Multi Interim Storage V 3.2
LINK - https://bltlly.com/2tlxiL
For items of equipment having a unit acquisition cost of $5,000 or more, NIH has the right to require transfer title to the equipment to the Federal government or to an eligible third party named by the NIH awarding IC The NIH organizational component responsible for a particular grant program or set of activities. The terms \"NIH IC,\" or \"awarding IC\" are used throughout this document to designate a point of contact for advice and interpretation of grant requirements and to establish the focal point for requesting necessary prior approvals or changes in the terms and conditions of award. under the conditions specified in 2 CFR Part 200.313 and 45 CFR Part 75.320. Such transfer shall be subject to the following standards: (1) The equipment shall be appropriately identified in the award or otherwise made known to the recipient in writing. (2) The awarding IC The NIH organizational component responsible for a particular grant program or set of activities. The terms \"NIH IC,\" or \"awarding IC\" are used throughout this document to designate a point of contact for advice and interpretation of grant requirements and to establish the focal point for requesting necessary prior approvals or changes in the terms and conditions of award. may require submission of a final inventory that lists all equipment acquired with NIH funds and federally-owned equipment. (3) If the awarding IC The NIH organizational component responsible for a particular grant program or set of activities. The terms \"NIH IC,\" or \"awarding IC\" are used throughout this document to designate a point of contact for advice and interpretation of grant requirements and to establish the focal point for requesting necessary prior approvals or changes in the terms and conditions of award. fails to issue disposition instructions within 120 calendar days after receipt of the inventory or if so instructed, the recipient shall sell the equipment and reimburse the HHS awarding agency an amount computed by applying to the sales proceeds the percentage of HHS share in the cost of the original project or program. However, the recipient shall be permitted to deduct and retain from the NIH share $500 or ten percent of the proceeds, whichever is less, for the recipient's selling and handling expenses. If the recipient is instructed to ship the equipment elsewhere, the recipient shall be reimbursed by the awarding IC The NIH organizational component responsible for a particular grant program or set of activities. The terms \"NIH IC,\" or \"awarding IC\" are used throughout this document to designate a point of contact for advice and interpretation of grant requirements and to establish the focal point for requesting necessary prior approvals or changes in the terms and conditions of award. an amount which is computed by applying the percentage of the recipient's share in the cost of the original project or program to the current fair market value of the equipment, plus any reasonable shipping or interim storage costs incurred. If the recipient is instructed to otherwise dispose of the equipment, the recipient will be reimbursed by the HHS awarding agency for such costs incurred in its disposition. If the recipient's project or program for which or under which the equipment was acquired is still receiving support from the same HHS program, and if the HHS awarding agency approves, the net amount due may be used for allowable costs of that project or program. Otherwise the net amount must be remitted to the HHS awarding agency by check. This right applies to nonexempt property acquired by all types of recipients, including Federal institutions, under all types of grants under the stipulated conditions.
A.2.2. Reaching and sustaining net zero global anthropogenic CO2 emissions and declining net non-CO2 radiative forcing would halt anthropogenic global warming on multi-decadal times cales (high confidence). The maximum temperature reached is then determined by cumulative net global anthropogenic CO2 emissions up to the time of net zero CO2 emissions (high confidence) and the level of non-CO2 radiative forcing in the decades prior to the time that maximum temperatures are reached (medium confidence). On longer time scales, sustained net negative global anthropogenic CO2 emissions and/or further reductions in non-CO2 radiative forcing may still be required to prevent further warming due to Earth system feedbacks and to reverse ocean acidification (medium confidence) and will be required to minimize sea level rise (high confidence). {Cross-Chapter Box 2 in Chapter 1, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, Figure 1.4, 2.2.1, 2.2.2, 3.4.4.8, 3.4.5.1, 3.6.3.2}
A.3.3. Adaptation and mitigation are already occurring (high confidence). Future climate-related risks would be reduced by the upscaling and acceleration of far-reaching, multilevel and cross-sectoral climate mitigation and by both incremental and transformational adaptation (high confidence). {1.2, 1.3, Table 3.5, 4.2.2, Cross-Chapter Box 9 in Chapter 4, Box 4.2, Box 4.3, Box 4.6, 4.3.1, 4.3.2, 4.3.3, 4.3.4, 4.3.5, 4.4.1, 4.4.4, 4.4.5, 4.5.3}
B.2.2. Sea level rise will continue beyond 2100 even if global warming is limited to 1.5C in the 21st century (high confidence). Marine ice sheet instability in Antarctica and/or irreversible loss of the Greenland ice sheet could result in multi-metre rise in sea level over hundreds to thousands of years. These instabilities could be triggered at around 1.5C to 2C of global warming (medium confidence). (Figure SPM.2) {3.3.9, 3.4.5, 3.5.2, 3.6.3, Box 3.3}
