Sentences with phrase «cost of coal»

We need electricity - but when you take into account the true cost of coal there are much better ways to get it!

Understanding the operating costs of coal power is not the most exciting topic until it is put into context with the relative cost of other power technologies.

The external costs of coal listed above don't cover the full scope of climate change.

The operating costs of coal units vary depending on numerous factors.

The authors have been challenged as to whether their estimate of the total cost of coal energy is comparable to their estimate of the total cost of wind energy.

The study is the first to look at the major costs of coal from extraction to combustion.

And when the full costs of coal are taken into account, there is nothing remotely «cheap» about coal.

But if we all understand that we should only talk about the lower cost of coal - fired generation with CCS included, then we can more clearly see which technologies are sustainable.

«Some people like to talk about the cheap cost of coal,» he says.

However, a clear trend is emerging where the operation costs of coal are gradually increasing at the same time the cost of renewable energy is decreasing.

The only way to solve that is to raise short term marginal cost of coal — a carbon price.

But that assumption was way off base: The true cost of coal is massive, and not just to the environment and public health, but to our economy as well.

As the operating cost of coal increases the cost of renewable energy is expected to continue to decline.

The single biggest influence on carbon prices is the relative cost of coal and natural gas.

Based on our modelling, the median bid for wind plus storage is lower than the operating cost of all coal plants currently in Colorado, while the median solar plus storage bid is lower than 74 % of operating coal capacity.

Patrick Michaels was one of several expert witnesses who testified on behalf of the Western Fuels Assocaition in St. Paul, Minnesota, to determine the environmental cost of coal burning by state power plants.

The coalition feels it is a critical time for the administration to seriously engage in the extensive health and environmental costs of coal in the region, as well as address the urgent need for economic transition.

Anti-regulatory blogs and commentators and the McCain - Palin campaign made a push to publicize a 10 - month - old comment by Senator Barack Obama about the high cost of coal burning if and when a hard cap is set for carbon dioxide emissions.

They point out the indirect costs of coal generated power plants, including the production of smog that causes asthma and other respiratory illnesses; carbon dioxide emissions that contribute to global warming; and acid rain that destroys lakes and forests.

Skeptical Science previously examined Epstein et al. (2011), which arrived at a much higher estimate of the external costs of coal combustion, mainly due to a higher estimate of (non-CO2) air pollution damages.

The U.S. Forest Service calculated the social cost of coal mining which includes negative impacts to human health, property damages from increased flood risk, and the overall destruction of the environment.

(Residents of Appalachia, where the health costs of coal mining have been found to «far outpace» the revenue it brings in, might have something to say about that.)

Thanks to the rising cost of coal and natural gas — as well as the short - term cost benefits of cadmium telluride, and falling costs of silicon and other solar options — the National Renewable Energy Laboratory estimates that solar energy could reach nationwide grid parity by 2017.

When analysing the running cost of coal power an important distinction needs to be made between the cash and operating cost.

Figure 6 compares the operating cost of coal with the LCOE of new wind and solar PV.

Furthermore, from 2009 - 2011, the average cost of coal (in dollars per short ton) increased 7.5 percent in the United States, much faster than the 3.2 percent national average electricity price increase cited by Taylor.

The calculated future cost of each coal unit is compared to the estimated future cost of wholesale market purchases to determine future economic viability on a unit - by - unit basis.

Perhaps most importantly, the report calls for governments to shift the «burden of proof» away from assuming that coal is the only solution to the world's growing energy demands and instead takes into consideration the devastating social, environmental, and economic costs of coal.

However, it will be more expensive than the unreal cost of that coal; that is, the cost without internalization of the costs listed above.

Moreover, the true cost of coal energy, on which Australia and the USA rely heavily, is approximately triple the market price, which does not account for factors like impacts on public or environmental health.

In particular, the authors have included a substantial «externality» cost in the total cost of coal energyó2.0 to 4.3 cents / kWh for «health and environmental costs.»

A study published by researchers at Harvard in 2011 found that the full life cycle cost of coal power is between about 9.5 and 27 cents per kilowatt - hour, most of which is paid by taxpayers in the form of increased health - related costs.

The rampant air and water pollution resulting from fossil fuel use has garnered considerable attention in recent years, with landmark studies on the human health effects and other costs of coal burning, and alarming accounts of declining air quality in gas - and - oil - drilling boomtowns.

In other words, electricity generated from wind power is cheaper per kilowatt hour than just the additional costs of coal - fired power alone, invisible though they may be.

That's the finding of a new Harvard study that, for the first time, examines the true cost of coal throughout its entire life cycle... Clearly, the fact that coal contributes more global warming pollution than any other source in the nation is far from its only problem.

Not so cheap: Australia needs to acknowledge the real cost of coal US President Barack Obama's latest plan to reduce carbon emissions is a welcome one, and not just because it addresses climate change.

Several details remain unknown, but the median bid for wind plus storage appears to be lower than the operating cost of all coal plants currently in Colorado, while the median solar plus storage bid could be lower than 74 % of operating coal capacity.

Skeptical Science previously examined Epstein et al. (2011), which arrived at a much higher estimate of the external costs of coal combustion, mainly due to a higher estimate of (non-CO2) air pollution damages.

Bart, Doug, You both speak of environmental costs of coal, currently not being paid.

Environmental costs of coal combustion: health; agriculture; industry, transportation, materials, buildings and infrastructure; water pollution; pollution of heavy metal to soil; solid waste of coal burning and electricity generation.

sig line, offers the best summary: «coal production, CTL included, is only feasible because the true costs of coal production are not being passed on to the industry and its customers.»