Sentences with phrase «under business as usual»

Quirke: In one of your posts, you mentioned that your best estimate for warming under a business as usual scenario — which I guess is unsuccessful mitigation and somewhere between the IPCC's RCP 6.5 and 8.5 emissions scenarios — is 3 °C by 2100.

It has become more important than ever for scientists, their allies, and public officials to speak out in no uncertain terms about the risks we face under a business as usual scenario.

«With the healthy diet that still contained some meat, global greenhouse gas emissions from the food sector only increased 7 percent by 2050, compared with an expectation of a 51 percent increase under business as usual.

IMO it's misleading, because the US administration is still insisting (a) on only discussing emissions intensity targets (for reducing, not total emissions, but only the rate of growth of US emissions), and US emissions intensity will reduce even under business as usual; and (b) the US administration is still insisting on only considering voluntary targets, despite the fact that even many major US corporations are calling for mandatory caps and despite the fact that there is no evidence that their existing voluntary targets have made any difference.

Arctic Currents Weaken or Stop With Double CO2 Levels What they found was that under a business as usual scenario, with CO2 levels doubling by 2070, the Transpolar Drift stops and other Arctic currents weaken due to, among other factors, melting of sea ice and changed wind patterns in a warmer world.

So if anthropic CO2 is causing warming how long and how many ppm under Business As Usual before fig 1 is reversed and the NH ice sheet melts?

While other nations would have to work reasonably hard to meet their commitments — under business as usual, Europe's emissions were expected to rise by around 20 % over the period, so cutting them by 8 % would require serious effort — Australia would have to do virtually nothing.

A 65 % global increase above the 2004 primary energy demand (464 EJ, 11,204 Mtoe) is anticipated by 2030 under business as usual (IEA, 2006b).

GAS — In a 2C world gas growth will be «at a lower level than expected under a business as usual scenario», the report finds.

Under business as usual: agricultural sector pretty much dead, tourism industry dead, coastal communities exposed and rampant dengue fever.

The 4 C number is possible by late this Century under business as usual fossil fuel burning and is possible long term (500 year time scales) under the continuous 490 ppm CO2e forcing now in place.

Sadly, many new studies on the rate of glacier destabilization in Antarctica and Greenland hint that such a significant jump in sea level is not only likely, but may even be significantly exceeded under business as usual or even a moderately curtailed rate of fossil fuel burning.

As much as 70 percent of the ice within the great Himalayan glaciers could melt out by 2100 under business as usual fossil fuel burning.

3) At 1.7 C per doubling, we can expect about twice as much warming as that under business as usual, as not only is CO2 itself going to more than double, but there are other greenhouse gases aside from CO2 that are increasing.

These models project a large, 8.3 °C warming by the end of the century under a business as usual scenario, further highlighting the need for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

Choice 1: How much money do we want to spend today on reducing carbon dioxide emission without having a reasonable idea of: a) how much climate will change under business as usual, b) what the impacts of those changes will be, c) the cost of those impacts, d) how much it will cost to significantly change the future, e) whether that cost will exceed the benefits of reducing climate change, f) whether we can trust the scientists charged with developing answers to these questions, who have abandoned the ethic of telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but, with all the doubts, caveats, ifs, ands and buts; and who instead seek lots of publicity by telling scary stories, making simplified dramatic statements and making little mention of their doubts, g) whether other countries will negate our efforts, h) the meaning of the word hubris, when we think we are wise enough to predict what society will need a half - century or more in the future?

However, under business as usual emissions are set to increase global average temperatures by approximately 2.5 °C.

Today we are already in the process to trigger a large scale climate change because of the quantities of CO2 equivalent emissions released and what is projected under business as usual scenarios.

However, as the Stern Review itself notes, this is unrealistic under business as usual since global greenhouse gas emissions can be expected to continue to increase on a «rapidly rising trajectory.»

Under a business as usual scenario, with rising prices, investment ramps up again.

The lower boundary of this range is with rapid reductions in human greenhouse gas emissions, the upper boundary is under business as usual.

Jack, 2.7 is very definitely worth it, compared with 5 or so under business as usual.

They assumed that «under business as usual» their emissions would increase from 781 (2013) to 1110 (2030) million tons of CO2 equivalent.

Progressively over that span, the panel's reports have raised the likelihood that people, mainly by burning billions of tons of coal and oil, have been the main force responsible for global warming since 1950 and that a lot more warming, coastal retreats and shifting weather are in the offing under business as usual.

Potentially to ever more shouting, disengagement, and a migration of debate to the edges, in a way that obscures all the well - established science pointing to huge consequences under business as usual — for everything from the diversity of life to the stability of climate.

