Example collocations logo

Emissions in sentence

2828 examples of Emissions in a sentence

Every country’s emissions must peak, decline, and eventually reach zero.
Defection would be discouraged because it is easy to see – and more important, to explain to the public – whether emissions are going up or down.
Such a target would put all new fossil-fuel-based infrastructure under intense scrutiny; if we need to drive emissions down, why build another coal plant or badly insulated building?
A shared vision of zero emissions could even spark a race to cross the finish line first.
Replacing temperature thresholds with an effort to reduce emissions to zero would ensure accountability and minimize political inconsistency.
The gap between real-world emissions and what will be needed to keep warming below the agreed-upon limits is rapidly widening.
Whatever our temperature target, global emissions have to peak soon and decrease afterwards – all the way to zero.
America can and should, for example, become the global leader combating climate change through major investments in alternative energy, conservation, and energy efficiency, and by taking strong actions at home to reduce America’s greenhouse gas emissions.
But, as the conservative author David Frum notes, over the last two decades, the US has experienced a swift decline in crime, auto fatalities, alcohol and tobacco consumption, and emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide, which cause acid rain – all while leading an Internet revolution.
In other words, our greenhouse gas emissions have, by causing enough warming to melt the arctic ice, created a feedback loop that will generate more warming, and melt more ice, even if we were to stop emitting all greenhouse gases tomorrow.
Developing nations are grasping just how outrageous the current distribution of greenhouse-gas emissions really is.
Kagame then suggested giving every country an annual per capita quota for CO2 emissions, and allowing developing countries that are below the quota to trade their excess quota with countries that are above theirs.
Sri Lanka took a similar stance, using studies from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to calculate that in 2008, environmentally permissible carbon emissions totaled no more than 2,172 kilograms per person.
In fact, the world’s per capita emissions were 4,700 kilograms, or more than double the permissible limit.
But, while emissions in the rich nations were far above the permissible limit, Sri Lankan emissions were, at 660 kilograms, well below it.
The Commission’s report, released at the end of May, argues that reducing CO2 emissions could result in an even stronger economy.
But we can address both issues simultaneously and reduce emissions by imposing a charge (a tax) for CO2 emissions.
The tax would also provide firms with incentives to innovate in ways that reduce energy usage and emissions – giving them a dynamic competitive advantage.
And the Swedes have simultaneously sustained their strong growth without US-level emissions.
Expanded access to renewable energy would benefit African countries in many other ways, too, such as by reducing poverty, improving gender equality, enhancing sanitation, and limiting greenhouse-gas emissions.
In an interesting conjunction of events, shortly after the Asahi editorial was published, Abe committed Japan to halving greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, and to helping developing countries to join in a new post-Kyoto protocol climate regime.
These plans represent the first generation of investments to be made in order to build a competitive future without the dangerous levels of carbon-dioxide emissions that are now driving global warming.
Carbon taxes should be applied comprehensively to emissions from fossil fuels.
The EU is facing up to its responsibilities as a major source of past emissions.
One major problem with factory-style livestock production is that it leads to considerable greenhouse-gas emissions – and not just because the digestive processes of ruminant animals produce methane.
The intention was understandable: if everyone in the world exchanged most light bulbs for energy-efficient compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs), we could save 3.5% of all electricity, or 1% of our CO2 emissions.
But this does not mean that we should just cut all emissions.
My household uses CFLs, and I enjoy knowing that I am causing fewer CO2 emissions and spending less money.
Should we ban private cars wherever public transport is available to move us from A to B with fewer CO2 emissions?
Real reductions in carbon emissions will occur only when better technology makes it worthwhile for individuals and businesses to change their behavior.
BackNext