Emissions Reduction Quotes

Are we better off if we displace jobs and investments to other countries and global emissions go up? I say no. Let's bring that production here and have less emissions globally because we can make things more efficiently and cleaner.

There is universal consensus among experts that the earth's atmosphere is heating up - and that we are responsible for it by putting carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. We also know that the consequences of global warming are catastrophic. But how do we make sure that all countries reduce greenhouse gases?

The reason we should do a carbon tax is because it's the right thing to do. It's economics 101, elementary stuff.

Now, as the world's largest economy and as the world's second largest emitter, America bears our responsibility to address climate change, and we intend to meet that responsibility.

In the current climate motorists have a long list of issues from which to choose to raise on the doorstep. Policies aimed at reducing emissions - like the changes to Vehicle Excise Duty or here in Manchester the proposals for congestion charges - are not without controversy.

Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket… Because I’m capping greenhouse gasses, coal power plants, natural gas…you name it…whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retro-fit their operations. That will cost money…they will pass that money on to the consumers.

Under the Paris agreement, every one of the 147 signatories issues what is called an 'intended nationally determined contribution' (INDC), which amounts to a promise that the nation will take certain actions to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by a certain date.

I think we can lower our emissions. I think the world will be better off if we did that, and we can do it without cap and trade.

Renewable energy could reduce emissions but also create jobs and improve public health.

We don't know what's causing climate change on this planet. And the idea of spending trillions and trillions of dollars to try to reduce CO2 emissions is not the right course for us.

Many of the most science-fictional tools to fight climate change are untested, are almost impossible to truly test at planetary scale - we only have one planet after all. We're better off cutting our emissions so we don't need them.

We must stop climate change. And we can, if we use the tactics that worked in South Africa against the worst carbon emitters.

Nuclear power can continue to help us reduce our greenhouse gas emissions, but we must do everything we can to make it safer.

In the future, every industry should be an environmental industry. In a world where energy and carbon emissions are constrained, every business must take resource productivity seriously

I did a lot of work on energy efficiency at the White House. By the time I left we had taken the equivalent of six hundred cars a year off the road in reduced greenhouse gas emissions just in the White House complex.

By taxing CO2, firms and households would have an incentive to retrofit for the world of the future. The tax would also provide firms with incentives to innovate in ways that reduce energy usage and emissions - giving them a dynamic competitive advantage.

Reducing and removing greenhouse gas emissions spares our planet from the well-documented degradation that we are witnessing on a global basis.

I'd like to see a little more action on the energy side of things. I've been pushing for some kind of a carbon tax for years, and it seems to me we've had lots of opportunities to do it.

Ultimately, refiners, like all of us, are going to have to clean up their emissions.

The methods that EPA introduced after 1970 to reduce air-pollutant emissions worked for a while, but over time have become progressively less effective.

Flue gas extraction is really, really hard to do. It's not that we can't do it - just not at a cost that anyone will bear.

The US needs a cap and trade system with auctioning of licenses for emissions rights. The revenues from these auctions can be used to launch a new, environmentally friendly energy policy. That would be yet another federal program that could help us to overcome the stagnation.

There is only one possible route of action, Greenhouse gases have to be radically reduced and it has to happen worldwide. Until now, the US has kept its eyes shut to this emergency. Americans make up a mere 4 percent of the population, but are responsible for close to a quarter of emissions.

Climate change threatens the wellbeing of every person around the world and can only be addressed through a global response to reduce emissions.

Governments have to conclude a fair, universal, and binding climate agreement, by which every country commits to reducing emissions of greenhouse gases.