Sentences with phrase «dig coal and oil»

From this point of view, continue to dig coal and oil and build dangrous nuclear power plants to make fuel from carbon dioxide is reverse the world developing trend.

Because make fuel from CO2 means to continue to dig coal and oil and use huge amount of energy from nuclear, these make this idea lose advantage much.

Not exact matches

Oil and coal era will finished in the future when no oil and coal to dOil and coal era will finished in the future when no oil and coal to doil and coal to dig.

But how much more can be accomplished administratively is unclear, which is why the prese ce of a clear and present signal that raises the cost of emitting carbon (starting from where oil, gas, and coal are dug up) is so important to cover all the bases.

The idea is to supply fuel by recycling the carbon already in the air in CO2 molecules instead of adding more to the atmosphere (and greenhouse effect) by digging up or pumping more ancient deposits of coal and oil.

A more likely scenario if we do nothing is that emissions will continue at a rapid pace as oil from sand and shale plus coal substantially replace oil and natural gas, with the consequence that we will have dug ourselves into a deeper hole in terms of having sufficient resources to reduce emissions sufficiently without major disruption to our society.

We've already mined out much of the coal that's really easy to dig up (Britain had massive reserves in the nineteenth century), and oil is increasingly being sought in expensive locations like the deep sea and Arctic.

We are getting close to world peak production on resources like oil and natural gas, and we shouldn't be using them to dig up coal and make even more pollution delivering WY coal to Georgia.

If humans dig up and burn coal, oil and gas, they returning much of this carbon back to the atmosphere, causing the level of CO2 to rise.

Each year the people keep digging up coal and drilling up oil and gas and burning it, and each year, on average, the world, since 1907, has warmed by half more than a hundredth degree Fahrenheit.

If we keep digging up more coal, gas and oil, it will get burned, if not here, then somewhere else.

We could dig more coal, pump more oil and drill more gas, to bring more of each on stream.

(1) Putting aside actual so - called fossil carbon (i.e. shales, coal, oil, gas tar sands) which are all relatively unreactive geologically overall (unless those pesky humans dig them up and burn them) there are in fact (today) substantial pools of potentially more reactive «fixed» carbon other than the active biosphere's biomass.

Given all that I've dug up on the origins of the «industry - corrupted skeptic climate scientists» accusation, I'd call it a can't - lose wager if you bet that the «e-mail message circulated at a U.S. climate research lab» which Myanna Lahsen referred to owes its «funded by the oil and coal industry» accusation against skeptic climate scientists to Gelbspan / Ozone Action.

«In truth only one component of the CO2 budget is known with any certainty, human emissions, implicitly through records of extraction - how much coal and oil are dug up»

But that's also besides the point — coal isn't «leaking» into the atmosphere, it has to be dug out of the ground with considerable effort, and oil doesn't just jump into our gasoline tanks.