Example collocations logo

Emissions in sentence

2828 examples of Emissions in a sentence

At this low price, companies have little incentive to cut back on their CO2 emissions – and little faith that a market-based incentive will return.
Each region of the world should introduce a tax on CO2 emissions that starts low today and increases gradually and predictably in the future.
These subsidies could start fairly high and decline gradually over time, as the tax on CO2 emissions rises and the costs of new energy technologies fall with more experience and innovation.
Water contamination and scarcity, alongside carbon dioxide emissions and lethal levels of air pollution, are imperiling people’s health and jeopardizing the sustainability of China’s economic performance.
It is also clear that climate change will continue, at a pace determined by past, present, and future emissions of heat-trapping gases.
Continued high emissions of heat-trapping gases will lead to large amounts of future warming.
Ambitious efforts to control emissions can decrease future warming and its risks.
Progress in reducing emissions is an important part of responding to climate change, but it is not the whole solution.
These investments are especially important over the next few decades, a period when much of the climate change that we will experience is already baked into the climate system, owing to past emissions and existing infrastructure.
At the same time, lower oil consumption would reduce traffic congestion and accidents, limit local air pollution and its adverse health effects, and lower greenhouse-gas emissions, which lead to global climate change.
Moreover, greenhouse-gas emissions are contributing to climate change, the effects of which, as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warns, could prove devastating for all countries, with China highly vulnerable.
Over the last eight years, China’s economy has grown by an average of 10% annually – a total increase of around 115% – leading to a 53% increase in CO2 emissions.
Along with more stringent restrictions on coal consumption and greenhouse-gas emissions, the upcoming 13th Five-Year Plan, for 2016-2020, will include additional investment in research and development.
With this mix of policies, Chinese carbon emissions could peak by 2030, even as the economy grows at a rate of 4-5%.
Rich-country policymakers, in particular, should bear in mind this imperative, given their economies’ history of high emissions and greater access to technology.
All of this has gone to buttress an industry that produces a massive share of global emissions – and seems dead set on continuing to do so.
Since 1988, just 35 coal producers, both private and state-owned, have contributed one-third of total CO2 emissions.
Volkswagen managers received huge bonuses this year, despite the global scandal caused by the company’s years-long effort to evade emissions standards.
When he introduced a new tax on diesel fuel in the name of reducing carbon-dioxide emissions, struggling French commuters saw it as a personal affront.
Even if everyone accepted the need to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, that would not resolve the plight of workers who can barely make ends meet.
We also know beyond doubt that emissions from human activities have substantially increased the amount of greenhouse gases (especially carbon dioxide) in our atmosphere.
We know that the amount of greenhouse gases is rising due to our emissions, and we know that this is causing warming.
Polls of climate researchers, as well as analysis of thousands of scientific publications, consistently show a 97-98% consensus that human-caused emissions are causing global warming.
With a rapid reduction in emissions, it is still possible to keep warming within safe bounds (estimated at below 2ºC); but the task is becoming increasingly difficult.
Beyond the Carbon CrusadeCOPENHAGEN – At its heart, much of the debate over climate change deals with just one divisive and vexing question: How big should cuts in carbon emissions be?
We should be open to other ways to stop warming – such as cutting carbon emissions in the future instead of now, or focusing on reducing emissions of other greenhouse gases.
Cutting carbon emissions, however, requires a reduction in the basic energy use that underpins modern society, so it will also mean significant costs.
Cutting emissions now is much more expensive, because there are few, expensive alternatives to fossil fuels.
This would not cut carbon emissions spectacularly, but nor would it be a spectacular waste of public funds.
Taxing fossil fuels to reduce carbon emissions is a sensible part of the solution to climate change, but it is not the only or best way to prevent warming.
BackNext