Sentences with phrase «coal use does»

Although China is adding wind and solar power capacity at a rapid clip, after years of exporting most of their solar panel output, the scale of the country's coal use doesn't lend itself to easy or quick substitution by these renewables.

Not exact matches

A skeptic might argue that this does not necessitate peak coal, because other developing countries home to billions of people are still nowhere near the level of electricity use of the Western world.

The new president doesn't care if such policy forecloses use of the most plentiful native energy source in the United States» coal.

But I would note Lahey did not come up with the dutch oven trick — it's been around for awhile and Elizabeth David in her famous «English Bread and Yeast Cookery» talks about how the English used to bake in overturned flower pots, with coals piled outside.

We don't add any wood chips for smoke, but use a pan of water between the coals and the wrapped chicken to keep the chicken juicy.

That bugged the heck out of me because I don't use lighter fluid to light my coals.

If using a smoker, don't add wood chips for smoke, instead just place a pan of water between the coals and the wrapped meat to keep the «package» from drying out.

If I were in Robbins» group, he would have to grab the nape of my neck, and use a whip, to get me to do the coal walk.

But one of the things that I have been very impressed by here is a lot of the stories of hope; many folks have traveled a long way to share what they are doing on a very local level to help combat climate change, and that's everything from, kind of, rural electrification in Africa and India, you know, bringing light to people who are still using dung or coal for cooking and heating and dying from indoor air pollution to, you know, major renewable energy projects, say, here in Denmark where they now get 20 percent of their electricity from wind power.

Instead of piping in natural CO2, it will use the greenhouse gas captured at a coal - fired power plant just completed nearly 100 miles north of here and send it down into the reservoir, pushing oil out and leaving the greenhouse gas deep below, safely locked away from the atmosphere, so it does not add to global warming.

After 10,000 gallons of coal - washing chemicals leaked into the Charleston - area's water supply, many residents still do not trust that the water is safe enough to use, despite the lifting of a «Do Not Use» orddo not trust that the water is safe enough to use, despite the lifting of a «Do Not Use» oruse, despite the lifting of a «Do Not Use» ordDo Not Use» orUse» order

I really believe that we're going to have to use a kind of a coal [technology] that does not emit the greenhouse gases that present - day coal - fired utility plants do.»

Perhaps that's why Southern Co., has announced it will no longer fund a proposed project to use such amines to capture CO2 at a coal - fired power plant in Alabama, despite securing $ 295 million from the federal government to do so (or roughly 100 times what UTC received).

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).

The earths heat is just a few KM's further down than coal and oil, does nt the use of fossil fuels seem stupid by comparison?

1750 - 1850 did see coal use / CO2 emissions rise 18 - times bigger, but from a very small start level.

For the past four years almost nothing meaningful has been done to stop the rampant production and release into the atmosphere of ever greater amounts of carbon dioxide, and there have even been more frantic calls for more production of oil and expanded use of coal as a fuel.

«China is building coal - fired power stations but it's also closing many of the older ones down, which is why its overall coal use is declining — the more significant point is it's now building the clean energy equivalent of one coal - fired power station every week, and will do for the next 15 years.»

Watt wanted to sell his engines to coal mine owners who used horses to do their labor.

Add to that the fact that not all rocks turn into coal chunks when you break them apart and you've got yourself a reason to use the word «grating» in a review of a debut title that did its best to charm you earlier.

Used to do the Job 1987 Steel, aluminum, coal, copper, iron, zinc, copper carbonate, brass, bronze, saltpeter, bursera gummfera, glass, iron oxide, santalum album, bluestone, sulfur, tar, rubber, volcanic ash, lodestones, trinitrotoluene (TNT), ammonium nitrate, and other natural and artificial ingredients suspended in microcrystalline wax and paraffin on sheet - metal base 48 1/2 x 25 3/4 x 24 3/4 inches

No, they will not do anything to alter the trajectory of substantially increasing coal use and domination of global emissions growth.

Whether the discussion turns to replacing coal - fired power plants with wind turbines and using electric cars instead of gas - driven SUVs, converting industrial agricultural practices to organic permaculture, or reversing the decline of ocean life though international regulations, it is an article of faith in the reform movement that we know what we need to do and all that's lacking is a sufficiently visionary leader to put more planet - friendly solutions in place.

Given the facts about global warming, that seems to be exactly what continuing to burn coal will do, as long as we use existing technologies that mean that burning goal contributes to, and will accelerate, climate change.

Researchers at Stanford University who closely track China's power sector, coal use, and carbon dioxide emissions have done an initial rough projection and foresee China possibly emitting somewhere between 1.9 and 2.6 billion tons less carbon dioxide from 2008 to 2010 than it would have under «business as usual» if current bearish trends for the global economy hold up.

If you don't like cats, we can use cell phones, coal smokestack, tall buildings, agriculture, automobiles.

«dnatwork» # 7 has to do the math to see that energy (derived from oxidizing coal) has to be used to convert CO2 into those carbon fibers.

When you think about it, Japan doesn't use very much coal.

