Sentences with phrase «cause extra fuel»

Not exact matches

There is not enough ligament in the pelvic cage to stretch and cause an increase in size; any extra width is likely baby milk fuel (or fat to everyone else).

Mr Hutton concluded: «I do not underestimate the difficulties and anxiety that rising energy prices can cause but I believe that this extra cash, coupled with ensuring we have the most competitive market possible, will help us toward our goal of eradicating fuel poverty in the UK.»

Also may cause extra undesired fuel to leak into one of the throttle.

Therefore, if switching to natural gas from coal reduces the amount of CO2 you emit, you can tolerate quite a large amount of leakage and still come out ahead, because the warming caused by the leakage will go away quickly once you eventually stop using natural gas (and other fossil fuels), whereas the warming you would get from all the extra CO2 you'd pump out if you stuck with coal would stay around forever.

This extra warming will be in addition to the increase in temperature caused directly by emissions from fossil fuels.

Over 100 years ago we began putting forest fires out, and extra forest fuel has built up, which now cause high - intensity, catastrophic forest fires.

At the end of the day, counting as well the EXTRA energy used to manufacture this EXTRA generating capacity, wind farms cause MORE fossil fuels to be consumed than if they did not exist.

CRF is also designing an ingenious way to pay for the task of restoring the ice via the insurance industry, where fossil fuel industries would pay an extra premium that fairly reflects the climate change liability they cause.

Suppose someone offered you an electricity fuel that would cause tens of thousands of premature deaths every year and add hundreds of billions of dollars in extra health care costs?

IMF says in these countries, air pollution other than greenhouse gases, and congestion from incorrectly priced fuels, cause an extra $ 57.50 in damage per ton of carbon dioxide, although the damage is not from the CO2.

Air pollution other than greenhouse gases, and congestion from incorrectly priced fuels, cause an extra $ 57.50 in damage per ton of carbon dioxide, even though it is not the CO2 doing the damage.

With other greenhouse gases it is responsible for the natural greenhouse effect, and the extra levels of CO 2 from burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil and natural gas) in industry, transport and the generation of electricity, are causing the enhanced (or accelerated) greenhouse effect which is why global warming is happening.

The fact that the sea ice, for example, has been disappearing so dramatically in recent decades tells us that the climate system is disrupted, and the only explanation is the extra heat trapped by the rapid increase in greenhouse gases caused mostly by our burning fossil fuels.

RealClimate is wonderful, and an excellent source of reliable information.As I've said before, methane is an extremely dangerous component to global warming.Comment # 20 is correct.There is a sharp melting point to frozen methane.A huge increase in the release of methane could happen within the next 50 years.At what point in the Earth's temperature rise and the rise of co2 would a huge methane melt occur?No one has answered that definitive issue.If I ask you all at what point would huge amounts of extra methane start melting, i.e at what temperature rise of the ocean near the Artic methane ice deposits would the methane melt, or at what point in the rise of co2 concentrations in the atmosphere would the methane melt, I believe that no one could currently tell me the actual answer as to where the sharp melting point exists.Of course, once that tipping point has been reached, and billions of tons of methane outgass from what had been locked stores of methane, locked away for an eternity, it is exactly the same as the burning of stored fossil fuels which have been stored for an eternity as well.And even though methane does not have as long a life as co2, while it is around in the air it can cause other tipping points, i.e. permafrost melting, to arrive much sooner.I will reiterate what I've said before on this and other sites.Methane is a hugely underreported, underestimated risk.How about RealClimate attempts to model exactly what would happen to other tipping points, such as the melting permafrost, if indeed a huge increase in the melting of the methal hydrate ice WERE to occur within the next 50 years.My amateur guess is that the huge, albeit temporary, increase in methane over even three or four decades might push other relevent tipping points to arrive much, much, sooner than they normally would, thereby vastly incresing negative feedback mechanisms.We KNOW that quick, huge, changes occured in the Earth's climate in the past.See other relevent posts in the past from Realclimate.Climate often does not change slowly, but undergoes huge, quick, changes periodically, due to negative feedbacks accumulating, and tipping the climate to a quick change.Why should the danger from huge potential methane releases be vievwed with any less trepidation?