Sentences with phrase «therefore higher emissions»

The simulations reveal AOA is more effective under lower emissions, therefore the higher the emissions the more AOA is required to achieve the same reduction in global warming and ocean acidification.

Increased cooling means increased consumption of electrical power and therefore higher emissions of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, driving global warming even faster.

Not exact matches

With much of the world's accessible, light crude of this sort now exhausted, more and more of the oil we consume comes from heavy grades (the so - called bitumen derived from oilsands being among the heaviest) that require more refining and therefore entail higher emissions and other undesirable byproducts.

Xu said that higher trading activities are expected to emerge in coming weeks because regulated emitters are approaching their deadline of reporting annual emissions and therefore have stronger incentives to trade carbon allowances.

«The health hazards associated with high contaminant concentrations can therefore be avoided while at the same time reducing energy consumption in buildings by about fifty percent, which is highly significant in terms of existing carbon emission targets,» says Schütze.

So, the biggest difference between AGN types is that Type Is are surrounded by more dust and gas, therefore rejecting more matter and fueling far higher energy emissions than Type IIs.

However, the high luminosity of the primary star, intense Ca II H and K emission (Smith and Dominy, 1979), and radial velocity variations somewhat larger than can be accounted for by the expected uncertainties suggested that Delta Eridani might be an RS CVn - type binary and therefore a photometric variable like most members of that class.

The new turbo engine offers lean burn caracteristics and therefore a higher NOx emission.

Thanks to its powerful and high - torque hybrid module, in the city the F 800 Style can run exclusively on electricity and therefore without generating any local emissions.

Emissions have therefore also decreased assisting the petrol variants listed to achieve the highest Green Vehicle Guide noxious emissions score possible being 8.5 points out of 10 (excludes hybrid electric vEmissions have therefore also decreased assisting the petrol variants listed to achieve the highest Green Vehicle Guide noxious emissions score possible being 8.5 points out of 10 (excludes hybrid electric vemissions score possible being 8.5 points out of 10 (excludes hybrid electric vehicles).

Thanks to higher thermodynamic efficiency, this technology allows better use of the fuel and, therefore, lower fuel consumption and lower exhaust gas emissions.

Therefore, if you keep increasing forcing, yes the «Planck emissions» will also keep increasing but always ending in higher overall temperatures.

So climate modelling may not be perfect in the timing, but the end result would still be the same level of temperatures around 2100, so therefore we don't have any room to think emissions can continue at present levels, and the amount of carbon left to burn would not be as high as 800 gigatons.

What I meant was that Planck radiation increases with body or amb ient temperature, but higher temperature, per the Boltzmann distribution, makes it more probable that rotation, vibration, and / or electronic levels will be excited, and therefore less likely to emit relaxation energy, though as you point out this may not be exactly what happens physically — emission radiation is more flat than anything with increasing temperatures.

«An even smaller number of scenarios meet the 1.5 C target with at least a 50 per cent chance and have least - cost emissions pathways beginning in 2020 — and therefore, have higher emissions up to 2020.»

While HFCs are not Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS) and therefore an acceptable substitute for chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) under the Montreal Protocol, they have high global warming potentials (GWPs) and contribute to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

Therefore, in regions with fewer controls, primary particulate matter emission factors are higher, but SO2 emissions are also higher....

Therefore, unless human overpopulation and even immigration (from poor to rich countries where per capita carbon emissions are higher) is addressed, it will be difficult to make a dent in the predicted rate of global temperature increase.

Given this pattern and the high fraction of nutrient enriched, productive reservoirs in our GHG database (of systems where trophic status data were available, 38 % and 24 % were eutrophic and mesotrophic respectively), it is likely that a large fraction of reservoirs are highly productive and therefore support high CH4 emission rates.

There is, in other words, an intolerably high risk that emission reductions alone will fail to limit warming to 1.5 ˚C or «well below» 2 ˚C and will therefore fail to avert disaster.»

Higher atmospheric CO2 concentrations, and associated climate impacts of present emissions, will, therefore, persist for a very long time into the future.

The analyses show that the costs of the mitigation policies would exceed the hypothesised benefits this century, and this is using assumptions and inputs parameters that favour high climate damages for GHG emissions and therefore high benefits from mitigation.

While nuclear energy is regarded as the lesser of the two evils when compared at an emission level to the burning of fossil - fuels, it may trump on the containment of the heat process, which burns in a contained nuclear reactor through an in - ward heat - chemical reaction called fission, but nuclear energy production is a chain from uranium mining to the toxic waste disposal and therefore as an entire process is an equally high risk environmental option.

Even a much higher carbon price of 300 Euros per tonne would only result in a moderate increase in ticket prices, and therefore only a moderate reduction in demand and emissions growth.

They vary between 756 and 810 Tg / Cy and are therefore about 5.5 times higher than the anthropogenic VOC emissions.

Therefore it's my opinion that the not - so - extreme decline from April to July 2010, coupled with the higher - than - usual April value, coupled with the changes (both trend and fluctuation) in both the size of and the timing of the annual cycle, are such that there's insufficient evidence to conclude that the Eyjafjallajökull eruption caused a noticeable change in atmospheric CO2, whether by emissions from the eruption, the lack of emissions from air traffic, or iron fertilization of the oceans.

Trenberth still relates the effect from CO2 based on 100ppmv causing an increase of 0.6 °C but does not subtract the 0.5 °C of natural warming as recovery from the LIA that has nothing to do with CO2 emissions therefore producing an effect six times too high for the effect from increased CO2 Trenberth is not aware that CO2 is not increaseing at an accelerated rate as predicted by Hansen but at a near linear rate averaging 2.037 ppmv / year so by 2100 the concentration will not be as predicted by the IPCC as per scenario A1 but merely reach a level of 573.11 ppmv by 2100, This is only in the case that CO2 increase is maintained but this may not happen as the rate appears to be slowing down with the average rate for the past 5 years being lower than the rate for the past ten years.

Likewise, the emission of CO2 within its absorption bands is just as effective as its interception, therefore this energy is partitioned throughout the atmosphere and radiated back to earth in its majority (because the escape of energy through the optically thick higher levels of the atmosphere reduces the flux, whereas the earth is still optically close by and a ready recipient of IR radiation.

But the building sector, the designers, also have huge influence on the industrial sector, on the types of materials that they manufacture and whether those materials have high embodied energy or low embodied energy and, therefore, would cut your greenhouse gas emissions.