Sentences with phrase «while human emissions»

The natural variability in sink capacity is around + / - 2 GtC, quite constant over the years, while the human emissions increased from 1.5 to 8 GtC / year and the average increase in the atmosphere followed with about 53 % of the emissions.

So there is another reason to believe that while humans certainly ARE adding CO2 to the atmosphere, it isn't the primary component (we already know it isn't the primary component because the atmosphere is accumulating CO2 at a much faster rate than humans add each year) because while human emissions have been rising nearly exponentially, atmospheric CO2 has been rising linearly and that rate of rise did not change when global human CO2 emissions fell in absolute terms (tons of CO2 emitted to atmosphere fell in 2009, rate of increase of atmospheric CO2 unchanged).

That means that the ~ 0.6 warming since the LIA is good for not more than ~ 5 ppmv CO2 increase over the past 55 years, while human emissions were ~ 170 ppmv and the increase in the atmosphere was ~ 80 ppmv in the same time frame...

The 1991 - 1997 sink capacity of the whole biosphere is 1.4 + / - 0.8 GtC / year, while human emissions, excluding deforestation, were around 6 GtC / year.

And (2) with regard to its main rationale, carbon emissions cause warming, the vector of causation is backwards: atmospheric CO2 concentration follows global warming, empirically and theoretically, while human emissions are lost in the noise.

The world's plants can only pull so much CO2 out of the atmosphere in a given season, while human emissions keep rising.

Not exact matches

But while wildfires are estimated to contribute about 18 percent of the total PM2.5 emissions in the U.S., many questions remain on how these emissions will affect human populations, including how overall air quality will be affected, how these levels will change under climate change, and which regions are to most likely to be impacted.

Thus, methane emissions in this region are largely from rice cultivation and livestock, while human - made fertilizers are a major source of nitrous oxide.

While the ranking of individual years can be affected by chaotic weather patterns, the long - term trends are attributable to drivers of climate change that right now are dominated by human emissions of greenhouse gases,» said GISS Director Gavin Schmidt.

The researchers further recommend that, given that many human influences are driving both climate change and biodiversity loss, conservationists should aim for win - win solutions such as the United Nations program REDD + (an extension of the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation programme)-- an initiative that protects forests while also creating benefits for local communities and biodiversity.

While this number is higher than the previous estimate made in the late 1990s based on ground measurements, the new research includes data on more volcanoes, including some that scientists have never visited, and it is still lower than human emissions of sulfur dioxide pollution levels.

In this earth system model, human belief systems and corresponding climate governance will drive anthropogenic GHG emissions that force the climate system, while the magnitude of climate change and related extreme events will influence human perception of associated risk.

Globally, about 80 percent of human - induced carbon dioxide emissions comes from the burning of fossil fuels, while about 20 percent results from deforestation.

The article said «However, while the volcano emitted roughly 2 × 106 metric tons SO2, annual emissions from cars were 30 x 106 tons (out of a total human emission of ~ 131 × 106 tons).

While the report included strong statements pointing to a growing human influence on climate, Mr. Bush's critics asserted that the emphasis on unknowns gave the administration cover to avoid quickly pushing forward with actions to limit greenhouse - gas emissions.

But President Bush's announcement Wednesday of a plan to halt growth in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 2025, while not embracing all the enviro groups want, legitimizes their argument that global warming is caused by humans and an imminent threat to mankind.

But Obama faces a reality that many of these groups seem slow to recognize: While the 20th - century toolkit preferred by traditional environmentalists — litigation, regulation and legislation — remains vital to limiting domestic pollution risks such as the oil gusher, it is a bad fit for addressing the building human influence on the climate system, which is driven now mainly by a surge in emissions mostly outside United States borders in countries aiming to propel their climb out of poverty on the same fossil fuels that generated much of our affluence.

The thing though with these low - sulfur fuels, the study also found, is that while they do reduce total particle emissions, the particles that do remain tend to remain in the air longer... Which is where they post a threat to human health and affect climate.

Terrell Johnson, reporting on a recent NASA publication concluding that deep ocean temperatures have not increased since 2005 (http://www.weather.com/science/environment/news/deep-ocean-hasnt-warmed-nasa-20141007): «While the report's authors say the findings do not question the overall science of climate change, it is the latest in a series of findings that show global warming to have slowed considerably during the 21st century, despite continued rapid growth in human - produced greenhouse gas emissions during the same time.»

While, in theory, human activities have the potential to result in net cooling, a concern about 25 years ago, the current balance between greenhouse gas emissions and the emissions of particulates and particulate - formers is such that essentially all of today's concern is about net warming.

While pressing for cuts in greenhouse - gas emissions and better efforts to control hunting, both legal and illegal, the participating scientists concluded on an optimistic note, saying they were «optimistic that humans can mitigate the effects of global warming and other threats to polar bears, and ensure that they remain a part of the Arctic ecosystem in perpetuity.»

The biomethane that fuels the Bio-Bus is generated from sewage and food waste (waste which is unfit for human consumption), and because the bus» engine produces lower emissions while burning biomethane than conventional diesel does, it could not only help improve air quality, but also help to prove the case for more waste - to - fuel projects.

While I am still comfortable with my argument that «human inertia» is the prime explanation for a long response time for doing anything about greenhouse gas emissions, I am very wary of efforts by California and the U.K. to stick their necks out on carbon reductions.

While I continue to try and understand and employ solutions for cutting my own C02 emissions, I will also continue endorsing humane methods of birth control for the human being.

