The quantitative target for the original treaty was to reduce the emissions of most major greenhouse gases
, notably carbon dioxide and methane, to 1990 levels by the year 2000, in approximately 25 nations with relatively high GDPs.
However, greenhouse gases
have so many sources, EPA determined the thresholds would have to be tailored to limit which facilities would be required to obtain those permits.
Transportation accounted for more than half of greenhouse gases
emitted in Eugene from 1990 to 2005, and will account for half of them in the future unless people change their ways, the city said.
Although factors such as soil degradation and falling rice prices may have played a role in this decline, air pollution and greenhouse gases
have contributed substantially, the researchers contend.
The comprehensive Energy Policy Act of 2005 that Moniz cites provides loan guarantees to develop energy technologies, including nuclear power, that avoid, reduce, or sequester greenhouse gases
. It also provides a tax credit of 1.8 cents per kilowatt hour for 6,000 megawatts of capacity at new nuclear power plants (equivalent to the output of about six new plants).
Federal and state governments are implementing the provisions of the treaty, even though implementation will do little or nothing to rectify the supposed problem with greenhouse gases
. The treaty is aimed at emissions from 35 industrialized nations, but exempts many of the largest emitters of carbon dioxide, including Communist China, India, Brazil, and Mexico.
The UK figures show the total amount of greenhouse gases
- which contribute to global warming - fell 10% between 1990 and 2002.
Total warming during the century was 0.6 degrees Celsius, leaving something like 0.05 degrees attributable to increases in greenhouse gases
. Cut both results in half, and accumulating greenhouse gases
would still account for only about half of the warming seen in the last century.
(a) cut car mileage; (b) trap heat in the atmosphere; (c) slow crop growth; (d) kill useful bacteria.
It is controversial because it will help large emitters of greenhouse gases
achieve their protocol goals without effectively slashing the amount of greenhouse gases
They worry that the reversal of forests from absorber to emitter of carbon dioxide could be contributing to the acceleration of greenhouse gases