Example collocations logo

Warming in sentence

1698 examples of Warming in a sentence

They could then agree to impose taxes on products from other countries – including the US – that are produced in ways that unnecessarily add substantially to global warming.
The Right Priorities for the G8In the run-up to the G8 meeting in Scotland on July 6-8, British Prime Minister Tony Blair has called on the international community to set the right global priorities, which he has unequivocally stated should be Africa and global warming.
Global warming is real.
In the absence of a binding global agreement, such unilateral or bilateral commitments by countries to rein in their contribution to global warming represent the most realistic hope for addressing climate change.
To answer that question, several variables must be taken into account: demand growth, technological change, investment, and the commitment to confront global warming, among others.
Ban has taken a leadership position on the problem of global warming.
Indeed, the “bootleggers and Baptists” theory helps to account for other developments in global warming policy over the past decade or so.
Whenever opposite political forces attract, as activists and big business have in the case of global warming, there is a high risk that the public interest will be caught in the middle.
But, with increasing strain on the planet’s resources, meeting this demand could carry massive environmental costs from pollution and global warming.
Gradually, awareness is setting in that global warming is not just a gloom and doom fantasy.
So, taking land for the production of bio-fuels from forests means speeding up global warming, because bio-fuel crops store much less carbon than trees.
At the same time, India has long advocated for the principle of “common but differentiated responsibility,” which holds that the industrialized countries that have contributed the most to global warming have a larger obligation to address it.
But India is also increasingly aware that nothing can be done without its help on issues from Pakistan to Afghanistan to Iran to global warming.
Left unchecked, global warming will threaten the health and safety of our people, damage the ecosystems on which we all depend, and – through rising sea levels – put the very existence of some countries in jeopardy.
And for those countries that are most vulnerable to the harmful effects of global warming, far more needs to be done if catastrophic effects are to be avoided.
The Climate Vulnerable Forum has long argued that even two degrees of warming risks creating unbearable conditions for some countries.
And the rich world does have a moral obligation to move first and faster – with policies, technologies, and finance – to reduce the emissions that cause global warming.
We need the industrialized countries and the giants of the developing world to redouble their efforts to reduce their emissions, so that global warming can be limited to 1.5 degrees.
The US, Russia, Canada, Norway, and Denmark, for example, have agreed to prohibit commercial fishing in the international waters of the Arctic Ocean until research can be carried out on how fish stocks are being affected by rapidly melting ice and warming seas.
For example, the Tibetan Plateau, which contains the world’s third-largest store of ice, is warming at almost twice the average global rate, owing to the rare convergence of high altitudes and low latitudes – with potentially serious consequences for Asia’s freshwater supply.
Brazilian growth will soon to rest on the shoulders of a product that is the main source of global warming.
That is appropriate, for it is of the utmost importance that the leader of the world’s 1.2 billion Roman Catholics has unequivocally stated that scientific studies attribute “most global warming” in recent decades to greenhouse gases, “released mainly as a result of human activity.”
Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni last year accused the industrialized countries of committing aggression against Africa by causing global warming.
Obama’s treatment of global warming in his inaugural address is telling in this regard, because, other than a passing reference to preserving “our planet,” the issue of climate was dealt with as an internal matter.
Obama’s silence with regard to multilateral efforts to combat global warming is notable.
His position seemed less to deny the existence of global warming than to insist that policies mitigating climate change not impose an unreasonable burden on American companies.
On one hand, because it covered only those countries projected to emit roughly half of the world’s greenhouse-gas emissions by mid-century, it was not an effective long-run safeguard against the dangers of global warming.
But the political cards will be reshuffled, and there will be a new deal on global warming, when America next elects a president in November 2008.
Unless we are extraordinarily fortunate and learn that climatologists have overlooked some enormously important channels of carbon sequestration, the models predicting global warming will still be grimly accurate in 2009.
When the time comes to revisit international policies on global warming, two things should happen.
BackNext