Go to ClimateCrisis.org or CarbonCalculator.com and buy carbon credits.

This is not the very distant future.

Surprisingly, agriculture is the biggest contributor to climate change.

So I can tell you how far we have come in the ensuing 12 years.

JOLANKA NlCKERMAN Methane is actually a very potent greenhouse gas.

In doing so, we'll be removing a large part of our greatest carbon sink and replacing it with the most high greenhouse gas emission oil in the future.

So an 82 percent absolute reduction translates into a 90 percent reduction in greenhouse gas intensity relative to sales.

The first way, which is the most important way, is through reducing the emissions from our own operations.

The choice here, to put a gas systematic ? in and collect ? and manage the landfill gas, was predicated on the fact that we could manage the carbon offsets, reduce our carbon footprint, and market carbon credits to the value which would assist in offsetting most of our cost.

Here's a little question.

And I mean that with all seriousness.

And so I get to think of places that have nothing to do with Google's core business, but where we can really have a big impact in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

But they're also materials with very high energy and very high greenhouse gas emissions in their process.

In my particular job, I'm trying to have the biggest impact in terms of reductions of greenhouse gases.

And I would say that we live in a country five percent of the world's population, 25 percent of the greenhouse gases, but also 25 percent of the world's prisoners.

And that is now what we're trying to do, and working with this large cities group to fight climate change, to negotiate huge, big, volume deals that will enable cities which generate 75 percent of the world's greenhouse gases, to drastically and quickly reduce greenhouse gas emissions in a way that is good economics.

You want to reduce green house gases.

It's the single largest emitter of greenhouse gases of any human activity in the world.

Well not in our state!

These diagrams that show that nuclear is somehow putting out a lot of greenhouse gases a lot of those studies include, Well of course war will be inevitable and therefore we'll have cities burning and stuff like that, which is kind of finessing it a little bit, I think.

Because California was the first state in this country to mandate 25 percent reduction of greenhouse gases by 2020.

A greenhouse effect. Everything is burning up.

And this is the object of their scrutiny.

Why do we need to study this anymore?

So what we're doing is, we're taking the most concentrated greenhouse gas sink, twice as much greenhouse gases are sequestered in the boreal per acre than the tropical rainforests.

Then hear this, please.

If Greens globally found some reason to re assess nuclear, but we only have a limited amount of money.

This is a U.S. statistic about the impact of greenhouse gases.

And we're replacing that with the largest industrial project in the history of the world, which is producing the most high carbon greenhouse gas emitting oil in the world.

The next big issue, deforestation.

So it's a bit counterintuitive, but by collecting methane and burning it, which converts it into carbon dioxide, you're actually dramatically reducing the greenhouse gas emissions from the landfill.

Every single debate has been sponsored by Clean Coal.

CO2e emissions are equivalent emissions of all the greenhouse gases and particles that cause warming and converted to CO2.

Furthermore, per kilogram of manure, you have much, much less ammonia and fewer greenhouse gases when you have insect manure than when you have cow manure.

If we start next year, it is six percent per year.

Why don't I hear how much energy Britain used yesterday, or American used yesterday?

The second pressure on the planet is, of course the climate agenda the big issue where the policy interpretation of science is that it would be enough to stabilize greenhouse gases at 450 ppm to avoid average temperatures exceeding two degrees, to avoid the risk that we may be destabilizing the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, holding six meters level rising, the risk of destabilizing the Greenland Ice Sheet, holding another seven meters sea level rising.

When animals like us eat those plants our stomachs convert that food back into energy for our own growth.

The oil produced from either method produces more greenhouse gas emissions than any other oil.

like woodland caribou and grizzly bears, and it consumes even more energy, more water, and produces at least as much greenhouse gas.

If those plants die, they decompose, and tiny microorganisms break down those carbohydrates and again, release greenhouse gases as a byproduct.

Steel represents about three percent of man's greenhouse gas emissions, and concrete is over five percent.

If so, more warming is in the pipeline.

Its changes will affect all of humanity.

The scientists tell us and they're only guessing that we've got to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by one half, and do it as fast as possible.