Sentences with phrase «bridge fuel»

The next thing automakers did was to bridge the fuel economy gap by offering more gears.

To put a nail in natural gas as bridge fuel away from coal, here's Myhrvold on the effect of rapidly replacing coal with natural gas on temperatures over the next 100 years:

Gas is a very good bridging fuel to get there as it has less than half of the emissions, for instance, that coal has and also much less than oil has.

At the time of the agreement, Cuomo and the commission argued that the nuclear plants provide a clean bridge fuel while reaching the state's goal of getting 50 percent of its power from renewable sources by 2030.

Cuomo has argued that nuclear power is cleaner than fossil fuels and is a needed bridge fuel during a transition to wind, solar and other renewable energy sources.

In addition, the misleading characterization of natural gas as a «clean bridge fuel» in Israeli public discourse myopically overlooks the role caused by methane leaks in perpetrating global warming.

Governor Cuomo has argued that nuclear power is cleaner than fossil fuels, and is a needed bridge fuel during a transition to wind, solar, and other renewable energy sources.

New York's nuclear energy landscape is poised to shift dramatically in 2016, as it shrinks by one reactor and as the governor readies a policy that would recognize nuclear as a key bridge fuel to a renewable - powered future.

The idea was, perhaps unsurprisingly, that natural gas will solve the supply problem of «peak oil» — when global oil production starts to decline — and dramatically cut US emissions of greenhouse gases, making it a perfect bridging fuel to a low - carbon future.

It's being touted in the US as the ultimate bridging fuel to a low - carbon future.

We still see natural gas as an important bridge fuel and encourage converting coal plants to natural gas, but we also support full disclosure of fracking chemicals and strong environmental safeguards during production.

The group's Blair Horner said nuclear power is not the best bridge fuel to use in achieving greener energy sources.

(IEA, 2012) Even if natural gas is a short - term bridge fuel, delay in investing in non-fossil fuel technologies may make it impossible to meet the emissions reductions targets needed to prevent dangerous climate change.

«While we know that gas can play a small part as a bridging fuel as to move to greener sources, the government's decision to sign off upwards of 30GW of new gas simply flies in the face of warnings about the consequences of a «dash for gas» on both consumer bills and legally binding climate targets»

And he argued the nuclear plants» output is needed as a bridge fuel to help the state reach a goal of half of all New York's power coming from renewable sources by 2030.

Next month, in his State of the State address, Cuomo plans to introduce a new policy to create incentives for utilities to buy nuclear power as a bridge fuel until the state can reach its goal of renewables powering half the electric grid by 2030.

Its only hope for salvation is the new Cuomo administration policy that would effectively use nuclear as a bridge fuel while the state expands its renewable industry.

Draft State Energy Master plans made oblique references to the implementation of hydrofracking here, and prominently factored fracked gas in the state's future energy portfolio as a «bridge fuel».

Cuomo administration officials also said it would be difficult to abruptly transition from oil and gas to cleaner fuels without a bridge fuel like nuclear power.

The development of natural gas, far from being a bridge fuel, makes climate change worse because it is so much more potent than carbon near term.

Cuomo administration officials also say it would be difficult to abruptly transition from oil and gas to cleaner fuels without a bridge fuel like nuclear power.

The fracking ban demand convinced the many environmentalists to support a ban rather than their positions at that time of promoting fracked gas as the «bridge fuel» to renewable energy or calling for a moratorium while fracking was studied.

One day after President Barack Obama touted hydrofracking of natural gas as a bridge fuel, Gov. Andrew Cuomo's environmental commissioner says it's extremely unlikely that permits for drilling wells will be issued in the next year.

NYPIRG's Blair Horner says nuclear power is not the best bridge fuel to use in achieving greener energy sources.

Optimists see the new resource as a cheap, clean «bridging fuel» to a low - carbon future.

Natural gas's impact as a bridge fuel to a cleaner energy future has been oversold, new research suggests

Krupp, who has been a measured supporter of natural gas as a «bridge fuel» to transition the nation's energy economy toward cleaner sources, called the numbers «alarming.»

In that sense, natural gas is a bridge fuel to disaster, even with some form of CO2 capture and storage, and the world must immediately transition to renewables and nuclear.

When burned, natural gas emits roughly half the carbon dioxide of coal, making it a promising «bridge fuel» until cleaner renewable energy sources come online.

«Natural gas emits roughly half the CO2 of coal, and is a promising «bridge fuel», ahead of cleaner sources»

By 2014, he highlighted natural gas as as «the bridge fuel that can -LSB-...]

«Using this new information as well as other independent studies on methane emissions published since 2011, and the latest information on the climate influence of methane compared to carbon dioxide from the latest synthesis report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released in September of this year, it is clear that natural gas is no bridge fuel,» Howarth wrote.

«I think we contribute a lot to the discussion, but we do not really have anything to say about whether or not natural gas is or is not a good bridge fuel.

The notion, Ingraffea said, that shale gas is a desirable «bridge fuel» from oil to widespread renewable energy supplies several decades from now «makes no sense» in terms of climate change.

Natural gas is playing an increasingly important role in meeting U.S. and global energy needs and could serve as a «bridge fuel» for countries as they transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy resources.

This analysis provides five clear reasons why fossil gas is not a «bridge fuel.»

«The same IPCC report that says (natural gas) is a bridge fuel says we only have 15 to 20 years to do something,» Ingraffea said, referring to the IPCC's call to reduce greenhouse gas emissions globally.

The issue was well known but little studied: methane does not hang around in the atmosphere for long, so scientists had assumed that the odd leak would not undermine its use as a bridge fuel.

The IPCC in its Working Group III report says natural gas as a bridge fuel will only be effective if few gases escape into the atmosphere during natural gas production and distribution.

In a warming world, natural gas is often touted as a «bridge fuel» between carbon - laden coal and a full embrace of renewables for electric power generation.

It is not a bridge fuel, there's too much leakage.»

Some scientists, including Cornell University environmental biologist Robert Howarth, have questioned natural gas's use as a «bridge fuel» because producing the gas, most of which is released from underground shale formations through hydraulic fracturing, often emits a lot of methane, a potent greenhouse gas.

Thus, although fugitive methane emissions reduce the short - term emissions benefit of coal - to - gas switching --- and should be addressed for that reason — they do not limit natural gas's potential as a bridge fuel to a low carbon future.

Using this new information as well as other independent studies on methane emissions published since 2011, and the latest information on the climate influence of methane compared to carbon dioxide from the latest synthesis report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released in September of this year, it is clear that natural gas is no bridge fuel.

Our study does not address how the magnitude of the source types that we present translate into an overall climate impact for natural gas vs. other fuel types, nor does it address implications for natural gas as a bridge fuel.

However, in their recent publication in Climatic Change Letters, Howarth et al. (2011) report that their life - cycle evaluation of shale gas drilling suggests that shale gas has a larger GHG footprint than coal and that this larger footprint «undercuts the logic of its use as a bridging fuel over the coming decades».

[N] one of this, in my view, undercuts the importance of natural gas as a bridge fuel on the path to a lower - carbon, and more secure, energy menu as humanity sprints toward 9 billion people seeking decent lives.