas intensity of tar sands production, which even in the most conservative prior estimates is several times higher than for conventional oil pgreenhouse gas intensity of tar sands production, which even in the most conservative prior estimates is several times higher than for conventional oil productigas intensity of tar sands production, which even in the most conservative prior estimates is several times higher than for conventional oil production.

Deforestation Bigger Greenhouse Gas Problem Than Transportation For perspective: Remember that cattle ranches are now a leading cause of Amazon deforestation — with pastures now occupying former forest the size of Iceland.

And that's a big problem because they are very potent greenhouse gases: roughly 6,500 times more so than carbon dioxide.

A lot of folks, including myself, think that the recent melting of Arctic sea ice and rising Arctic temperatures is more attributable to Asian black carbon pollution than to CO2 and greenhouse gas warming (particularly since similar warming and sea ice melting is not seen in the Antarctic, where there is not a problem with soot pollution).

The problem is that methane is a powerful greenhouse gas - much more so than CO2 - and the more natural gas you produce and distribute, the more of it will leak in the atmosphere.