B.5.6. Exposure to multiple and compound climate-related risks increases between 1.5C and 2C of global warming, with greater proportions of people both so exposed and susceptible to poverty in Africa and Asia (high confidence). For global warming from 1.5C to 2C, risks across energy, food, and water sectors could overlap spatially and temporally, creating new and exacerbating current hazards, exposures, and vulnerabilities that could affect increasing numbers of people and regions (medium confidence). {Box 3.5, 3.3.1, 3.4.5.3, 3.4.5.6, 3.4.11, 3.5.4.9}
B.5.7. There are multiple lines of evidence that since AR5 the assessed levels of risk increased for four of the five Reasons for Concern (RFCs) for global warming to 2C (high confidence). The risk transitions by degrees of global warming are now: from high to very high risk between 1.5C and 2C for RFC1 (Unique and threatened systems) (high confidence); from moderate to high risk between 1C and 1.5C for RFC2 (Extreme weather events) (medium confidence); from moderate to high risk between 1.5C and 2C for RFC3 (Distribution of impacts) (high confidence); from moderate to high risk between 1.5C and 2.5C for RFC4 (Global aggregate impacts) (medium confidence); and from moderate to high risk between 1C and 2.5C for RFC5 (Large-scale singular events) (medium confidence). (Figure SPM.2) {3.4.13; 3.5, 3.5.2}
B.6.2. Adaptation is expected to be more challenging for ecosystems, food and health systems at 2C of global warming than for 1.5C (medium confidence). Some vulnerable regions, including small islands and Least Developed Countries, are projected to experience high multiple interrelated climate risks even at global warming of 1.5C (high confidence). {3.3.1, 3.4.5, Box 3.5, Table 3.5, Cross-Chapter Box 9 in Chapter 4, 5.6, Cross-Chapter Box 12 in Chapter 5, Box 5.3}
C.3.1. Existing and potential CDR measures include afforestation and reforestation, land restoration and soil carbon sequestration, BECCS, direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS), enhanced weathering and ocean alkalinization. These differ widely in terms of maturity, potentials, costs, risks, co-benefits and trade-offs (high confidence). To date, only a few published pathways include CDR measures other than afforestation and BECCS. {2.3.4, 3.6.2, 4.3.2, 4.3.7}
D.2.3. Mitigation and adaptation consistent with limiting global warming to 1.5C are underpinned by enabling conditions, assessed in this Report across the geophysical, environmental-ecological, technological, economic, socio-cultural and institutional dimensions of feasibility. Strengthened multilevel governance, institutional capacity, policy instruments, technological innovation and transfer and mobilization of finance, and changes in human behaviour and lifestyles are enabling conditions that enhance the feasibility of mitigation and adaptation options for 1.5C-consistent systems transitions. (high confidence) {1.4, Cross-Chapter Box 3 in Chapter 1, 2.5.1, 4.4, 4.5, 5.6}
D.4. Mitigation options consistent with 1.5C pathways are associated with multiple synergies and trade-offs across the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). While the total number of possible synergies exceeds the number of trade-offs, their net effect will depend on the pace and magnitude of changes, the composition of the mitigation portfolio and the management of the transition. (high confidence) (Figure SPM.4) {2.5, 4.5, 5.4}
Potential synergies and trade-offs between the sectoral portfolio of climate change mitigation options and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The SDGs serve as an analytical framework for the assessment of the different sustainable development dimensions, which extend beyond the time frame of the 2030 SDG targets. The assessment is based on literature on mitigation options that are considered relevant for 1.5C. The assessed strength of the SDG interactions is based on the qualitative and quantitative assessment of individual mitigation options listed in Table 5.2. For each mitigation option, the strength ofthe SDG-connection as well as the associated confidence of the underlying literature (shades of green and red) was assessed. The strength of positive connections (synergies) and negative connections (trade-offs) across all individual options within a sector (see Table 5.2) are aggregated into sectoral potentials for the whole mitigation portfolio. The (white) areas outside the bars, which indicate no interactions, have low confidence due to the uncertainty and limited number of studies exploring indirect effects. The strength of the connection considers only the effect of mitigation and does not include benefits of avoided impacts. SDG 13 (climate action) is not listed because mitigation is being considered in terms of interactions with SDGs and not vice versa. The bars denote the strength of the connection, and do not consider the strength of the impact on the SDGs. The energy demand sector comprises behavioural responses, fuel switching and efficiency options in the transport, industry and building sector as well as carbon capture options in the industry sector. Options assessed in the energy supply sector comprise biomass and non-biomass renewables, nuclear, carbon capture and storage (CCS) with bioenergy, and CCS with fossil fuels. Options in the land sector comprise agricultural and forest options, sustainable diets and reduced food waste, soil sequestration, livestock and manure management, reduced deforestation, afforestation and reforestation, and responsible sourcing. In addition to this figure, options in the ocean sector are discussed in the underlying report. {5.4, Table 5.2, Figure 5.2} 59ce067264
https://www.thelaserlounge.clinic/forum/untitled-category/unreal-pt-1-0-7-free-download