I know some here will decry that I am not talking about the issues because I do not try to obsfuscate with a discussion of the spot market price of coal vs long - term contracts, or use of coal in locations other than Kansas, or Al Gore's footprint, but the issue of Global Warming IS politics (non-ratification of Kyoto and negative flag - waving ads about politicians who oppose coal), it IS public relations («Clean Coal», cleanest coal - fired plants, surface mining and mountain - top reoval rather than strip mining, etc.), and it IS about misrepresentation (Peobody framing the debate as coal vs NG when it is really coal vs every other energy source), and it IS about greed (the coal industry doing everything it can to scuttle every other energy alternaticoal vs long - term contracts, or use of coal in locations other than Kansas, or Al Gore's footprint, but the issue of Global Warming IS politics (non-ratification of Kyoto and negative flag - waving ads about politicians who oppose coal), it IS public relations («Clean Coal», cleanest coal - fired plants, surface mining and mountain - top reoval rather than strip mining, etc.), and it IS about misrepresentation (Peobody framing the debate as coal vs NG when it is really coal vs every other energy source), and it IS about greed (the coal industry doing everything it can to scuttle every other energy alternaticoal in locations other than Kansas, or Al Gore's footprint, but the issue of Global Warming IS politics (non-ratification of Kyoto and negative flag - waving ads about politicians who oppose coal), it IS public relations («Clean Coal», cleanest coal - fired plants, surface mining and mountain - top reoval rather than strip mining, etc.), and it IS about misrepresentation (Peobody framing the debate as coal vs NG when it is really coal vs every other energy source), and it IS about greed (the coal industry doing everything it can to scuttle every other energy alternaticoal), it IS public relations («Clean Coal», cleanest coal - fired plants, surface mining and mountain - top reoval rather than strip mining, etc.), and it IS about misrepresentation (Peobody framing the debate as coal vs NG when it is really coal vs every other energy source), and it IS about greed (the coal industry doing everything it can to scuttle every other energy alternatiCoal», cleanest coal - fired plants, surface mining and mountain - top reoval rather than strip mining, etc.), and it IS about misrepresentation (Peobody framing the debate as coal vs NG when it is really coal vs every other energy source), and it IS about greed (the coal industry doing everything it can to scuttle every other energy alternaticoal - fired plants, surface mining and mountain - top reoval rather than strip mining, etc.), and it IS about misrepresentation (Peobody framing the debate as coal vs NG when it is really coal vs every other energy source), and it IS about greed (the coal industry doing everything it can to scuttle every other energy alternaticoal vs NG when it is really coal vs every other energy source), and it IS about greed (the coal industry doing everything it can to scuttle every other energy alternaticoal vs every other energy source), and it IS about greed (the coal industry doing everything it can to scuttle every other energy alternaticoal industry doing everything it can to scuttle every other energy alternative).

Demonstrating that the overall environmental damage is less than that from coal does not imply that gas production and use is cost - free, and the sooner we reduce our dependence on fossil fuel sources of energy of all kinds the better.

India cancelled an Enron power plant when they didn't use coal, and instead produced an expensive natural gas plant with fuel from Africa.

Don't be fooled by the dulcet tones of the sirens used by the oil and coal industries to lure us onto the rocks.

Meanwhile we will spend lots of money on things of limited use while not doing things like substituting gas for coal, and nuclear, than can have a big effect now.

As long as fossil fuels wind up being abandoned, it doesn't matter how it happens, and it's probably more effective to use humor and economics against the pro-fossil-fuel crowd (oil & coal industries).

I saw Hansen on CBS the other night, he knocked every possible use of coal, of course coal emmisons are growing around the globe no matter what the United States does.

And when you have used the coal, gas and oil to make ethanol, or used the oil, you don't get to use it again.

Secondly using coal to power vehicles is best done by creating electric power and wall charging all electric vehicles (AEVs).

If we choose to use our own abundant coal resources to provide the energy for electricity, heating, and motive power; remove CO2 from the coal - fired electrical generationg plant smokestacks, and add better safety systems to the mines, we will have done all that we need to do other than greatly improve and enlarge our public transportation systems, and the reliability of our power grid system.

Most of the coal we burn still in these waning years of fossil fuel use derives from trees that died and could not rot, because the organisms evolved to eat the strong, tough cell walls of trees did not yet exist.

Or, just don't burn your fire wood completely, but gasify it and leave some char coal for use in the fields.

The short - term blip does not undermine the general trend of continued upward trend in coal deployment in China's power sector, which represents a growing share of China's energy use].

For years, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has used tortured economic logic to mask its willful ignorance of the tremendous harm done to our climate and people through federal leasing of more than five billions of tons of coal.

We've got to expand nuclear; we've got to do clean coal, we've got to expand the use of hybrid vehicles, wind, solar, hydroelectric, liquid natural gas, natural gas, domestic oil, more refineries....

Once in office, Mr. Bush did a complete turnaround in March 2001, abandoning that pledge under intensive lobbying of the White House by coal and oil companies, and industries whose profits depend on selling things that use energy.

Moreover, we should avoid now economically (but not ecologically) feasible widespread use of CO2 dirty technologies: coal - to - liquid, gas - to - liquid, oil shales or tar sands... nice said, worse done...

Through appropriate building design, behavioural change and demand management (this does not mean living like a cave - man, just using resources efficiently) and appropriate matching of energy source with demand (i.e using solar radiation, not brown coal fired electricity for water heating), it is possible to eliminate these emissions completely.

He talks to [Prime Minister Narendra] Modi, and they're doing this great job of expanding solar, but they're also going to double their coal use because they need electricity for 300 million people.

How come they don't object to using coal to make their expensive toys in China?

[4] While a range of positions is possible, it seems particularly strange that ExxonMobil takes the position that it does in that future global warming will be caused most by emissions from use of coal rather than by emissions from use of petroleum or natural gas.

And as the English have done and as the Chinese and the Indians and etc will still do, they will use coal, lots of coal plus gas and oil for power generation until some capitalist somewhere with a very good idea on how to reduce costs and still make a fortune comes along and devises / discovers or restructures an old technology or a new power generation technology that is more efficient, lower cost, more profitable, just as reliable as fossil fueled, those coal, oil and gas generators