Sentences with phrase «warming emissions compared»

Biofuels made from low carbon biomass, including perennial grasses and farm waste, can produce up to 90 percent fewer global warming emissions compared to gasoline.

This type of biodiesel produces far less toxic and global warming emissions compared to conventional diesel fuel, and is sourced, produced, and sold locally.

For the first time ever, all eight major automakers reduced their average global warming emissions compared to their respective 1998 fleet average, the model year examined in our first report.

Not exact matches

It obliges the UK to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by at least 80 % by 2050 compared to 1990 levels and to adapt to the risks associated with a warming planet.

To hold global warming in check requires reducing current emission levels by as much as 70 percent by 2050, compared with 2010 levels, and nearly eliminating such pollution by 2100.

At least two studies published since 2010 — one report from the United Nations Environment Programme in 2011 and a follow - up published in Science last year — suggested that significantly reducing the emissions of soot and methane could trim human - caused warming by at least 0.5 °C (0.9 ° F) by 2050, compared with an increase of about 1 °C if those emissions continued unabated.

Countries in the Paris climate agreement set a target of keeping warming below 2 degrees Celsius by curbing carbon emissions compared to their preindustrial levels.

Kessler adds, «Our results agree with this conclusion, showing that ancient methane emissions to the atmosphere in an area that is experiencing some of the greatest warming today, is actually quite small, especially when compared to more direct emissions from human activities.»

(C) potential metrics and approaches for quantifying the climatic effects of black carbon emissions, including its radiative forcing and warming effects, that may be used to compare the climate benefits of different mitigation strategies, including an assessment of the uncertainty in such metrics and approaches; and

«However, there is an additional difficulty when searching for warm dust in the immediate stellar environment: it generally contributes very little emission compared to the star, and that is when nulling interferometry comes into play.»

The ambitious goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees compared to pre-industrial levels may be compromised merely due to the warming caused by the reduction of fine emission particles.

Pierrehumbert said Howarth uses the figure for methane's 20 - year global warming potential — 86 times that of carbon dioxide — without seriously discussing the magnitude of warming caused by those methane emissions compared to warming prevented by the reduction in carbon dioxide emissions.

Here we show the climate impacts from removing present - day anthropogenic aerosol emissions and compare them to the impacts from moderate GHG - dominated global warming.

And while methane from Siberian lakes is a relatively modest contributor to climate change compared to human greenhouse emissions by industry and automobiles, it helps intensify a positive feedback mechanism for global warming.

The UCS report, State of Charge: Electric Vehicles» Global Warming Emissions and Fuel - Cost Savings Across the United States, compares the global warming emissions from EVs with those from gasoline - powered vehicles and findWarming Emissions and Fuel - Cost Savings Across the United States, compares the global warming emissions from EVs with those from gasoline - powered vehicles and fiEmissions and Fuel - Cost Savings Across the United States, compares the global warming emissions from EVs with those from gasoline - powered vehicles and findwarming emissions from EVs with those from gasoline - powered vehicles and fiemissions from EVs with those from gasoline - powered vehicles and finds that:

The report evaluates regional electricity grids across the United States based on the global warming emissions produced from electricity generation, and then compares the emissions generated by charging an EV with those produced by gasoline - powered vehicles.

Detailed studies at the State Hydrology Institute in St. Petersburg allow one to assume that biogenic methane emission in the Russian permafrost zone can not increase by more than 20 %, or at the most 30 %, compared to the current level, which would cause global warming by 0.01 degrees Celsius by 2050.

Once implemented, this phase - down could prevent emissions of 80 GtCO2e by 2050, reducing global warming by up to 0.5 ºC by the end of the century compared to business as usual.

They compared estimated emissions for shale gas, conventional gas, coal (surface - mined and deep - mined) and diesel oil, taking into account direct emissions of CO2 during combustion, indirect emissions of CO2 necessary to develop and use the energy source and methane emissions, which were converted to equivalent value of CO2 for global warming potential.

Given that those changes are insignificant compared to everyone's daily experience it is clear that no environmental impacts caused by global warming could possibly be affected with this emission reduction.

Figure 5 compares the IPCC SAR global surface warming projection for the most accurate emissions scenario (IS92a) to the observed surface warming from 1990 to 2012.

Figure 3 accounts for the lower observed GHG emissions than in the IPCC BAU projection, and compares its «Best» adjusted projection with the observed global surface warming since 1990.

In 2006, the European Union (EU), which consists of 27 members, committed to reducing its global warming emissions by at least 20 percent of 1990 levels by 2020, to consuming 20 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2020, and to reducing its primary energy use by 20 percent from projected levels through increased energy efficiency.1 The EU has also committed to spending $ 375 billion a year to cut greenhouse gas emissions by at least 80 percent by 2050 compared to 1990 levels.2 The EU is meeting these goals through binding national commitments which vary depending on the unique situation of a given country but which average out to the overall targets.

In warmer years such as 1998, this outgassing also increases, and that correlation is seen in the data, so you have to allow for that when comparing the increase to emissions.

A global phase - down could avoid 1.1 — 1.7 billion metric tons CO2 equivalent (CO2 equivalent is a measure used to compare impacts of greenhouse gases based on their global warming potential in relation to CO2) of GHG emissions per year by 2030, with cumulative emission reductions of nearly 100 billion metric tons CO2 equivalent by 2050.

Surely, it does not all hang on the fact that Europle cleaned up its aerosol emissions and therefore anthropogenic warming very likely slightly or moderately outedges natural warming compared with 200 years ago, and if Europe had not cleaned up its act a little and temperatures were 0.2 C lower today, global warming would be a non issue.

The «social cost of carbon» was developed in large part to compare long - term costs from coastal flooding and other impacts of emissions of climate - warming carbon dioxide with upfront costs to the economy from curbing the burning of fossil fuels, the main source of such emissions.

