Sentences with phrase «far less fossil fuel»

One advantage to the environment − according to a discussion paper from the Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis − is that ships will burn far less fossil fuel to reach their destination.

Obviously this will also be a greatly reduced trade, requiring far less fossil fuel and contributing much less to the Greenhouse Effect.

Not exact matches

More than anything else, fossil fuel has allowed us to stop being neighbors to each other, both literally — we move ever farther into ever emptier suburbs — and figuratively — we depend less and less on each other for anything real.

Yes, households are being asked to contribute to the cost of developing green energy — but contrary to the claims of some think tanks and commentators, this will be far less than the cost of staying hooked on fossil fuels.

Realistic large - scale solar panel coverage could cause less than half a degree of local warming, far less than the several degrees in global temperature rise predicted over the next century if we keep burning fossil fuels.

... Based on these results, further warming and drying of tropical forests is expected to result in less uptake and more release of carbon on land, unfortunately amplifying the effect of fossil fuel emissions warming the climate.

Moving on to assess the influence of fossil fuel emissions during this same period, it's important to stress that literally all investigators acknowledge that both the level of AGW and the rate of increase were far less at that time than what we see in the latter part of the century.

Nader said, «We do not need nuclear power... We have a far greater amount of fossil fuels in this country than we're owning up to... the tar sands... oil out of shale... methane in coal beds...» Sierra Club consultant Amory Lovins said, «Coal can fill the real gaps in our fuel economy with only a temporary and modest (less than twofold at peak) expansion of mining.»

The Way Forward As China seeks a cleaner, softer path of development, renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, and geothermal are attractive not only because of their lower carbon emissions profiles, but because they use far less water than their fossil fuel counterparts.

Backers of plug - in hybrids acknowledge that the electricity to boost their cars generally comes from fossil fuels that create greenhouse gases, but they say that process still produces far less pollution than oil.

Further, increased human - caused CO2 emissions mean more energy use, which results in more human productivity since humans generally use fossil fuel energy to increase their productivity and reduce their dependency on other less reliable and higher cost energy sources.

Who is more likely to have an agenda — a scientist who actively chose to enter a career that produces far less income than someone who chose instead to use their considerable intellect to game the system on Wall Street, or a billionaire with ties to the fossil fuel industry?

I know many on this site beleive peak oil is a bigger threat than global warming, but I can't help but think the 20 - 100 year time lag between CO2 release and maximum effect is a far less addressable than issues of increasing fossil fuel prices.

So while I agree that the global risks of nuclear are far less than fossil fuels, the local specific risks of nuclear seem far greater.

Absent some crash programs for renewables (or temporary reprieve via unconventional fossil fuels), civilization must get by on a small fraction of the energy it now uses (and in far less convenient forms).

For the minority who use common sense, very little data is necessary to know that a «low carbon» economy is far less efficient than an economy run on fossil fuel energy [coal, preferably, because it is the least expensive power].

By contrast, a transition from fossil fuels to solar or wind power, biomass, or hydroelectricity would require rematerialization — the use of more natural resources — since sunlight, wind, organic matter, and water are all far less energy dense than oil and gas.

Burning methane and other NATURAL gasses produces far less CO2 / kilocalorie / mole than traditional fossil fuels.

Natural gas is a fossil fuel whose emissions contribute to global warming, making it a far less attractive climate solution than lower - and zero - carbon alternatives such as energy efficiency and renewable energy.

Since much RE now costs the same or less than coal, oil their real cost is Zero or even profitable and far less costly as fossil fuel costs rise..

«Until now, fossil fuel companies have been able to talk about climate science in political and media arenas where there is far less accountability to the truth,» Michael Burger of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University told Grist.

Other examples of the military embracing Mr. Obama's climate goals include the construction of a massive solar power project at Fort Benning, Georgia, and the Navy's move toward a «green fleet» that is far less reliant on fossil fuels.

Your conclusion that we all have to use far less energy is based on the assumption that we must use either fossil fuels or renewables.

A far less costly option, although still a fossil - fueled one, might be the as - yet - unreleased $ 6,800 Elio Motors vehicle, which is touted as being capable of getting 84 mpg, but there's another contender in the race to build clean affordable vehicles, and instead of being powered by electricity, the $ 10,000 AIRPod boasts of being a «Zero Pollution Vehicle» because it runs on compressed air.

''... Overall, all PV technologies generate far less life - cycle air emissions per GWh than conventional fossil - fuel - based electricity generation technologies.

If the goal is less pollution, it might be a better strategy to fund methodologies that serve to make fossil fuels far less polluting and to fund the production of alternative fuels.