What if we recognize that under business as usual CO2 won't stop at a doubling, but go on eventually to a quadrupling or worse?

In this case you need to demonstrate that destruction and death will be significantly more widespread under business as usual scenario compared to mitigated.

The inventory of CO32 -, the buffering agent, is about 2000 Gton C, which is about how much fossil carbon we are projected to release under business as usual by the year 2100.

The most likely outcome under business as usual is that the country will become one vast, regularly inundated flood plain, with a continually displaced population.

Personally, in economic terms and under business as usual, I believe we could see the beginnings of an economic crisis in this century which will dwarf the Great Depression both in terms of its severity and duration.

Thats under business as usual.

Then we have the commercial model and rights whether these sales fall under business as usual, subsidiary sales, or whatever.

Not exact matches

Under a «business as usual» scenario in which past trends continue, the expected temperature increase in 2100 is 4.2 degrees Celsius (7.6 degrees Fahrenheit).

«In most of the Western world, salary just isn't something people feel comfortable talking about,» writes researcher David Burkus in his 2016 book «Under New Management: How Leading Organizations are Upending Business as Usual.»

Looking at the headline figures, first quarter 2018 could be considered a business - as - usual quarter for the European fund industry, since the assets under management (+ $ 10.5 trn) hit a...

But Wells Fargo CEO Tim Sloan sought to convey an air of business as usual: «I want to repeat, we are open for business,» said Sloan, who became chief executive in 2016 after his predecessor John Stumpf resigned under pressure.

Is a cultural change under way, or was the academy cleaning things up for the media and then going back to business as usual?

In other news, our team seems to be rounding nicely into form, with a productive off - season and several new additions already settling in, there seems to be a renewed sense of confidence in the air... our well - oiled machine has conducted business again early this year, so we can just sit back, kick our feet up and watch all those other suckers scramble to make panic moves in the 11th hour... of course, we need to tie up a few loose ends but our team of savvy negotiators, under the tutelage of our faithful leader, will perform their usual magic with ample time to spare... I have to laugh when I look around the soccer world and see all those teams look upon us with envy and scorn as they struggle to mimic our seemingly infallible business model... thank goodness the powers that be had the foresight and fortitude to resist the temptations of the modern football era... instead of listening to all the experts and simply taking the easy way out by making the necessary improvements on the field and in the front office, we chose the path never traveled... we are truly pioneers in our field... sometimes you just have to have faith in the people that have always conducted themselves in a respectful and honest fashion... most fans aren't so fortunate, they will never know what it's like to follow a team that treats everyone in and around the club as if they were an extended member of the family... all for one I say... so when you wake up this morning, please try not to gloat when you see rival fans pacing back and forth waiting for their respective teams to pull the usual panic buys, just say nothing and be thankful that it isn't you... like I've always said, this is why you stay the course... this is when the real benefits of having someone in charge for over 2 decades really pays off... have a great day fellow Gunners

