Sentences with phrase «build fossil fuel power plants»

It is entirely possible to build fossil fuel power plants in these areas only to have all the power go to already - connected, wealthier industrial users.

So - called dispatchable solar farms would in theory allow utilities to avoid spending billions of dollars building fossil fuel power plants that are fired up only a few times a year when electricity demand spikes, like on a hot day.

Not exact matches

In an article in this week's Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy, from AIP Publishing, the authors present results indicating that an optimally designed VAWT system can financially compete with fossil - fuel based power plants in urban and suburban areas, and even spearhead the development of a net - zero energy building or city.

The reality is that many of those people, and millions of others like them throughout the developing world who have NO access to electricity, will NEVER have access to fossil - fuel - fired electricity because no one is ever going to build the centralized power plants and the grid to deliver electricity to them.

(PS there are also emissions and energy consumption associated with fossil fuel energy supply outside the combustion of fuel, since power plants have to be built and run, etc.).

When nuclear power was first contemplated and the first plants were built, this energy source satisfied your condition for a low cost alternative for fossil fuel.

There is no need for these societies to repeat the disaster of the western world's 19th century fossil - fueled industrial revolution, nor is there any possibility of them doing so, given that they can afford neither the cost of the fossil fuels nor the cost of building electric grids to distribute power from large, centralized power plants.

We should not be building new power plants that burn fossil fuels, period.

From producing gas - guzzling cars to building more coal - fired power plants, to creating toxic waste disasters and simply maintaining our dependence on fossil fuels — are the members of USCAP really leading the pack?

Now that Obama has targeted power plants, vehicles, government buildings, the agriculture sector, the fossil fuel industry, and advocated for a plant - based diet, there isn't much low - hanging fruit left.

As countries build more fossil fuel power plants, they are committing to rapidly increasing emissions

Nuclear defenders are calling for keeping things in perspective — fossil fuels, they point out, have many more costs and risks associated with them than nuclear power; and newer generation reactor designs are far safer than those built in Japan many decades ago (a number of US plants from the same era have the same or similar designs).

I would agree 100 % that building nuclear power plants using today's best technology to cover a majority of future electrical energy needs or to replace old fossil fuel plants that are being decommissioned anyway makes sense.

Expansion of grid supply by construction of big new coal fired power plants such as in the Hunter Valley and near Lithgow are going ahead and look to me to be intended to prevent the issue of decarbonising our energy supply getting mixed up with the issue of maintaining growth and reliability of supply; we'll have enough fossil fuel generating capacity that building low emissions capacity will remain «optional» and can be deferred another decade or two.

Neilio, I'm with you on this.I just love the way you stand up to that guy's strange arguments.I too am extremely concerned at the way we are all being made to follow this crazy «science», to the detriment of most normal Humans» lives.I'm in England.We are living on a huge mass of fossil fuel, (coal, oil and now gas from Fracking), and we're being told that we must not use it to keep warm.Coal - fired power plants are being shut down.Useless windfarms are swamping our country.Nuclear stations are planned when Germany has banned them in favour of Coal.China and India are building and using more coal stations than we ever did.

We can build more large scale fossil fueled power plants and continue business - as - usual or invest in renewable and more decentralized energy technologies.

The bad news is that according to Chancellor Merkel, 10 — 20 GW of new fossil fuel power plants need to be built in order to facilitate the nuclear phase - out.

As Kammen points out, once you build a fossil fuel plant you are tying all who use its power to unpredictable fluctuations in fossil fuel prices and availability for at least 35 or so years.

As such, the country is promoting efforts to decommission fossil fuel based power plants and break its dependence on energy imports by building ever more PV systems and not strangling the market.

Because wind and solar are relative newcomers, most of what exists today was built to serve large fossil fuel and nuclear power plants.

New fossil - fuel power plants will have to meet the standard, or they simply can't be built.

A recent Oxford study found that as of next year, no more new fossil fuel - fired power plants can be built.

Earlier this year, scientists found that to have a 50 percent chance of avoiding the worst impacts of climate change, no new fossil fuel - fired power plants can be built after 2017.

Utilities prefer wind energy because the intermittent production at the wrong time of the day becomes a token excuse to build more fossil and nuclear fueled power plants.

Building or using a second power plant (powered by fossil fuels) paired with every solar plant, to produce energy for the night energy demand, was not an ideal solution.

Today around the world, new renewable power plants are being built that will generate electricity for less cost than fossil - fuel power plants.

So as wind power installation expands across the world, more fossil fuel plants will need to be built to back them up.

Even fossil fuel - burning power plants have become more efficient, and electric cars provide an alternative to gas - guzzlers, while better building design and more advanced electrical equipment mean we can enjoy modern facilities without rising emissions.

Fossil fuel giant PetroVietnam is in the process of building the Long Phu 1 coal power plant in southern Vietnam and asked for international financial support from the U.S. Export - Import Bank (Ex-Im).

The «mitigation» planned is to shut down all of the fossil fueled power plants and build more wind turbines guaranteeing a spectacular failure leading to a significant loss of life.

«Since fossil - fuel burning power plants and infrastructure built in 2012 - 2020 will produce energy - and emissions for 40 to 50 years, the actions taken in the next few years will set us on a path that will be impossible to redirect.

After all, we can't escape the fact that we depend on an infrastructure — roads, buildings, sewage systems, power plants, electrical grids, etc. — that requires huge quantities of fossil fuels.

It might have been better to keep Germany's existing nuclear power plants operational and do a thorough safety review so that they can be used until a transition to renewables can be done directly (without having to build a large amount of new fossil fuel plants).

Once built, a refrigerator, a car, a power plant, a fossil fuel well, or a house's systems will either live their whole life in somebody's hands or be turned into trash prematurely.

I'm a Safety Engineering professional who is conscientious, detail - oriented equipped with 20 + years of success in construction site safety consulting and management, conducting field safety surveys and building inspections of industrial, commercial, residential, and transportation environments, including airports, high - rises, (fossil fuel, nuclear, and renewable energy) power plants, manufacturing facilities, and highways.