Sentences with phrase «anything about fuel»

And of course, neither party will do anything about fuel taxes and emissions from the transportation sector.

Does section 202 of the Clean Air Act, the provision through which EPA is promulgating motor vehicle greenhouse gas emission standards, say anything about fuel economy?

Looking at the box for the part, it says it's a high performance part and does not say anything about fuel savings.

Not exact matches

Mojio is a little box that plugs into any car's maintenance data port, beaming out information about the car's internal state, so the driver can use smartphone apps (either supplied by Mojio, or by third parties) to do anything from monitor their car's fuel economy to find parking spots.

Senator Joseph Montoya of New Mexico added fuel to the fire by stating that anyone born north of the border could not know anything at all about chili, so he entered his wife's Mexican chili!

An additional worry for the children is whether anything about their parent will appear in the newspapers, providing fuel for taunts and bullying.

It gave me ammunition and fuel to step into my role of motherhood with more passion and purpose, and it gave my daughter the confidence to talk about nearly anything with me.

Yet lawmakers are on course to leave town this year without doing anything about the underlying problems that have fueled a «show me the money» culture here that, time and again, has gotten Democrats and Republicans both cunning and clueless into trouble.

Ships, cars, aeroplanes, rockets and just about anything that requires fuel to move can be adapted to run on water, according to claims made this week at a conference on marine technology in Southampton.

Farmers in the Near East — what is today Israel, Palestine, Syria, Jordan, and neighboring countries — began cultivating plants and herding animals about 8000 B.C.E., but there are no signs that they used animal dung for anything other than as fuel for fires.

Health improvement (allowing to post - pone / escape the diseases and thus live, healthier / disease - free longer, but not above human MLSP of around 122 years; thus these therapies do not affect epigenetic aging whatsoever, they are degenerative aging problems not regular healthy aging problem (except OncoSENS - only when you Already Have Cancer - which cancer increases epigenetic aging, but cancer removal thus does not change anything / makes no difference about what happens in the other cells / about what happens in the normal epigenetic «aging» course in Normal non-cancerous healthy cells) Although there is not such thing as «healthy aging» all aging in «unhealthy» (as seen from elders who are «healthy enough» who show much damage), it's just «tolerable / liveable» enough (in terms of damage accumulating) that it does not affect their quality of life (enough yet), that is «healthy aging»: ApoptoSENS - Clearing Senescent Cells (this will have great impact to reduce diseases, the largest one, since it's all inflammation fueled by the inflammation secretory phenotype (SASP) of these senescent cells) AmyloSENS - Dissolving the Plaques (this will allow humans to evade Alzheimer's, Parkinsons and general brain degenerescence, allowing quite a boost; making people much more easily reach the big 100 - since the brain is causal to how long we live; keeping brain amyloid - free and keeping our memories / neuron sharp / means longer LongTerm Potentiation - means longer brain function means longer heavy brain mass (gray matter / white matter retention seen in «sharp - witted» Centenarians who show are younger brain for their age), and both are correlated to MLSP).

«The methodology can not be used to infer anything about the direct impacts of specific policies, such as power plant emissions limits or renewable portfolio standards, or the effect that changes in relative prices may have on fuel choice, such as the impact of the change in supply or price of natural gas or renewables may have had on the competitiveness of coal.

But like Justin's talking about the to help fuel the enzymatic processes and help Krebs cycle and promote energy and all that, it's not going to do anything.

I'm worried about not eating anything and not having enough «fuel» to do these workouts.

But I think anything that's gonna make you feel better about what you're doing and how you're fueling your body and — and the end goal of — of feeling better and getting healthier, is a good thing.

If you didn't do anything all day except sit on the couch, you would need about sixty grams of carbohydrates a day to make fuel to generate energy to keep yourself going.

But truthfully, it isn't saying anything about the relationship between the media and society — and the toxic and symbiotic voyeurism that fuels it — that hadn't been said already, decades earlier, in eerily prescient films from «Ace in the Hole» (1951) to «Network» (1976) to «Broadcast News» (1987).

Gasoline in a fuel tank should be good for a minimum of six months before you need to start worrying about anything.

(Heck, if the Ridgeline did get better fuel economy, I'd be highly tempted to buy a used one, since the Ridgeline will tow and haul just about anything that I or most people could throw at it.)

As might be expected from a turbocharged V - 8, mileage isn't anything to write home about, but 24 highway mpg and a 22 - gallon fuel tank mean an effective range of about 500 miles on the freeway.

Bear in mind I bought this vehicle with no regard or worry about fuel consumption or niceties like power seats or leather wrapped anything.

