Sentences with phrase «fueling a debate as»

The price of bitcoin surged through $ 10,000 on Wednesday, adding to its ten-fold jump in value this year and fueling a debate as to whether the virtual currency is gaining mainstream acceptance or is merely a bubble waiting to burst.

Not exact matches

As Vancouver's house prices lift off into lotus land, the debate over just how much local real estate activity is fuelled by wealthy Asian investors is getting more heated.

In a ruling that fuels a long - simmering debate over some of Silicon Valley's fastest - growing technology companies and the work they are creating, the California Labor Commissioner's Office said that a driver for the ride - hailing service Uber should be classified as an employee, not an independent contractor.

Canada's coming national price on carbon adds further fuel to the debate, as some will be looking for Canadian industries affected by the carbon price to get protections, maybe even in the form of a carbon tax applied at the border on goods coming from places in the U.S. where there is no such policy.

«In my own opinion this debate is fuelled by an overoptimism in what can be achieved with AI algorithms, as well as an underestimating of how intelligent people really are.

Regardless of actual effects of the drug itself, the issue of legalization / prohibition is mainly an issue of people that see the marihuana use as part of a lifestyle they want / they do not want and that is what fuels the debate.

This Monday 250 industry leaders and key stakeholders will meet in Scarborough to debate the issues affecting the 4.5 million UK households in fuel poverty, as part of leading fuel poverty charity NEA's 3 - day Annual Conference.

It needlessly fuels enervating sectarian debates that are by and large absent from the lives of most British people, who - as polls show - do not want religions or religious identities to be actively prioritised by their elected government.»

The Conference will bring together key decision - makers, influencers and actors to debate the new strategy as well as the other issues and policies affecting the 4.5 million UK households in fuel poverty».

It will allow debate and discussion around issues such as the implementation of the new fuel poverty strategy in England which is taking effect from 2015, how we can reduce the health impacts of fuel poverty and will explore the effect of the changes to welfare reform.

Latimer consistently ties Astorino to President Donald Trump, fueled most recently by a super PAC backed by Robert Mercer that seemingly funds anti-Latimer ads, as mentioned here by News 12 debate host Scott McGee.

The discovery of seven Earth - sized planets orbiting a single cool star fuels a debate over what counts as good news in the search for life outside the solar system.

«If future studies continue to not find strong longer - term salvage harvest effects on forest understory vegetation,» Knapp said, «the debates about pros and cons of post-fire management could then narrow to topics such as snag habitat and woody fuel levels that are unequivocally impacted by salvage harvest.»

Until such time as meaningful mitigation is seriously considered and planned for, the real - world scenario remains BAU and the debate which actually matters remains the one about the size of the fossil fuel reserves.

In the cost / adapt or mitigate debate we have a global choice; deal with fossil fuels and mitigate - this is a finite cost as fossil fuels are finite.

Off to the new trends we go; and as the debate over the proposed Google + «real name» policy wages on, it is fueled by the appearance of a new dating site Luxurylustdates.com.

Peopled by flapper - era caricatures partaking in white - collar social orgies fuelled by selfish hedonism, Luhrmann's interpretation of Fitzgerald's oft - debated novel emerges as grotesque melodrama that plays more like a Mexican telenovela than a respectful reinterpretation of 1920's New York high society.

His appearance here in lieu of the original star only fuels speculation and debate over Efron's capacity as a vocalist and will undoubtedly disappoint fans.

The decision in Vergara v California provides new fuel for the debate, as the opposing forces contemplate what it could mean for California — and beyond.

FARMINGTON HILLS, MI — Rieter Automotive Systems appears to be in the right place at the right time as the national debate over the size and fuel efficiency of big pickups and SUVs grows more impassioned and auto makers contemplate whether new - generation diesels are quiet enough for American ears.

Bottom line, you need to know the number of carbon atoms in every style of hydrocarbon to determine ultimate stociometric burn, but even this is hotly debated as «stochio» burn does NOT mean the highest power or fuel efficeiency.

We could debate the usefulness of a B - segment car that gets the same fuel economy as a C - segment car but offers less interior and cargo space for not much of a cost savings, but that would apply to this entire class, not just the Chevy Sonic.

The SEC approval of ETMFs and potentially other requests for non-transparent active ETFs could lead to another phase of growth and innovation for ETFs in the U.S.» So while the index based ETF industry has been growing and fueling victory for the passive vs. active debate «traditional fund providers are taking action, creating ETF teams of their own as a precursor for potential future launches.»

Nevertheless, the new report is likely to fuel the sometimes vitriolic debate between environmentalists who see free - roaming domestic cats as an invasive species — superpredators whose numbers are growing globally even as the songbirds and many other animals the cats prey on are in decline — and animal welfare advocates who are appalled by the millions of unwanted cats (and dogs) euthanized in animal shelters each year.

The subject of raw vs. cooked cat food is an often hotly debated topic, and recent position statements against raw feeding by several high profile organizations such as the American Veterinary Medical Assocation and the ASPCA have only added fuel to the fire.

As with all things art, interpretation and debate fuel the fire.

