Word: co2
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
That's one more reason why the world must work together to reduce global carbon emissions to minimize the impact of climate change. The trouble is, though, CO2 cuts won't be enough. As a recent paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science points out, even if we are successful in cutting carbon emissions rapidly - hardly an easy task - the momentum of climate change will continue for centuries. That means our ability to adapt to the impacts of warming, including more aggressive responses to wildfires like those in Australia, will become all the more critical, lest natural...
...country of just 5.5 million people - about as big as a medium-sized city in China - but a fitting host of the climate change summit. Denmark has thrived while emphasizing clean energy and cutting carbon emissions - between 1980 and 2004, the country's GDP rose 56% while CO2 emissions dropped 35% - and thanks to smart policies and investment, more than a quarter of Denmark's electricity now comes from renewable sources. Danish companies also punch well above their weight in the growing wind turbine industry. To drum up global support for the summit, Hedegaard can easily make the case that...
Kyoto's key failing was that it called on developed countries to make mandatory CO2 emissions cuts, while letting developing countries - including massive emitters like China - essentially off the hook, an inequality that has to be resolved if the world is to craft a new treaty at the U.N. global warming summit in Copenhagen in December. (See the top 10 green ideas...
...voters deemed “protecting the environment” a top priority than in 2006. Such general apathy frustrates and puzzles adherents of the green movement—all indicators, after all, point to nothing less than impending doom. They thrust forth pamphlets full of statistics (bright red), CO2 graphs (alarmingly inclined), and before-and-after images of Arctic ice caps (now you see ’em, now you don?...
...recommendations have recently come under attack from a number of outside environmental groups, and the National Wildlife Federation even dropped out of the alliance rather than endorse the blueprint. The problem is that USCAP would allow industry to pay for offsets of around 2 billion metric tons of CO2 a year, to ensure that business has plenty of time to make the transition to a low-carbon economy. (Offsets are projects in which companies pay to reduce carbon emissions more cheaply elsewhere, often by funding energy efficiency programs or through forestry, rather than cutting their own emissions...