Fuel economy is about the same as I had with the R / T, although thats more due to San Diego traffic than anything else.

That falls significantly below the EPA's estimates of 28 city mpg and 40 highway, but if experience has taught me anything about three Car Tech editors sharing a car that claims a sporty pedigree, it's that our observed fuel economy is usually something of a worst - case scenario.

Unfortunately, Toyota didn't say anything about the Prius» powertrain or fuel economy numbers.

Honda's cylinder deactivation technology keeps fuel economy high on the highway, but there isn't anything particularly exotic about the drivetrain.

Average fuel economy in the low 20s many not be anything to write home about, but it is quite good for an SUV of this capacity.

Also, if you know anything about this vehicle you know not to expect great fuel economy.

Fuel economy numbers have yet to be released for the Roadster, but if they're anything like the Coupe, expect digits in the high 30s on the highway — not in Prius territory, but again, this unlikely competitor is not only about fuel efficieFuel economy numbers have yet to be released for the Roadster, but if they're anything like the Coupe, expect digits in the high 30s on the highway — not in Prius territory, but again, this unlikely competitor is not only about fuel efficiefuel efficiency.

From its impressive performance to an eye - popping fuel economy and state - of - the - art safety features, the one thing you'll uncover about the Nissan Altima is it is anything but «average».

So call bodykit but never mention anything about aerodynamics of the car or the fuel consumption....

I haven't read anything on any blogs about Kroger cracking down on this, but what are the odds of 7 stores in 2 states suddenly not giving fuel points for these cards anymore?

The screenshots and video below offer our first look into Kaos Studios» second game under THQ, Homefront, and as someone who liked their previous game, Frontlines: Fuel of War, I have to say it's hard to really say anything much about them at this point.

None of which has anything to do with poor people in rural Africa that Gavin wrote about — people who use little or no fossil fuels, and who would therefore not pay any carbon taxes, even if someone were to impose such taxes in rural Africa, which no one has suggested doing.

I understand that large estimates of recoverable fossil fuels are central to making a case for the risks of burning those fuels, but the longer term risk, if we manage to survive burning everything we've got in the ground, is taking a path that is completely dependent on those fuel sources and finding ourselves living on a baked planet with no energy to do anything about it.

There are several western states — just about all of them — with sufficient open space away from almost anything to store fuel rods for the next couple of thousand years, even if nuclear provided 100 % of US electric supply.

One more thing: The line Gelbspan had in the video and in the Mother Jones interview about the 1991 Western Fuels annual report «enlisting several scientists» and «attacking mainstream science»...... the lack of those exact words in that ’91 WFA report, or anything actually resembling those phrases, will be the topic of a future blog piece here.

By the 90's I'd started to realize that the Coming Disasters the Alarmists always preached about never actually seemed to get any closer, and more telling, that their chosen solutions (like Solar and Wind Power, Hydrogen Fuel, and especially Governmental Control) never seemed to make anything better.

«The methodology can not be used to infer anything about the direct impacts of specific policies, such as power plant emissions limits or renewable portfolio standards, or the effect that changes in relative prices may have on fuel choice, such as the impact of the change in supply or price of natural gas or renewables may have had on the competitiveness of coal.

A better question, however, would be to ask exactly how the questioners came to know the detailed information about the skeptics» associations with anything related to the fossil fuel industry.

However, as Mr. Outing points out, presenting a «balanced» view of global heating doesn't make sense — there isn't anything resembling a serious debate about whether human beings are causing global heating because the current scientific consensus is that human burning of fossil fuels is causing global heating.

CFACT advisor Larry Bell reports, «If there's anything that climate crisis theology clerics hate more than fossil fuels, it's got to be any glad tidings about CO2.»

You don't have a lot of bandwidth left to think about climate change — or at least you haven't had a lot of it — and the only people who have that bandwidth left is the fossil fuel industry because they understand that doing anything for climate change is a mortal threat for their industry.

Now, out here in the real world the most charitable way to describe this lunacy of forcing the nations of the world to give up fossil fuels is to... to... well, now that I think about it, there is no way to describe this as anything but a pathetic joke which if implemented will cause untold economic disruption, disaster, and death.

Other than his first illustration of a pedal - powered hydraulic log splitter (a silly idea more simply done by hand), the article shows numerous ways that bike tech can be used to replace fuel or electricity powered machinery, including everything blenders, washing machines, agricultural implements and multi-tool devices that can do just about anything.

Second, not doing anything about our fossil fuel habits is highly likely to make radical changes to our planet's environment.

The usual activists like Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth remind us that the whole thing is just another hand out for fossil fuels and it doesn't mention anything about deep enough carbon emission reductions.