Sentences with phrase «if coal industry»

If the the coal industry does falter, that could have negative consequences for the many pension funds, banks and financial institutions that have coal - related assets.

The filmaker couldn't have made a more sensational anti-wind statement if the coal industry paid her to.

Joffan, despite what you think I know for a fact that if the coal industry in Gillette, Wyoming dried up the place would become a ghost town in no time flat.

«Let's see what happens if we get rid of the war on coal, and then let's see if the coal industry has a future,» Ebell said.

I think if the coal industry hadn't been so vicious about all of this, buying them out would be on the table.

In my view, if the coal industry does not proactively agree to, and indeed volunteer for, a prompt moratorium on the construction of new coal - fired power plants until carbon capture and storage are proven and viable, and included in commercial plants, we should get out the literature, the musical lyrics, the poetry, the ethical codes, and so forth and create a collection of material that brings to vivid life the «problems» (to put it mildly) that Shakespeare illuminates, as they will then apply to the coal industry.

Not exact matches

Clark said a ban will help develop the province's liquefied natural gas industry, arguing if China shifted from coal to LNG it would have «a massive impact» on greenhouse gas emissions.

-- Here's a closer look at why Trump will struggle to save the US coal industry even if he manages to repeal many of Obama's environmental policies.

Trump said that, if elected, he would rescind Obama's «job - destroying» executive actions, «save» the coal industry, revive the Keystone XL pipeline project and cancel the Paris climate accords.

If it were, those television commercials by the fossil fuel industry would have convinced everyone by now that coal can be «clean.»

Coal industry executives contend that it can compete against gasoline if oil prices are $ 50 a barrel or higher.

Some experts say that coal - fired plants can only become truly clean if the government and industry pump billions of dollars into the technological upgrades required to extract the carbon dioxide gas created during combustion and sequester it semipermanently deep underground.

Solar panels could produce electricity at the same price as coal - and natural gas - burning power plants by the end of this decade if countries direct resources at this rapidly advancing corner of the energy industry, according to the Paris - based International Energy Agency.

«China has called for controlling its primary energy consumption in 4.8 billion tons of standard coal by 2020 and limiting coal consumption in 4.2 billion tons; those targets will not be realized if Chinese coal - to - chemicals industry continues to grow,» Ma said.

The coal industry, and its backers in Congress, have said that if EPA deems CCS the best system of emissions reduction, it will force the industry to use a method that has not been proved on a commercial scale.

Hard - won reductions in the environmental toxin could be erased if Trump proceeds with plans to resuscitate the coal industry and abandon climate initiatives

Coal - reliant states and industry groups had justified their early legal action by saying they have already started incurring costs in preparation for the anticipated final rule and that they will not be able to be compensated fully for costs if they waited to challenge the rule.

If the government decides to continue subsidising the nuclear industry, future investment in coal and other fuels may be jeopardised.

The jist of this is that we must NOT suddenly switch off carbon / sulphur producing industries over the planet but instead we must first dramatically reduce CO2 emissions from every conceivable source, then gradually tackle coal / fossil fuel sources to smoothly remove the soot from the air to prevent a sudden leap in average global temps which if it is indeed 2.75 C as the UNEP predicts will permanently destroy the climates ability to regulate itself and lead to catastrophic changes on the land and sea.

Given his history as an oil and coal industry consultant who ignores 97 % of working climate scientists worldwide, why doesn't Arizona State consider it a problem for Dr. Balling to promote his political positions as if they were factual?

But even if the industry does increase output, it will likely not be accompanied by the well - paying jobs and economic prosperity that coal towns desperately need.

Like, if I go talk to a coal plant, I'm gonna be like «You know this industry is dying, right?

If we let ourselves get distracted by the complaints of some people in the coal industry about other people's insensitivity, whether or not that's what it was, we risk taking our eyes off the ball.

As for the criticism for McCain wanting to build non-carbon capturing coal plants, since we're going to be burning coal for decades by any estimate, if we implement a carbon restrictive regime, wouldn't we want to allow industry to build new plants that are more efficient than the current fleet?

A coal burning plant lasts around 40 years - industry needs to know now if it is to invest in clean coal technolgy for a new plant or retrofit.

You don't need to be a expert to cut through the coal industry hokum if you just read the reports that our government has made available.

And if Body Thetan Cricklewood wants only what's spent on climatology for these people [coal industry et al], then it should be the same for government sponsored work.

Please, if any member of the coal industry disagrees with me, let him / her post here and clearly explain why.