In the cost / adapt or mitigate debate we have a global choice; deal with fossil fuels and mitigate - this is a finite cost as fossil fuels are finite.

It could be parsed as a Pangaean Affairs article by an editorial collective of ammonites critical of the elitist vertibrate policy debate between coprolite carbon sequestration advocates, and radical therapods demanding more tree fern peatbeds to fuel posterity's struggle to power through Snowball Earth episodes in epochs to come.

«Researching Don't Even Think About It, which I see as the most important book published on climate change in the past few years, George Marshall discovered that there has not been a single proposal, debate or even position paper on limiting fossil fuel production put forward during international climate negotiations.

Whether human activities such as burning fossil fuels is contributing to the greenhouse effect is where much of the debate lies.

Justin Gillis has written a news article putting the paper in context with other recent research on Antarctic dynamics and sea level, as well as with policy debates about the current value of fossil fuels against the momentous costs that could attend greatly expanded use:

As you might expect in a debate about whether or not the U.S. should make a risky move to perpetuate the use of fossil fuels, some committee members took the opportunity to voice doubt that the constant burning of that energy source was behind the rising temperatures, melting ice sheets, and abnormal weather events most scientists associate with climate change.

A tactic used by ethanol backers trying to defend the relatively defenseless Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) is attempting to frame the RFS debate as one between America's oil and natural gas companies and renewable energy.

The clash between Neste and Greenpeace highlights one of the key ideological debates over climate change: Business and politicians believe that a «technological» fix such as alternative fuels can solve the problem and also generate profits; many environmental groups believe the real solution to global warming lies in reducing consumption.

As far as hydrogen fuel cells versus electric cars or wind - powered land sailers, you can make arguments on all sides of the alternative fuel debate until you're blue in the face from too much COAs far as hydrogen fuel cells versus electric cars or wind - powered land sailers, you can make arguments on all sides of the alternative fuel debate until you're blue in the face from too much COas hydrogen fuel cells versus electric cars or wind - powered land sailers, you can make arguments on all sides of the alternative fuel debate until you're blue in the face from too much CO2.

I find it hard to separate the current debate from the policy issues, as suggested in this post, because the fuel of the debate is exactly the implications of the science, namely what policy should be adapted.

Instead, Cook and friends tried to shut down the debate, but their incompetence and secrecy only served as fuel on the flames of an already polarized debate.

What you describe is exactly the outcome that Exxon - Mobil and other fossil fuel companies desire, and have achieved by their funding of right - wing propaganda mills, disguised as «think tanks», that spew a steady stream of fake, phony, pseudoscientific bunk and employ cranks and liars to create the completely false impression that there is a genuine «debate» about the reality of anthropogenic global warming.

Yet moves by governments around the world to designate wood as a carbon - neutral fuel — making it eligible for beneficial treatment under tax, trade, and environmental regulations — have spurred fierce debate.

Its supplemental online interview of the late IPCC scientist Dr Stephen Schneider quoted his opinion about the Global Climate Coalition as being «a coalition of liars and spin doctors to reposition the debate onto the issue of uncertainty, way beyond [what] the scientific community agreed with» (he probably meant to say it was the Western Fuels Association, out to «reposition global warming as theory rather than fact», an error I note at item 17 here).

Utility and fossil fuel - funded front groups are peddling disinformation to attack Ohio's Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard (AEPS) and Energy Efficiency Resource Standard (EERS) that should not be considered credible evidence as legislators debate a bill to freeze the pro-clean technology laws.

a) poor people are dying as we debate this because of the bad science, pensioners are shivering in Britain as we speak because of the bogus claims of people like Marcott and his ilk, and ############################################### I do nt see marcott cited in any of the decisions to raise fuel prices in the UK.

Michael Fallon (Energy Minister) is also an misinformed puppet of the fossil fuel industry (as his attempts to discredit Tim Yeo in the recent parliamentary debate on the Energy Bill demonstrated).

'' As he sees it, there are three groups with a common cause in the debate over fossil fuels and they are wasting time arguing unnecessarily with one another.

Some of the biggest bioenergy debates stem from a «food or fuel» problem, where agricultural lands have been devoted to growing grain as inputs for biofuels, at the cost of food production.

However, as Mr. Outing points out, presenting a «balanced» view of global heating doesn't make sense — there isn't anything resembling a serious debate about whether human beings are causing global heating because the current scientific consensus is that human burning of fossil fuels is causing global heating.

Often, the debate is presented as if the only question is how high, and how fast does the carbon price need to climb in order to substitute existing fossil fuel technologies with clean energy technologies, whilst also maintaining economic growth.

With cap and trade on ice in Washington — regional programs exist in California and the Northeast — the oxygen fueling climate debates was sucked out of Capitol Hill as fast as air vacates a popped balloon.

Would this happen more often, more broadly, so as to enable a rational debate on the best ways to replace fossil fuels with renewable, clean and endless supplies.

Ebell spoke in a panel presentation titled «Climate Change Debate: How Speech is Being Stifled» alongside Attorneys General Luther Strange and Scott Pruitt, as well as Chet Thompson, President of the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers.