Sentences with phrase «burning less gas»

As California integrates these record levels of wind and solar, it is improving its ability to manage these levels by burning less gas and importing less power during peak renewable energy output.

It's immaterial to them that the tallish X5 can lap a racetrack faster than the legendary 2002, burning less gas, spewing fewer pollutants, and with the air conditioning on.

Owners can burn less gas when they drive, and so release fewer carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.

In recent years, engineers have redesigned vehicles with more fuel - efficient technology, including gasoline direct injection engines paired with turbocharging, which results in smaller engines that burn less gas while retaining power.

Installing a smaller turbocharger, to burn less gas, is easier than putting the Sonata on a crash (sorry) diet.

One of the easiest ways to burn less gas and save money is to drive 55 instead of 70 on expressways.

Not exact matches

Commuting on two wheels conserves gas, burns fat, and, hey, nobody wants to stand next to that guy on the subway, much less in a professional meeting environment.

Quite simply, the world will be burning less oil, less coal, and maybe even less natural gas.

«Energy efficient lighting uses significantly less electricity, which equals less fuel burned, and less greenhouse gases.»

The new argument could be that if CP passes, drivers will sit in less traffic, reduce the gas they burn through less idling, and save money.

And burning natural gas releases 43 percent less CO2 than burning coal.

Exxon Mobil also touted its status as the United States» No. 1 natural gas producer, noting that gas emits significantly less CO2 than coal when burned to generate electricity.

Natural gas, which is mainly methane, may generate less carbon dioxide than oil and coal when burned, but as recent research has found, there's more to greenhouse gas emissions than just combustion.

At a cost of less than 3 cents per kilowatt - hour, tornado energy is cheaper than burning coal (which rings up at 4 or 5 cents per kwh) and produces no additional greenhouse gases.

Although natural gas generates less greenhouse gas than coal when burned, when its total life - cycle emissions associated with extraction and distribution are factored in, it does not seem much cleaner than coal

Burning gas emits less carbon dioxide than burning other fossilBurning gas emits less carbon dioxide than burning other fossilburning other fossil fuels.

The low - carbon fuel standard orders providers to reduce the carbon intensity of their fuels by 10 percent by 2020 through efforts such as blending in biofuels that result in less greenhouse gases emitted when burned.

With more money for development of novel designs and public financial support for construction — perhaps as part of a clean energy portfolio standard that lumps in all low - carbon energy sources, not just renewables or a carbon tax — nuclear could be one of the pillars of a three - pronged approach to cutting greenhouse gas emissions: using less energy to do more (or energy efficiency), low - carbon power, and electric cars (as long as they are charged with electricity from clean sources, not coal burning).

It hopes to make less use of coal - burning stations and more of combined - cycle gas - turbine stations.

Keeping in mind the enormous stake that panel members ExxonMobil and Shell have in the oil, natural gas and coal industries, here is a look at the panel's take on why oil and coal have been so difficult to replace by the following alternative energy sources: Natural gas ExxonMobil favors boosting the U.S.'s consumption of natural gas, in part, because it produces at least 50 percent less greenhouse gas per hour when burned compared with coal, Nazeer Bhore, ExxonMobil senior technology advisor, said during the panel.

Cleaner coal - burning technologies would reduce emissions not only of greenhouse gases but also of soot and other by - products that cause local and regional pollution — and they could prove to be easier or less expensive to implement.

The project is testing three approaches: wood - burning stoves that are more efficient and thus leave less black - carbon residue; stoves that burn natural gas produced from waste; and solar cookers.

Though burning natural gas produces much less greenhouse gas emissions than burning coal, a new study indicates switching over coal - fired power plants to natural gas would have a negligible effect on the changing climate.

For example, burning compressed natural gas emits roughly 30 percent less CO2 than burning diesel but, if the new methane leakage estimates are true, the practice ends up being worse for climate change.

Natural gas produces less than half the carbon dioxide of coal when burned.

Burning that less carbon - intensive fuel could prevent the emission of 0.5 to one billion tonnes of greenhouse gas, according to one study.

In other words, we would need to grow crops that suck CO2 from the air, then burn them to generate electricity and store the resulting gases so there is less CO2 in the atmosphere overall.

This means we'll be far less likely to suffer from lethargy, gas, stomach bloat, heart burn, acid reflux, indigestion, or even suffering from more serious conditions such as stomach or bowel (colorectal) cancer.

Although the GL550 weighs less and make less power, it still manages to burn more gas than a QX56.

