Sentences with phrase «fuel usage reductions»

The sum of the fossil fuel usage reductions of the lifestyle maintenance component and the demand reduction component should be in the 20 % -25 % per year range.

Kevin Anderson, Tim Garrett, myself, and many others who have examined the economic consequences of the severe fossil fuel usage reductions required to give us any chance of avoiding the impending climate Apocalypse all come to that conclusion, with perhaps somewhat different views of «devastating».

Not exact matches

Now, what we have is an incredibly efficient, incredibly progressive industry that is very cost - sensitive, it improves dramatically, looks at scraps, reductions in fuel reductions in water usage, better yeast for the fermentation, better enzymes to convert the starch to sugar... every scrap of economic performance they can get.»

A reduction in fossil fuel usage means a decline in standards of living (though not, necessarily, quality of life).

Kristianstad's energy initiative has resulted in the halving of its fossil fuel usage, and the reduction of the city's carbon dioxide emissions by 25 % in the last ten years.

The Bill already includes an 18 % reduction in the budget of the EPA but the additional measures include a rider preventing the EPA from issuing any regulation on greenhouse gases for the next year, a rider stopping the EPA from bringing in proposed fuel - efficiency standards for all automobiles (which were approved by manufacturers) a refusal to label toxic ash spill left from coal combustion as hazardous waste, a rider preventing uranium mining in the Grand Canyon and a prevention on stopping limits on mercury usage.

This tax shift has caused household energy costs to increase, which has resulted in a 15 - percent reduction in consumer electricity use and a 5 - to 10 - percent decrease in fuel usage.

But the upside is three-fold: (i) your tax reduction or dividend check will offset much, perhaps more than 100 %, of those price increases; (ii) you'll be able to minimize your tax bite by cutting down on fuel usage (e.g., shortening those country drives, buying locally - grown produce, purchasing «green power» from wind and solar cells); and (iii) Americans» combined behavior changes in response to the carbon tax will go a long way toward protecting the climate and averting the cataclysmic consequences of unchecked global warming.

The environmental benefits of this project are a function of the reduction of fossil fuel usage for heating of the greenhouses.

Aside from reductions in fuel usage aboard ship due to technological advances, one way to reduce the impact of shipping — in fact it's a facet of slowing down, broadly conceived — would be to reduce the volume of goods traded globally.

The scenario on the left assumes drastic and immediate global reductions in fossil fuel usage; the right assumes «business as usual» just continues.

They also estimate the saving of up to 7 million lives in the next four decades, along with substantial reductions in carbon emissions, were nuclear power to replace fossil fuel usage on a large scale.

There will always be countries that will choose not to be a party to such protocols, thus I believe a greenhouse gas reduction will only come about as a consequence of a reduction in fossil fuel usage.

Although there more quickly renewable sources of biomass for cooking than wood, a 50 % reduction in fuel usage compared with other tradtional stoves is something to take seriously.