Abstract

An abundance of data, including decades of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission rates, atmospheric concentrations, and global average temperatures, is sufficient to allow a strictly empirical evaluation of the U.S. plan for controlling GHGs. This article presents an analysis, based solely on such data, that shows that the difference between atmospheric GHG levels that will be reached if current trends continue, and levels that would be achieved if the goals of the plan are met-even with worldwide implementation-is inconsequential. Further, the expected globally averaged temperature differences are well within measurement error. The results lend additional support to the argument that any mitigation strategy must include drawdown of atmospheric GHGs. Equally important, a particular drawdown strategy, agrigenomics, offers the opportunity for a revolutionary trifecta: climate change mitigation, food security, and medical advances.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.