Example collocations logo

Carbon in sentence

2411 examples of Carbon in a sentence

Plenty of carbon dioxide will be emitted into the atmosphere as the world’s climate negotiators fly to and from the Montreal meeting.
On the island’s eastern tip, the nearly 29,000-acre El Yunque National Forest is one of the Caribbean’s most important systems for capturing and storing carbon.
In return, the world gets more carbon sinks to soak up greenhouse gasses.
The results were impressive: Brazil reduced the average rate of Amazon deforestation by over 60% over the last decade, absorbing about 3.6 billion tons of carbon dioxide, more than any other country.
And Norway was able to help mitigate global carbon dioxide emissions.
No technology is as effective at storing carbon as tropical forests, and saving and restoring them offers one of the cheapest large-scale forms of emissions abatement or capture, while providing a host of other environmental and social benefits.
These activities raise the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which in turn has many effects: a rise in average temperature, a rise in the water level of the oceans, significant changes in the global patterns of rainfall, and an increase in "extreme weather events" such as hurricanes and droughts.
The rise of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere B which is the main cause of the long-term climate change B might actually have some directly beneficial effects, since a higher concentration of carbon dioxide can stimulate the faster growth of some types of forests and some crops.
For example, the effects of global warming on Africa and India could be very severe, even though their economies have contributed very little to the overall problem (since Africa and India use so little energy per person, they also contribute very little to the build up of atmospheric carbon dioxide).
Consider climate change: few people realize that tropical forest destruction accounts for 20% of overall carbon emissions – more than the world’s cars, trucks, and airplanes combined.
Halting the cutting and burning of tropical forests, which are found almost exclusively in developing nations, is among the most readily achievable and effective possible steps to reduce carbon emissions.
Solar energy enables plants to absorb carbon gas and thereby produce not only oxygen, but also matter that the animal kingdom uses for food – and that our machines can use for energy.
Increasing the responsible use of this energy source would contribute to the fight against climate change by reducing the amount of carbon in the atmosphere and diminishing the amount of fossil fuel required to produce energy.
In the future, geologists will see telltale markers like radioactive carbon – debris from nuclear blasts – and plastic waste scattered across the planet’s surface and embedded in rock.
Efforts to improve air quality in China, US carbon and mercury emissions standards, cheaper natural gas, and growing investments in renewable energy have all eroded coal’s share of the energy market.
For starters, while the international community is unlikely to agree any time soon on a global mechanism for putting a price on carbon emissions, other types of environmental policies have already had an effect on demand for oil.
That reflects Saudi Arabia’s output increase of more than a million barrels a day, as well as mandated efficiency measures in the European Union, partly motivated by efforts to cut carbon dioxide emissions, which have contributed to a comparable drop in demand – by about 1.5% a year.
We must also reduce our dependence on gas altogether by increasing energy efficiency, and by investing in carbon capture and storage technology for coal, and in renewable resources and nuclear power.
For example, Walmart has teamed up with the Environmental Defense Fund to devise a strategy to eliminate 20 million tons of embedded carbon in the products on its shelves.
Both McCain and Obama could leave future generations lumbered with the costs of major cuts in carbon emissions – without major cuts in temperatures.
In fact, it is worse than a straightforward carbon tax.
But this, not carbon emissions, should be the core of their climate change policy.
The typical cost of cutting a ton of CO2 is now about $20, but the damage from a ton of carbon in the atmosphere is about $2.
By focusing more on research and development, and less in carbon cuts, both candidates could embrace a solution that encourages the best of the American innovative spirit and leaves the best possible legacy to future generations: a high-income, low-carbon energy world.
The organization is now working with UNEP to offer an experimental “green energy” app that rewards users for reduced carbon use.
So ANT’s new green energy app translates financial-transaction data into implied carbon emissions.
This does not mean an increase in overall taxation, but simply a substitution in each country of a pollution (carbon) tax for some current taxes.
The government is experimenting with carbon pricing, and investing heavily in low-carbon wind, solar, and nuclear energy.
Scientists now estimate that somewhere close to 50% of climate change is being caused by gases and pollutants other than CO2, including nitrogen compounds, low-level ozone formed by pollution, and black carbon.
Consider black carbon, a component of the soot emissions from diesel engines and the inefficient burning of biomass cooking stoves that is linked to 1.6 million to 1.8 million premature deaths annually as a result of indoor exposure and 800,000 as a result of outdoor exposure.
BackNext