For example, with nitrogen, where the majority of human emissions come from synthetic fertilizers, the real - world challenge is to apply just the right amount of nitrogen to optimize crop yields while minimizing nitrogen losses that harm aquatic ecosystems.

But there weren't 6 billion plus human beings on this planet in those years threatening its habitat, polluting its waters, hunting it relentlessly for sport while shamelessly flushing tons of carbon emissions into the atmosphere exacerbating Earth's warming.

In the late 1990s, while many other oil and gas companies were still questioning science pointing to a dangerous human influence on climate, BP pledged to cut its direct emissions of such gases 10 percent below 1990 levels by 2010.

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.

Human CO2 emissions increased at an exponential rate of X % per year while human population increased at an exponential rate ofHuman CO2 emissions increased at an exponential rate of X % per year while human population increased at an exponential rate ofhuman population increased at an exponential rate of Y %.

While the president and top administration officials continue denying the causal connection between carbon emissions from human activity and climate change, many corporations, including utilities like DTE, have accepted it as fact.

While the above analysis yields good results for by tying past climate change to increases in human CO2 emissions, it should be cautioned that the suggested exponential time relation is not suitable for projecting the future over longer time periods, because of possible changes in human population growth rates and absolute limitations on carbon available in remaining fossil fuels.

BMJ.com (nee the British Medical Journal) published a study today showing that a bike share program in Barcelona, Spain saves human lives while reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

While the greenhouse effect is undeniably real, and while most scientists agree that there has been a rise in global temperatures caused in some part by human emissions of carbon dioxide, no one knows how much more warming will occur this century or whether it will be dangeWhile the greenhouse effect is undeniably real, and while most scientists agree that there has been a rise in global temperatures caused in some part by human emissions of carbon dioxide, no one knows how much more warming will occur this century or whether it will be dangewhile most scientists agree that there has been a rise in global temperatures caused in some part by human emissions of carbon dioxide, no one knows how much more warming will occur this century or whether it will be dangerous.

«Meat production represents 18 percent of global human - induced GHG emissions... While the world is looking for sharp reductions in greenhouse gases responsible for climate change, growing global meat production is going to severely compromise future efforts... a study from the University of Chicago showed that if Americans were to reduce meat consumption by 20 percent it would be as if they switched from a standard sedan to the ultra-efficient Prius.»

First, while the early 20th century warming was likely predominantly naturally - caused (i.e. low volcanic activity and increasing solar activity), there was also a significant human contribution as greenhouse gas emissions began to ramp up.

The difference is that in my calculations, the airborne fraction is about 55 % of the human emissions, while if you take into account land use changes, the airborne fraction is 45 % of the emissions.

While other causes might be in play, human emissions are certainly the primary cause of the future climate catastrophe.

There are many things about climate that I accept — that human emissions have effect on increases of CO2 content in the atmosphere (while the concentration is driven largely by temperature and resulting solubility of CO2 in sea water, humans still provide the surplus), that this increased CO2 content has effect on temperature (and indirectly on other aspects of climate), that humans affect the climate (but not just through CO2 but also through UHI, agricultural changes, pollution etc), that temperatures have risen since half of the last century.

A number of recent studies have found a strong link between peak human - induced global warming and cumulative carbon emissions from the start of the industrial revolution, while the link to emissions over shorter periods or in the years 2020 or 2050 is generally weaker.

While the Kyoto Protocol had already been set into place as the primary solution to climate change, the historian of science Stuart Weart marks the point at the year 2001 where climate scientists had actually reached a consensus that human activity was warming the planet via GHG emissions and land - use changes, the former largely from fossil fuel use.

To date, while various effects and feedbacks constrain the certainty placed on recent and projected climate change (EG, albedo change, the response of water vapour, various future emissions scenarios etc), it is virtually certain that CO2 increases from human industry have reversed and will continue to reverse the downward trend in global temperatures that should be expected in the current phase of the Milankovitch cycle.

While left - leaning U.S. politicians, bureaucrats and the partisan mainstream press continue to push the silly catastrophic AGW hysteria from human CO2 emissions,

Note that while this warming trend is 7 times greater than that of the post period, human CO2 emission were 40 billion tons less - the fallacy of CO2 being a global temperature thermostat control knob is clearly documented.

Globally, about 80 percent of human - induced carbon dioxide emissions comes from the burning of fossil fuels, while about 20 percent results from deforestation.

About half of the summer ice loss between 1979 and 2005 can be explained by natural variability, the researchers found, while the other half is due to human greenhouse emissions.

While environmental activists and some politicians claim «the debate is over» and call for immediate action to reduce man - made greenhouse gas emissions, others say the science points to only a very small human impact — too small to warrant concern — and the costs of trying to prevent global warming far exceed the benefits.

Note that while the BEST approach is based on correlations, they are correlations of variables with known causal relationships (i.e. an increased greenhouse effect is known to cause global warming), although they do not appear to have considered some important influences like human aerosol emissions or the El Niño Southern Oscillation.

IOW something (which we can not explain as yet) is causing the recent «pause» in warming despite unabated human CO2 emissions; and this «something» may just continue for a while.

While scientists continue to refine projections of the future, observations unequivocally show that climate is changing and that the warming of the past 50 years is primarily due to human - induced emissions of heat - trapping gases.

So, if you think that through, then for that to be true, in a period in which atmospheric CO2 levels have risen in proportion to human emissions, something else would also have had to be emitting large amounts of CO2 while at the exact same time that we are completely unaware of, and much more strangely, something we don't know about would have to be removing large amounts of CO2, otherwise we would have higher atmospheric levels of CO2 than we currently do.