Time for some brutal honesty... this team, as it stands, is in no better position to compete next season than they were 12 months ago, minus the fact that some fans have been easily snowed by the acquisition of Lacazette, the free transfer LB and the release of Sanogo... if you look at the facts carefully you will see a team that still has far more questions than answers... to better show what I mean by this statement I will briefly discuss the current state of affairs on a position - by - position basis... in goal we have 4 potential candidates, but in reality we have only 1 option with any real future and somehow he's the only one we have actively tried to get rid of for years because he and his father were a little too involved on social media and he got caught smoking (funny how people still defend Wiltshire under the same and far worse circumstances)... you would think we would want to keep any goaltender that Juventus had interest in, as they seem to have a pretty good history when it comes to that position... as far as the defenders on our current roster there are only a few individuals whom have the skill and / or youth worthy of our time and / or investment, as such we should get rid of anyone who doesn't meet those simple requirements, which means we should get rid of DeBouchy, Gibbs, Gabriel, Mertz and loan out Chambers to see if last seasons foray with Middlesborough was an anomaly or a prediction of things to come... some fans have lamented wildly about the return of Mertz to the starting lineup due to his FA Cup performance but these sort of pie in the sky meanderings are indicative of what's wrong with this club and it's wishy - washy fan - base... in addition to these moves the club should aggressively pursue the acquisition of dominant and mobile CB to stabilize an all too fragile defensive group that has self - destructed on numerous occasions over the past 5 seasons... moving forward and building on our need to re-establish our once dominant presence throughout the middle of the park we need to target a CDM then do whatever it takes to get that player into the fold without any of the usual nickel and diming we have become famous for (this kind of ruthless haggling has cost us numerous special players and certainly can't help make the player in question feel good about the way their future potential employer feels about them)... in order for us to become dominant again we need to be strong up the middle again from Goalkeeper to CB to DM to ACM to striker, like we did in our most glorious years before and during Wenger's reign... with this in mind, if we want Ozil to be that dominant attacking midfielder we can't keep leaving him exposed to constant ridicule about his lack of defensive prowess and provide him with the proper players in the final third... he was never a good defensive player in Real or with the German National squad and they certainly didn't suffer as a result of his presence on the pitch... as for the rest of the midfield the blame falls squarely in the hands of Wenger and Gazidis, the fact that Ramsey, Ox, Sanchez and even Ozil were allowed to regularly start when none of the aforementioned had more than a year left under contract is criminal for a club of this size and financial might... the fact that we could find money for Walcott and Xhaka, who weren't even guaranteed starters, means that our whole business model needs a complete overhaul... for me it's time to get rid of some serious deadweight, even if it means selling them below what you believe their market value is just to simply right this ship and change the stagnant culture that currently exists... this means saying goodbye to Wiltshire, Elneny, Carzola, Walcott and Ramsey... everyone, minus Elneny, have spent just as much time on the training table as on the field of play, which would be manageable if they weren't so inconsistent from a performance standpoint (excluding Carzola, who is like the recent version of Rosicky — too bad, both will be deeply missed)... in their places we need to bring in some proven performers with no history of injuries... up front, although I do like the possibilities that a player like Lacazette presents, the fact that we had to wait so many years to acquire some true quality at the striker position falls once again squarely at the feet of Wenger... this issue highlights the ultimate scam being perpetrated by this club since the arrival of Kroenke: pretend your a small market club when it comes to making purchases but milk your fans like a big market club when it comes to ticket prices and merchandising... I believe the reason why Wenger hasn't pursued someone of Henry's quality, minus a fairly inexpensive RVP, was that he knew that they would demand players of a similar ilk to be brought on board and that wasn't possible when the business model was that of a «selling» club... does it really make sense that we could only make a cheeky bid for Suarez, or that we couldn't get Higuain over the line when he was being offered up for half the price he eventually went to Juve for, or that we've only paid any interest to strikers who were clearly not going to press their current teams to let them go to Arsenal like Benzema or Cavani... just part of the facade that finally came crashing down when Sanchez finally called their bluff... the fact remains that no one wants to win more than Sanchez, including Wenger, and although I don't agree with everything that he has done off the field, I would much rather have Alexis front and center than a manager who has clearly bought into the Kroenke model in large part due to the fact that his enormous ego suggests that only he could accomplish great things without breaking the bank... unfortunately that isn't possible anymore as the game has changed quite dramatically in the last 15 years, which has left a largely complacent and complicit Wenger on the outside looking in... so don't blame those players who demanded more and were left wanting... don't blame those fans who have tried desperately to raise awareness for several years when cracks began to appear... place the blame at the feet of those who were well aware all along of the potential pitfalls of just such a plan but continued to follow it even when it was no longer a financial necessity, like it ever really was...

«Yet somehow in the Senate the Republicans now have an entire leadership in the Senate that's under indictment and they go about business as usual,» Gianaris said.

I am proud to stand with the people of eastern Connecticut who've had enough of business as usual under the Gold Dome in Hartford and who want a different kind of leader to fight for a better future for our state.»

«Something is pardonable when one government is in power but when another is in power it's unpardonable, things that the media would have been so loud about under my administration, it happens everyday and it's like it's business as usual.

Under Governor Yahaya Bello, it will never be business as usual,» he said.

There's a 50 percent chance that temperatures will rise 4 degrees Celsius under a business - as - usual scenario

Under a «business - as - usual» emissions scenario, they add, there's an 80 % likelihood that at least one decades - long megadrought will hit the regions between 2050 and 2100.

«When we modeled future shoreline change with the increased rates of sea level rise (SLR) projected under the IPCC's «business as usual» scenario, we found that increased SLR causes an average 16 - 20 feet of additional shoreline retreat by 2050, and an average of nearly 60 feet of additional retreat by 2100,» said Tiffany Anderson, lead author and post-doctoral researcher at the UH Mānoa School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology.

40 %: expected loss by 2050 of the region's original biodiversity under a «business as usual» scenario for climate change (with loss of 35 - 36 % expected under the three «pathways to sustainability»)

According to the report, under a «business as usual» scenario, climate change will be the fastest growing driver negatively impacting biodiversity by 2050 in the Americas, becoming comparable to the pressures imposed by land use change.

I then instructed the model to project forward under the assumption of business - as - usual greenhouse gas emissions.

The study examined not just the «business as usual» case but also the effects under a moderate mitigation scenario, which showed that these dramatic, deadly effects can still be averted.