The Sprinter 2500 is powered by a 2 - stage turbocharged engine that provides ample low end torque for moving the heaviest loads, and burns less fuel than comparably powerful gas engines.

And if you're willing to spend a little more to spend a little less on gas, there's the HX, which has a lean - burn engine that is EPA - rated at 36 miles per gallon in the city, 44 mpg on the highway.

While most hybrids are all about efficiency, Lexus is trying to justify V12 pricing for their flagship model and are backing up their claims with a 5.0 Liter gas burning V8 and a powerful electric motor to produce a maximum output of 439 HP with four less pistons than the competition.

Instead of the standard Avalon's 265 - horsepower, 3.5 - liter V6, the 3,585 - pound Avalon Hybrid does fine with 1 - liter less displacement and two fewer cylinders to burn gas.

Chrysler employs this same type of system to burn enough gas to keep the fuel stable, and told BestRide, «If needed, the Pacifica Hybrid will automatically shift from electric to hybrid mode to cycle through any fuel that is more than 90 days old, eliminating the need to add a fuel stabilizer — meaning customers have one less thing to think about.»

The gas - burning M3 and M4 are less innovative, but they're valuable in their own way: Both reaffirm BMW's mission as a builder of pure driver's cars.

The 240 - hp diesel makes 65 hp less than the gas - burning V6, but its 420 lb - ft of torque peak way down at 2,000 rpm.

The transition from deeply rooted energy systems based on burning fossil fuels to new norms emitting ever less of this gas — here and in China — is seen by many as requiring a sustained energy quest including much greater direct government investment on the frontiers of relevant technologies (batteries, photovoltaics, superconductivity, photosynthesis).]

There was no attempt to explain the mysteries of disel engines (of which there were no mysteries, just a different engine) to people or to push disel engines as transportation which burned cheaper, costs much less here than gas, gave longer lasting engine life, less harmful to the environment.

The decline in coal - related emissions is due mainly to utilities using less coal for electricity generation as they burned more low - priced natural gas.

Power generators are turning away from coal for a host of reasons: In some instances natural gas is cheaper; many states are requiring utilities to generate a certain portion of electricity from renewable resources; individual cities (and even an entire Canadian province) have decided to stop purchasing electricity created by burning coal; and new Environmental Protection Agency regulations are making it more expensive and less economical to use coal plants.

In addition, the popularity of natural gas relies, in part, on its reputation as a «bridge fuel» — the fossil fuel that will lead to a renewable energy future because it's cleaner burning, emits less greenhouse gas and uses water less intensively in certain steps of the process.

Less well known is the immense potential of soils to act as vast carbon sinks, with the ability to «naturally turn over about 10 times more greenhouse gas on a global scale than the burning of fossil fuels.»

The 2009 State of the Climate report gives these top indicators: humans emitted 30 billion tons of of CO2 into the atmosphere each year from the burning of fossil fuels (oil, coal, and natural gas), less oxygen in the air from the burning of fossil fuels, rising fossil fuel carbon in corals, nights warming faster than days, satellites show less of the earth's heat escaping into space, cooling of the stratosphere or upper atmosphere, warming of the troposphere or lower atmosphere, etc..

Last year the Energy Information Administration noted that the «decline in coal - related emissions is due mainly to utilities using less coal for electricity generation as they burned more low - priced natural gas.»

While Dominion and all its spider legs may think that burning more gas is a great idea, the reality is, natural gas increasingly looks less like a long - term energy solution and more like a trap for companies that made the wrong bet.

Burning coal, for example, also produces copious quantities of greenhouse gasses (even with «clean coal» technologies) and our coal reserves are decidedly less limited than our oil reserves.

At the very least, larger landfills are required to burn the gases; the burning results in less harm to the environment.

If the U.S. were instead to use that natural gas to generate electricity as part of a portfolio with renewable sources of electricity, the analysis shows that «if the entire vehicle fleet were converted to electric vehicles and high efficiency natural gas combined - cycle power plants were used to generate all the additional electricity required, the increase in natural gas demand would be significantly less» than if the entire fleet was burning natural gas in its combustion engines — roughly a decrease in natural gas usage of 19 billion cubic feet per day.

Natural gas does emit less GHG than coal on a per Btu basis when burned, but the analysis assumes there are no methane leaks from both conventional and unconventional wells.

The fuel cell operates much more efficiently than a conventional gas - burning turbine, meaning it emits between 3,400 and 5,000 tonnes less CO2 per year.