Example collocations logo

Greenhouse in sentence

502 examples of Greenhouse in a sentence

And, third, realistic solutions are possible, which will allow the world to combine economic development and control of greenhouse gases.
First, we must stabilize greenhouse gases in order to avoid dangerous human interference in the climate system – the key goal of the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the global treaty under which the Bali negotiations took place.
The great question, of course, is whether stabilization of greenhouse gases, continued economic development, and adaptation to climate change can be achieved simultaneously.
Fifty years ago, the rest of the world might have carried on with remedying the problem of conventional and greenhouse gas emissions and let China and the US stew in their own waste.
Climate scientists have warned for years that global warming caused by manmade emissions of greenhouse gases will generate more extreme storms.
He called for delays in reducing greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming, which in turn causes the energy of hurricanes to rise.
Ultimately, reducing the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere will serve the common good.
One requires cuts in the emission of greenhouse gases; the other has tended to promote the combustion of fossil fuels for transport and energy.
Should we place our faith in the Kyoto Treaty, which sets firm limits on human emissions of so-called greenhouse gases?
Since 1900 the global temperature of the Earth's atmosphere and ocean surface waters has risen by 0.5-1 degree Celsius, and the prime suspect is atmospheric carbon dioxide, CO2, which is second only to water vapor in its greenhouse effect.
The consequences of this would be devastating: inland areas desiccated, low-lying coastal regions battered and flooded as polar ice melts and sea levels rise, and possibly further warming and a runaway greenhouse effect due to an increase in atmospheric water vapor.
Contrary to what climate models focusing on greenhouse gas emissions would predict, the samples show that a decline in atmospheric CO2 followed, rather than preceded, these frigid intervals.
The 2,000 Chiquitanos living around the park contend that a tree holds up the Amazon’s seven skies, and they are living that belief in a modern way: by using their forests to help reduce the stratospheric greenhouse gasses that cause global warming.
One might recall that many delegations arrived in Kyoto resignedly willing to accept the idea of a tax on greenhouse-gas emissions, or at least on carbon dioxide, the most commonly encountered greenhouse gas.
Human-induced climate change stems from two principal sources of emissions of greenhouse gases (mainly carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide): fossil-fuel use for energy and agriculture (including deforestation to create new farmland and pastureland).
If we add up these three factors – the enormous economic challenge of reducing greenhouse gases, the complexity of climate science, and deliberate campaigns to confuse the public and discredit the science – we arrive at the fourth and over-arching problem: US politicians’ unwillingness or inability to formulate a sensible climate-change policy.
The US bears disproportionate responsibility for inaction on climate change, because it was long the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases, until last year, when China overtook it.
The weak and only partly implemented Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012, and the world requires a much stronger framework, one that sets a strong target for stabilizing greenhouse gases by 2050 by including agreements on ending tropical deforestation, developing high-mileage automobiles, and shifting to low CO2-emitting power plants.
A Fair Deal on Climate ChangeThe agreement on climate change reached at Heiligendamm by the G8 leaders merely sets the stage for the real debate to come: how will we divide up the diminishing capacity of the atmosphere to absorb our greenhouse gases?
The G8 leaders agreed to seek “substantial” cuts in greenhouse gas emissions and to give “serious consideration” to the goal of halving such emissions by 2050 – an outcome hailed as a triumph by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
At the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, 189 countries, including the US, China, India, and all the European nations, signed the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, thereby agreeing to stabilize greenhouse gases “at a low enough level to prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.”
US per capita greenhouse gas emissions, already the highest of any major nation when Bush took office, have continued to rise.
China and India claim the right to proceed with industrialization and development as the developed nations did, unhampered by limits on their greenhouse gas emissions.
First, if we apply the principle “You broke it, you fix it,” then the developed nations have to take responsibility for our “broken” atmosphere, which can no longer absorb more greenhouse gases without the world’s climate changing.
Second, even if we wipe the slate clean and forget about who caused the problem, it remains true that the typical US resident is responsible for about six times more greenhouse gas emissions than the typical Chinese, and as much as 18 times more than the average Indian.
But it is also true that if China and India continue to increase their output of greenhouse gases, they will eventually undo all the good that would be achieved by deep emissions cuts in the industrialized nations.
This year or next, China will overtake the US as the world’s biggest greenhouse gas emitter – on a national, rather than a per capita basis, of course.
But there is a solution that is both fair and practical:The fairness of giving every person on earth an equal share of the atmosphere’s capacity to absorb our greenhouse gas emissions is difficult to deny.
It would seek to reduce the cost of electricity from sources that do not emit greenhouse gases below that of coal power by 2025.
There is now little doubt that greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, are leading to significant changes in climate.
Back