Since the ESA forbids the Federal Government from funding any activities which might harm a listed species, why not sue to prevent the ridiculous Federal subsidies on Ethanol, on the grounds that the production, distribution, and use of ethanol have a net negative impact on carbon dioxide emissions when compared with petroleum products, thus accelerating global warming and further endangering the polar bears.

Posted by Olive Heffernan on behalf of Paty Romero Lankao It does make sense to compare the per capita CO2 emissions of Mexico City and Los Angeles (see figure below) to illuminate the debate on shared but differentiated responsibilities on greenhouse gases emissions and show that just as urban centers register different levels and paths of economic development, cities do not contribute at the same level to global warming.

It does make sense to compare the per capita CO2 emissions of Mexico City and Los Angeles (see figure below) to illuminate the debate on shared but differentiated responsibilities on greenhouse gases emissions and show that just as urban centers register different levels and paths of economic development, cities do not contribute at the same level to global warming.

We also compare the peak emission rate and the year of peak emissions with the peak CO2 - induced warming.

Yet, this immense growth of modern emissions barely produced an uptick in 10 - year global warming averages, when compared to a similar time span for the pre-1950s.

Those of you who have heard me speak before know that I think that the issue of the century is global warming, and the good news is that plug - ins will also sharply reduce greenhouse gas emissions compared to existing cars.

As the climate of the Pacific Northwest warms, more winter precipitation is falling as rain, compared with historical averages.2 With declining snowpack in Oregon's Cascade Mountains, peak stream flows are occurring earlier, and summer flows are declining.2 These changes are expected to continue as heat - trapping emissions grow, putting more stress on already endangered salmon that return to the Columbia and other rivers in the region to spawn.2

«Climate science» as it is used by warmists implies adherence to a set of beliefs: (1) Increasing greenhouse gas concentrations will warm the Earth's surface and atmosphere; (2) Human production of CO2 is producing significant increases in CO2 concentration; (3) The rate of rise of temperature in the 20th and 21st centuries is unprecedented compared to the rates of change of temperature in the previous two millennia and this can only be due to rising greenhouse gas concentrations; (4) The climate of the 19th century was ideal and may be taken as a standard to compare against any current climate; (5) global climate models, while still not perfect, are good enough to indicate that continued use of fossil fuels at projected rates in the 21st century will cause the CO2 concentration to rise to a high level by 2100 (possibly 700 to 900 ppm); (6) The global average temperature under this condition will rise more than 3 °C from the late 19th century ideal; (7) The negative impact on humanity of such a rise will be enormous; (8) The only alternative to such a disaster is to immediately and sharply reduce CO2 emissions (reducing emissions in 2050 by 80 % compared to today's rate) and continue further reductions after 2050; (9) Even with such draconian CO2 reductions, the CO2 concentration is likely to reach at least 450 to 500 ppm by 2100 resulting in significant damage to humanity; (10) Such reductions in CO2 emissions are technically feasible and economically affordable while providing adequate energy to a growing world population that is increasingly industrializing.

If the United States is a very large emitter of gigs compared to most other nations in terms of historical and per capita emissions, why doesn't the United States have an ethical duty to fund reasonable climate change adaptation measures in and losses and damages of poor developing countries that have done little or nothing to cause human - induced warming.

By comparing values of these parameters from the mid-19 century to now, they can estimate how much the earth warmed in association with human greenhouse gas emissions.

Using existing, affordable technology, new trucks could be up to 40 percent more efficient compared to today, reducing annual fuel consumption by billions of gallons and preventing millions of metric tons of global warming emissions.

It would limit emissions from burning fossil fuels and clearing forests so that warming is contained to no more than 2 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial times and — in even higher ambition — to try to keep the rise below 1.5 degrees Celsius.

«Comparing the amount of warming in the U.S. saved by reducing our greenhouse gas emissions by some 80 % to the amount of warming added in the U.S. by increases in Asian black carbon (soot) aerosol emissions (at least according to Teng et al.) and there is no clear winner.

Is the naturally - occurring 100 W / m ^ 2 variation in observed DLR warming the skin layer (compared the the water below) so that it will cause more evaporation and emission?

Carbon Dioxide Equivalent — Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (or CO2e) is a measure used to compare the emissions from various greenhouse gases based upon their global warming potential (GWP).

Each sticker will include an index that compares the emissions of global warming gases from the vehicle with the average projected emissions from all vehicles of the same model year, and identifies the vehicle model within its class with the lowest emissions of that model year.

The ambitious goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees compared to pre-industrial levels may be compromised merely due to the warming caused by the reduction of fine emission particles.

Their warming influence (through CO2 emissions) is insignificant compared to fossil fuel burning.

In terms of greenhouse agents, the main conclusions from the WGI FAR Policymakers Summary are still valid today: (1) «emissions resulting from human activities are substantially increasing the atmospheric concentrations of the greenhouse gases: CO2, CH4, CFCs, N2O»; (2) «some gases are potentially more effective (at greenhouse warming)»; (3) feedbacks between the carbon cycle, ecosystems and atmospheric greenhouse gases in a warmer world will affect CO2 abundances; and (4) GWPs provide a metric for comparing the climatic impact of different greenhouse gases, one that integrates both the radiative influence and biogeochemical cycles.

Hansen et al. (1981), «emerge» p. 957; another scientist who compared temperature trends with a combination of CO2, emissions from volcanic eruptions, and supposed solar cycles, likewise got a good match, and used the cycles to predict that greenhouse warming would swamp other influences after about 2000.

For NF3 remote microwave plasma chamber cleaning, compared with CF4 cleaning processes, a reduction of emission of gases relevant to global warming is observed.