Analysis in the new WEO - 2017 showed that for the first time the largest share of global subsidies that
benefit fossil fuel consumption went to keep electricity prices artificially low (41 % of the global total), ahead of oil (40 %) and natural gas.
Not exact matches
The sad part is - there are several valid
benefits from reducing the
consumption of
fossil fuels, that have nothing to do with climate change.
People in the West have
benefited from an increase in living standards, which has largely been driven by a large
consumption of
fossil fuels.
This is known to cause premature death, and policies that aim to reduce our
consumption of
fossil fuels often cite the potential health
benefits — and related cost savings — linked to reducing air pollution.
In addition to economic
benefits, there are social and environmental advantages to reducing energy
consumption, such as preserving
fossil fuels and minimising impact on the environment.
With a share of 100 % renewable energy sources and 12 times the current grid capacity, the balancing capacity of
fossil fuel power plants can be reduced to 15 % of the total annual electricity
consumption, which represents the maximum possible
benefit of transmission for Europe.
Weighing the social and economic
benefits of
fossil fuel consumption and other human activities against some of the environmental consequences, he asked «[i] s it now necessary, for the long - term future of our planet, to limit such development?»
But this analysis significantly underestimates the unmeasured - by - GDP
benefits of private
consumption of
fossil fuels.
There are also many other
benefits to cutting energy
consumption, like saving money, creating jobs, and reducing our dependency on imports and
fossil fuels.
One of the key
benefits associated with energy efficiency and renewable energy programs (clean energy) is that they reduce
consumption of
fossil fuel resources, and in doing so reduce
fossil fuel - related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.
Most «skeptics» have concluded, based on the available data, that the cost of «going to war» against CAGW (with carbon taxes, carbon rationing, top - down forced reductions in
fossil fuel consumption, etc.) would be far greater than any «
benefit» that might result, and would thus be «skeptical» of entering such a «war».
Cardayre argues that LS9's biofuels offer several
benefits that make them more attractive as an alternative to
fossil fuels than do ethanol - derived
fuels, including higher cost - efficiency and lower energy
consumption in production (65 % less energy).
Who the hell will
benefit from this increased
fossil fuel consumption?
One of the
benefits of organic production is that energy
consumption and, therefore,
fossil fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, are less than that in conventional systems.
There are many
benefits to organic farming, including reduced
fossil fuel energy
consumption and greenhouse gas emissions.
Appeals to conscience or fashion work, to the extent they do, by reducing the
fossil -
fuel consumer's perceived
benefit of
consumption (or equivalently, by increasing his perceived share of the externalized cost), for only a sub-population of consumers.