These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

194 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28477569)

  • 1. Additionality and permanence standards in California's Forest Offset Protocol: A review of project and program level implications.
    Ruseva T; Marland E; Szymanski C; Hoyle J; Marland G; Kowalczyk T
    J Environ Manage; 2017 Aug; 198(Pt 1):277-288. PubMed ID: 28477569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Using remote sensing to quantify the additional climate benefits of California forest carbon offset projects.
    Coffield SR; Vo CD; Wang JA; Badgley G; Goulden ML; Cullenward D; Anderegg WRL; Randerson JT
    Glob Chang Biol; 2022 Nov; 28(22):6789-6806. PubMed ID: 36093912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Systematic over-crediting in California's forest carbon offsets program.
    Badgley G; Freeman J; Hamman JJ; Haya B; Trugman AT; Anderegg WRL; Cullenward D
    Glob Chang Biol; 2022 Feb; 28(4):1433-1445. PubMed ID: 34668621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Carbon trading, co-pollutants, and environmental equity: Evidence from California's cap-and-trade program (2011-2015).
    Cushing L; Blaustein-Rejto D; Wander M; Pastor M; Sadd J; Zhu A; Morello-Frosch R
    PLoS Med; 2018 Jul; 15(7):e1002604. PubMed ID: 29990353
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The Willingness of Non-Industrial Private Forest Owners to Enter California's Carbon Offset Market.
    Kelly EC; Gold GJ; Di Tommaso J
    Environ Manage; 2017 Nov; 60(5):882-895. PubMed ID: 28836080
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effective forest-based climate change mitigation requires our best science.
    Anderson-Teixeira KJ; Belair EP
    Glob Chang Biol; 2022 Feb; 28(4):1200-1203. PubMed ID: 34846762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Optimizing sequestered carbon in forest offset programs: balancing accounting stringency and participation.
    Wise L; Marland E; Marland G; Hoyle J; Kowalczyk T; Ruseva T; Colby J; Kinlaw T
    Carbon Balance Manag; 2019 Dec; 14(1):16. PubMed ID: 31797110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Contingent feasibility for forest carbon credit: evidence from South Korean firms.
    Roh T; Koo JC; Cho DS; Youn YC
    J Environ Manage; 2014 Nov; 144():297-303. PubMed ID: 24975805
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Designing a carbon market that protects forests in developing countries.
    Niesten E; Frumhoff PC; Manion M; Hardner JJ
    Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci; 2002 Aug; 360(1797):1875-88. PubMed ID: 12460503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Improved assessment of baseline and additionality for forest carbon crediting.
    Randazzo NA; Gordon DR; Hamburg SP
    Ecol Appl; 2023 Apr; 33(3):e2817. PubMed ID: 36756686
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Small-scale forestry and carbon offset markets: An empirical study of Vermont Current Use forest landowner willingness to accept carbon credit programs.
    White AE; Lutz DA; Howarth RB; Soto JR
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(8):e0201967. PubMed ID: 30106977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evaluating the potential of biodiversity offsets to achieve net gain.
    Souza BA; Rosa JCS; Campos PBR; Sánchez LE
    Conserv Biol; 2023 Aug; 37(4):e14094. PubMed ID: 37021395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The water footprint of California's energy system, 1990-2012.
    Fulton J; Cooley H
    Environ Sci Technol; 2015 Mar; 49(6):3314-21. PubMed ID: 25719565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the Marginal Cost of Carbon Abatement for Residential Buildings under California's 2019 Title 24 Energy Codes.
    White BW; Niemeier D
    Environ Sci Technol; 2019 Oct; 53(20):12121-12129. PubMed ID: 31542927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Carbon accounting rules and guidelines for the United States forest sector.
    Birdsey RA
    J Environ Qual; 2006; 35(4):1518-24. PubMed ID: 16825472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Barriers to the development of forest carbon offsetting: Insights from British Columbia, Canada.
    Peterson St-Laurent G; Hagerman S; Hoberg G
    J Environ Manage; 2017 Dec; 203(Pt 1):208-217. PubMed ID: 28783017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Climate Change Mitigation, Air Pollution, and Environmental Justice in California.
    Anderson CM; Kissel KA; Field CB; Mach KJ
    Environ Sci Technol; 2018 Sep; 52(18):10829-10838. PubMed ID: 30179479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Revisiting the land use assumptions in forest carbon projects through a case from India.
    Aggarwal A
    J Environ Manage; 2020 Aug; 267():110673. PubMed ID: 32421661
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. California air resources board forest carbon protocol invalidates offsets.
    Marino BDV; Mincheva M; Doucett A
    PeerJ; 2019; 7():e7606. PubMed ID: 31579578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Overstated carbon emission reductions from voluntary REDD+ projects in the Brazilian Amazon.
    West TAP; Börner J; Sills EO; Kontoleon A
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2020 Sep; 117(39):24188-24194. PubMed ID: 32929021
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.