logoJackobian
  • Home
  • Materials
  • Authors
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Materials
  • Authors
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
  • Become an Author

  • Login
Become an Author


logo
  • Socials
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • Resources
  • Materials
  • FAQs
  • Authors
  • Contact us
  • Legal
  • Terms & Condition
  • Privacy policy
google play

Get it on
Google Play

Download on the
App Store


© Jackobian 2026

BUILT BYCerebrohives
BooksUNNECO 512

In-App Reading Experiences

All books bought on the website can only be read on the app. Download Jackobian to have access to your materials

GLOBAL WARMING AND ATMOSPHERIC CARBON: IS  CARBON SEQUESTRATION A MYTH OR REALITY?

ECO 512: GLOBAL WARMING AND ATMOSPHERIC CARBON: IS CARBON SEQUESTRATION A MYTH OR REALITY?

ByAnthony Orji
SchoolUniversity of Nigeria, Nsukka
DepartmentEconomics
CategoryAcademic JournalsResearch Papers
Levels100200300400500600Post Graduate
₦ 3000
Preview Book

Description

Biotic and abiotic carbon sequestration currently seems to be the only viable tools

at the disposal of mankind for mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and thus a remedy

for tackling global warming challenges. This study accesses the global carbon capture and

storage (CCS) programme: the level of success in its implementation and its impact using panel data from eight countries, the majority of which have begun one or more operational 

CCS facilities. To achieve this objective, fifteen years period time series data was sourced 

for the eight selected countries based on data availability, namely the United States (US), the 

United Kingdom (UK), Canada, China, Australia, Norway, South Africa, and Nigeria; 

ranging from 1990 to 2015. The panel ARDL results show that the explanatory variables, 

global industrial production (LIP), Electricity production (LEP), Agricultural production 

(LAP), transportation (LTR), and energy supply (LES) have a long-run relationship with the 

dependent variable (LGHG emissions). While the short-run results show that none of the 

variables have a significant contribution to LGHG emissions. In the long-run results, LIP and 

LTR significantly contribute to the reduction of LGHG courtesy of the CCS programme 

while LEP, LAP, and LES contribute to a rise in the LGHG emission. The cross-sectional 

results show that all the variables have significant impacts on LGHG in all the sampled 

countries except Australia. Suggesting that, the CCS programme is viable for mitigating 

global warming and climate change and therefore should be considered by the various 

countries of the world.