Sentences with phrase «total emissions need»

«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.

Not exact matches

Coal - burning alone belched out 15 billion tons of CO2 worldwide in 2012, 43 % of total CO2 emissions; thousands of CCS projects would be needed by 2050 to reach targets to put a serious dent in emissions.

-- If however, the (almost inconceivable) abrupt global total cessation of (fossil) C emissions were to occur, then we could expect warming to stop without further need for mitigation.

It shows the number of articles along the y - axis, the total number of citations along the x-axis, color codes whether an individual is one of the «concerned signers» who signed any of 20 declarations affirming the mainstream view of human impact on climate and the need to limit greenhouse emissions, was one of the 619 contributing authors to IPCC AR4 wg1 (2007), «non-signer» who is one of the non-AR4-wg1 authors on climate who signed neither statement a statement of concern nor skepticism, or one of the 495 individuals who signed any of 16 declaration skeptical of mainstream climate science or of the need for GHG cuts.

The total amount of carbon that would need to be diverted from being emitted into the atmosphere is stunning: Current global atmospheric CO2 emissions total roughly 30 gigatons, or 30 billion metric tons per year.

For a powerful, visual illustration of this phenomenon, take a look at TrillionthTonne's emissions calculator — as our total emissions tick rapidly up, the percent at which we need to slash our emissions each year rises at a disconcerting pace.

Finally, the Saturday draft also noted the need to reduce total global emissions by 50 % by the year 2050.

The amount of carbon that would need to be removed from the atmosphere and stabilized in soils, in addition to the amount required to compensate for ongoing emissions, to attain pre-industrial levels is equivalent to approximately one - half of the total carbon in all of Earth's vegetation.

The ABC again reported on the wind farm on 28th July 2008 saying that it had been opened, its total cost was Au $ 5m ($ 2m of which came from the Commonwealth Government), and that it was expected to «meet a third of Kalbarri's power needs and offset about 5 000 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions a year.»

Save the average American family nearly $ 85 on their annual energy bill in 2030, reducing enough energy to power 30 million homes, and save consumers a total of $ 155 billion from 2020 - 2030; Give a head start to wind and solar deployment and prioritize the deployment of energy efficiency improvements in low - income communities that need it most early in the program through a Clean Energy Incentive Program; and Continue American leadership on climate change by keeping us on track to meet the economy - wide emissions targets we have set, including the goal of reducing emissions to 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and to 26 - 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025.»

Through both carbon sequestration and avoided emissions (because water being retained by green infrastructure isn't needing energy intensive pumping and treatment), the plan is estimated to reduce CO2 by a total of 73,000 tons per year.

Under the City's plan to reduce citywide GHG emissions 30 % by the year 2030, increasing the efficiency of its buildings is projected to reduce emissions by 12.7 million metric tons — or roughly two - thirds of the total reduction needed.

Table S4 lists all plotted cities by name and provides the critical cumulative emissions totals needed for commitment and the corresponding commitment years under all four RCP scenarios.

Coal based power plants produce 70 percent of our electricity needs and 40 percent of our total carbon dioxide emissions.

They will demand the relevant input data needed from scientists and other disciplines: e.g. ECS, projected emissions rates, total available fossil fuels, damage function, participation rate, discount rate.

If action is delayed, total investment costs will rise, the chances of stranded assets will increase and costly negative emission technologies will be needed to limit planetary warming.»

To hit our 2020 target, we need to cut emissions by 170 million tonnes: approximately equivalent to the total greenhouse gas output of Alberta.

Anyway, for policy, this is a number that is in the right ballpark, and exactly the kind of information that is needed: degrees per emission total.

Do the fit yourself, all you need are the total levels of atmospheric carbon (about 750 Gt in 2006) and the human emissions since 1750 and fit the line shape of Keelings curves using as many boxes as you want.

You state with utmost certainty that half of mans CO2 emissions are going into the ocean in order to establish this fact you would need to know how much CO2 is produced by undersea volcanos and vents can you tell me to the nearest gigaton (very generous here) what that total is?

To have a two thirds chance of staying below two degrees, total emissions from the beginning of the industrial revolution to the time we stop burning carbon would need to stay below 3,670 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide, one paper in Nature Geoscience notes.

Under these facts, it is simply inconceivable that those emitting high levels of greenhouse gases compared to others are not exceeding their fair share of safe global emissions given the enormity of reductions that are needed globally to return total global emissions to levels that are not already causing harm.

This is so because of the huge differences in per capita emissions between developed and developing countries and the need to reduce total global emissions by 60 to 80 % from global total emissions to prevent dangerous climate change.

Although some developing nations can make a presentable argument that they could increase greenhouse gas emissions without exceeding their fair share of global emissions, the developed nations, including the United States can not make this argument because it is known that existing total global emissions levels need to be significantly reduced and the developed nations are very high emitting nations compared to most nations in the world.

The first is the need to set any target in light of a total global ghg emissions limitation or budget entailed by the need to limit ghg emissions to levels that will not cause dangerous climate change.