If a new administration immediately places a moratorium on new coal - fired plants until CCS works, and if it begins a carbon cap - and - trade system or carbon tax, and if it's serious about the problem, then we will finally see (I hope) the coal and utility industries begin to act much more quickly to develop CCS and work to address the problem in all ways possiblIf a new administration immediately places a moratorium on new coal - fired plants until CCS works, and if it begins a carbon cap - and - trade system or carbon tax, and if it's serious about the problem, then we will finally see (I hope) the coal and utility industries begin to act much more quickly to develop CCS and work to address the problem in all ways possiblif it begins a carbon cap - and - trade system or carbon tax, and if it's serious about the problem, then we will finally see (I hope) the coal and utility industries begin to act much more quickly to develop CCS and work to address the problem in all ways possiblif it's serious about the problem, then we will finally see (I hope) the coal and utility industries begin to act much more quickly to develop CCS and work to address the problem in all ways possible.

If we should have luck here in Germany, and the EEG does not fail, it would mean that in 20 years we'd have a grid mostly powered by renewable energy, paid by the private households alone, that will produce cheap electricity for the industry at a time when oil, gas and coal will be much more expansive than today.

This is a vitally important distinction that many people don't seem to make very often, if at all (especially many of those in the coal, oil, and utility industries).

Of course, if we believe the large majority of the scientific community, this statement (from many in the oil and coal industries) essentially amounts to «You need the same thing that disturbs and destabilizes the Earth's climate.»

If the editors of the Times were truly smart and forward thinking, they would repeatedly condemn the greedy oil and coal industry as well as the rightwing naysayers like the moron in the oval office, and get real about climate change.

If industry - generated aerosols have a more limited cooling effect than originally thought, we can clean up and scale down dirty coal plants without worrying too much about consequent sudden jumps in global temperatures of up to 2 degrees C (if I remember the upper limits of earlier studies correctlyIf industry - generated aerosols have a more limited cooling effect than originally thought, we can clean up and scale down dirty coal plants without worrying too much about consequent sudden jumps in global temperatures of up to 2 degrees C (if I remember the upper limits of earlier studies correctlyif I remember the upper limits of earlier studies correctly).

Even after decades of increasingly dire warnings, the US has still not passed comprehensive federal legislation to combat global warming; Canada has abandoned past pledges in order to exploit its emissions - heavy tar sands; China continues to depend on coal for its energy production; Indonesia's effort to stem widespread deforestation is facing stiff resistance from industry; Europe is mulling pulling back on its more ambitious cuts if other nations do not join it; northern nations are scrambling to exploit the melting Arctic for untapped oil and gas reserves; and fossil fuels continue to be subsidized worldwide to the tune of $ 400 billion.

So what the proposal is really telling the electric utility industry is this: If you want to build a new coal - fired power plant, you'll have to build a natural gas combined cycle plant instead.

And wouldn't those talking points pack a fatal punch with reporters if you could say a Pulitzer winning investigative reporter discovered a leaked coal industry memo which was proof for skeptic climate scientists being paid to «reposition global warming as theory rather than fact.»

If you've seen U.S. coal industry executives casting wistful glances across the Atlantic recently, there's a reason.

Addressing Friday's announcement, Senator Lisa Murkowski (R - AK), Chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, declared: «If there were any lingering questions about whether the Obama Administration is intent on decimating America's coal industry, this should answer them.»

But if the industry wants to surpass coal and fulfil its role as a «transition fuel», it should lobby for a carbon price to help it on its way.

If the regulations on the coal industry are allowed to stand, they will almost certainly destroy the coal industry, with predictable, undesirable economic effects on the rest of the country.

In Australia, the coal industry, and the mining industry in general, is enormously wealthy and stands to lose a huge amount if we move to a low - carbon future.

If you haven't been watching MSNBC «s «All in with Chris Hayes» every night this week, you've been missing out on some phenomenal research into the coal industry, its future in the U.S., and the people fighting for clean energy to replace.

«It's particularly important that we do not demonise the coal industry and if there was one fundamental problem, above all else, with the carbon tax was that it said to our people, it said to the wider world, that a commodity which in many years is our biggest single export, somehow should be left in the ground and not sold.

If climate change continues to have a negative impact on these tourism spots and natural wonders, it could have a huge effect on the local economy, too, as tourism is Australia's second-most valuable export, employing more than 580,000 people — 15 times more than the coal mining industry.

The emissions from this exported coal are currently equal to the total emissions we produce here at home, and if government and industry get their way, these emissions will double again.

«And if you believe the polluter should pay, the coal industry is the classic case because for the last 100 years it had made massive profits at the expense of the atmosphere and the climate and now is the time for them to pay for their own research.»

The group argues that the so - called «beneficial - use industry» would be eliminated if a «hazardous» designation was given for coal ash waste.

And if it's right — something that, to be sure, can be questioned — then we would be on the verge of an energy and technology transformation to rival the sudden decline of the coal industry.

But, warns the IEA, the coal industry — and the funds management industry and the banks that finance it — are carrying on as if it's business as usual, making decisions about hundreds of billions of dollars of investment as if nothing would change, and not even lip service was paid to the climate change problem.