Not exact matches
All other major players who have proposed targets have talked about
total emissions, not intensity, which indexes
emissions relative to economic growth.
Currently, agriculture accounts for approximately 9 % of
total US greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions; the US dairy industry has committed to a 25 % reduction of GHG by 2020
relative to 2009.
Surely the
relative amounts of aerosols and greenhouse gas
emissions is of the utmost importance when evaluating the
total forcing.
I certainly agree with you that all agricultural practices that release fossil carbon will have to be revised, but the disproportionate contribution of livestock raising to
total GHG
emissions,
relative to non-livestock agriculture, speaks for itself.
It doesn't really matter if
relative current values are low
relative to
total global
emissions if they are rising exponentially, especially if they are doubling in fewer than ten or so years.
It peaks after 2020, sees
emissions halving (
relative to 1990 levels) by mid-century, and consumes, during the 2010 - 2050 period, a
total of 1170 gigatonnes CO2 — nearly three times the
emissions that are permissible under the 350 pathway.
Given that decline, environmentalists lobbied the administration for cuts
relative to a more recent baselines year, when
emissions were lower than in 2005, because that would represent a greater
total reduction.
«The CO2 numbers [in the oil sands] sound frightening when only the production and refining are taken into account... Yet once the oil is burned, a variety of sources say the
total lifecycle impact of oil sands
relative to the average crude used in the U.S. is much smaller, including the Council on Foreign Relations (17 percent higher
emissions) and Cambridge Energy Research Associates (5 - 15 percent).»
The Partnership's average annual SF6
emission rate, the ratio of SF6
emissions relative to
total SF6 nameplate capacity (i.e., the
total quantity of SF6 contained in electrical equipment), is a benchmark metric by which achievements of the Partnership are tracked.
But monthly coal consumption started growing again in the second half of 2016 (
relative to the second half of 2015), and
total annual consumption ended at just 1.3 % down by the end of December, leading to our estimated increase in
emissions of 0.5 %.
For example, a recent study by the International Renewable Energy Agency found that pursuing both efficiency and renewables will increase the share of load supplied by renewables (because
total loads are reduced) and reduce system costs and carbon
emissions relative to both business - as - usual and renewable - only scenarios.