On what basis may the United States argue that it need not reduce US ghg emissions to its fair share of safe global missions because China or some other developing country has not yet adopted strong climate change policies, given that any US ghg emissions in excess of the US fair share of safe total omissions is harming hundreds of thousands of people around the world and the ecological systems on which life depends.

In order to answer this question, the investor will need to know the «amount of total emissions, by type of greenhouse gas, by source, per unit of revenue, emissions trading activity, amount of emissions reductions.»

5 % of total funds must be used to create a clean national transportation low emissions plan, which would establish an electric vehicle strategic deployment goal for 2020 and project the near - and long - term infrastructure and standardization needs for EVs, electricity providers, vehicle manufacturers, and electricity purchasers.

«There is this total political hang - up on having the discussions we need to have on greenhouse gas emissions,» Udall said.

Do we compensate electricity suppliers if, rather than reducing the total emissions target, we increase the number of indusries that need to obtain permits?

For a 90 percent chance, we would need to cut total emissions before the end of the decade.

The electricity sector's share of greenhouse gas emissions in Ontario in 2012 was only about 9 percent of total emissions, compared to the transportation sector with 34 percent and the industrial sector with 30 percent (Ontario, Auditor General 2015), meaning that further environmental gains in the electricity sector are inherently limited.4 In any event, this impact needs to be compared to other alternatives, such as further enhancing transmission connections and expanding power purchase agreements with neighbouring jurisdictions, in particular Quebec and Manitoba, which have substantial clean hydroelectric resources.

If we ever change or collective mind and want to reduce emission totals beyond the pre-determined target range to be reached periodically, how much does the government need to pay the polluters?

The IPCC Special Report on Aviation demonstrates that the total impact of a sector is not represented by (nor scalable to) the direct emissions of primary greenhouse gases alone, but needs to consider a wide range of atmospheric changes.

Likewise, unless clean energy supplies come online in large measures, slowing demand growth will not reduce total emissions to needed levels.

Determined to protect the ozone layer by taking precautionary measures to control equitably total global emissions of substances that deplete it, with the ultimate objective of their elimination on the basis of developments in scientific knowledge, taking into account technical and economic considerations and bearing in mind the developmental needs of developing countries,

And then you need to know ALL of them for EVERY source of Energy generation to get the TOTAL CO2 emissions related to energy generation AND usage.

It shows the number of articles along the y - axis, the total number of citations along the x-axis, color codes whether an individual is one of the «concerned signers» who signed any of 20 declarations affirming the mainstream view of human impact on climate and the need to limit greenhouse emissions, was one of the 619 contributing authors to IPCC AR4 wg1 (2007), «non-signer» who is one of the non-AR4-wg1 authors on climate who signed neither statement a statement of concern nor skepticism, or one of the 495 individuals who signed any of 16 declaration skeptical of mainstream climate science or of the need for GHG cuts.

You shouldn't treat CO2 as a «separate variable» in the numerator as then you would from the start already know what the total CO2 emissions would be, and wouldn't need to calculate anything.

An adequate global climate change solution will need to limit total global ghg emissions to levels which will prevent atmospheric concentrations of ghgs from accumulating to dangerous levels and to do this any solution will also need to allocate total global emissions levels among all nations.

Since total global ghg emissions in 2010 already stood at 50.1 GtCO2e, and are increasing every year, reaching a 44 GtCO2e target by 2020 is extraordinarily daunting and much greater ambition is needed from the global community than can be seen in existing national ghg emissions reduction commitments.

UNEP pointed out in its report that the 44 GtCO2e target by 2020 is necessary to have any hope of achieving even greater cuts needed after 2020 when total emissions must be limited to sharply declining total emissions limitations.

Absolute caps in total carbon emissions, 90 % less than current emission levels, need to be accepted in every sector of the economy.

The September, 2013, IPCC issued a report which contained a budget on total carbon emissions that the world needs to stay within to give a 66 % chance of preventing more than the 2 ° C warming that attracted world attention despite the fact that it has been widely criticized as being overly optimistic.

One of the promises of services such as Lyft and Uber (which are called ridesharing platforms but are more like dispatchers for freelance taxis) is that they will reduce the need for car ownership, and that they will bring down the total number of cars driving in cities, thereby also decreasing vehicular emissions.

All of this would take tremendous energy and materials — ironically frontloading carbon emissions just when they most need to be reduced — and expand humanity's total ecological impact significantly in the short term.

However, options now being discussed in Congress can not by themselves achieve the significant reductions in the transportation sector needed to meet the Obama administration's targets for total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 2020.

Even in 2020, we could already need to dispose carbon from natural gas alone equal to half today's emission from all fuel and later methane would cause about 75 % of total CO2 emissions.

We don't need more tax revenue in order to cut CO2 emissions, we need to shift more of the total tax burden onto dirty energy, and to do so without harming low - and middle - income families.

To both achieve emissions reduction goals and fully displace nuclear power, renewable energy would need to scale up from 17 % of the country's power supply today to a full 57 % of total electricity generation in just nine years» time.