Sentences with phrase «fuels over renewable»

House subcommittee hearing features testimony from people who have received funding from fossil fuel interests and primarily advocate for the continued use of fossil fuels over renewable energy.

The Michigan power company is planning to float 30 year bonds to cover renewable energy and energy efficiency investments, while taking other steps to favor continued reliance on fossil fuels over renewable energy.

They choose fossil fuels over renewable energy sources because they are cheaper and tend to think short - term instead of looking ahead.

The findings suggest that without nuclear power utilities would turn to fossil fuels over renewable sources.

Not exact matches

While both provinces have set laudable targets for increasing the share of renewable power on their grids over the coming decades, they're still burning fossil fuels for power.

Over a year which has seen large banks halt funding for fossil fuel projects, major institutions divest from oil, gas and coal holdings, and oil companies snap up power and renewables companies in a bid to diversify their asset base, research published today by the UK Sustainable Investment and Finance Association (UKSIF) and the Climate Change Collaboration suggests nervousness over climate risk has shot up in financial circOver a year which has seen large banks halt funding for fossil fuel projects, major institutions divest from oil, gas and coal holdings, and oil companies snap up power and renewables companies in a bid to diversify their asset base, research published today by the UK Sustainable Investment and Finance Association (UKSIF) and the Climate Change Collaboration suggests nervousness over climate risk has shot up in financial circover climate risk has shot up in financial circles.

Other environmental policies include promoting smarter energy use through the ecoEnergy Initiative; a Chemical Management Plan to regulate chemicals harmful to human health and the environment; $ 1.5 billion over seven years for the production of renewable fuels; a commitment to ensure that 90 percent of Canadian electricity needs are generated through non-emitting sources by 2020; and additional government funding to acquire and preserve ecologically sensitive lands.

With a rich career demonstrating a strong advocacy for agriculture, North Carolina native Starling finds himself in the middle of critical decisions over global trade, renewable fuels, and future farm policy.

Starling shares industry concerns over possible Chinese trade retaliation and understands the levity of a pending White House decision on the Renewable Fuel Standard.

«This report shows the government's plans are stacked in favour of nuclear power over renewable energy and are so vague they risk locking the UK into a new generation of polluting fossil fuels,» senior economy campaigner Simon Bullock commented.

The Clean Energy Standard was part of an effort by state regulators to shift the state's reliance from fossil fuels to renewable energy over the next several decades.

In fact, the bill Obama voted for raised taxes on oil companies by $ 300 million over 11 years while providing $ 5.8 billion in subsidies for renewable energy, energy efficiency and alternative fuels.

Despite concerns over Scott Pruitt's record of opposing ethanol, experts say the renewable - fuel program is on safe ground

Ultimately, the political problem that regulators face here in the U.S. as they struggle with the California low - carbon fuel standard and the revised EPA Renewable Fuel Standard is that they are trying to regulate biofuels producers with respect to indirect changes over which they (both the regulators and the biofuels producers) have little contfuel standard and the revised EPA Renewable Fuel Standard is that they are trying to regulate biofuels producers with respect to indirect changes over which they (both the regulators and the biofuels producers) have little contFuel Standard is that they are trying to regulate biofuels producers with respect to indirect changes over which they (both the regulators and the biofuels producers) have little control.

The EIA says world energy consumption is likely to grow by more than 50 percent over the period 2010 to 2040, with fossil fuels supplying 80 percent of the total, despite a growth in renewables and nuclear power.

BGU researchers, pioneers and leaders in renewable fuels for over three decades, are powering the future of energy.

In many of its sponsored research «studies,» IPA promotes fossil fuel development over renewables.

Even though the country already generates over 99 percent of its electricity from renewable sources and ran entirely on alternative energy for 250 days in 2016, completely banning fossil fuels across all industries will likely prove difficult.

Feed - in tariffs would also have the effect of lowering the consumer's costs for renewable energy, which would only grow cheaper over time, as more and more manufacturing capacity was built — because under equivalent economies of scale, renewables are definitely cheaper than fossil fuels.

Compare with: «Renewables are the fastest growing fuel source, quadrupling over the next 20 years, supported by continuing gains in competitiveness» (to 2035) https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/pdf/energy-economics/energy-outlook-2017/bp-energy-outlook-2017.pdf

Renewable energy currently tends to have higher up - front costs than fossil fuel - based power systems do, but in the long run equipment depreciation is lower and the fuel (sunlight and wind) is free, thus any honest cost analysis over the lifetime of the power - generating equipment will conclude that solar is cheapest, wind second, nuclear third, and fossil fuels are unworkable in the long run due to the global warming issue.

The potential for efficiency remains enormous, and given the likely improvements in technology and changes in societal norms over the next century which it will take us to do the right thing, we are likely to be able to cut fossil fuel use further than most people imagine possible, even if renewables don't become commercially competitive (which wind is already, and solar is in certain situations).

Renewable energy sources are replacing fossil fuels now, all over the world, and increasingly are doing so at cost * savings.

The Council of the American Physical Society believes that the use of renewable energy sources, the adoption of new ways of producing and using fossil fuels, increased consideration of safe and cost effective uses of nuclear power, and the introduction of energy - efficient technologies can, over time, promote the United States» energy security and reduce stress on the world's environment.

Converting an existing fossil fuel grid completely to renewable electricity is calculated to cost between 1 — 2 % of a countries gdp, if spread over 20 years.

Ray 541 If fossil fuels and renewables are truly interchangeable when it comes to cost and value to the user, why is there so much friction to switch over?

To start, nearly all of the CSLF meeting participants were bullish on the outlook for fossil fuel consumption, expressing the view that fossil use would increase over the next several decades due to a combination of demand factors (e.g. population and economic growth) and supply factors (e.g. lack of cost - competitive renewable energy).

Over the last year, Environmental Progress discovered that major environmental organizations including the Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and Environmental Law and Policy Center (ELPC) have accepted contributions from, or made investments in, fossil fuel and renewable energy companies.

That major fossil fuel producers are now following the global trend should be taken as the most emphatic evidence yet that the switch to renewable sources of energy is, over the long term, irreversible.

The DOD's focus on renewable fuel is not over climate as the existential question of being able to conduct its core mission — which requires large quantities of fuel.

According to the IEA, global fossil fuel consumption subsidies are over 4 times higher than global renewable subsidies.

Pockets of partisan agreement over renewables despite wide divides over increasing fossil fuels and effects of climate change

The debate over biofuels and economics has tended to focus on mandates and subsidies rather than carbon taxes — unsurprisingly, given the absence of carbon - taxing in the U.S. and the prevalence of large biofuel subsidies, primarily via the Renewable Fuel Standard.

By doing so, it helps maintain the state's status quo of having below average grid interconnection rules and incentivizing centralized, fossil fuel - based power generation over renewable sources.

Backing out fossil fuels begins with the electricity sector, where the development of 5,153 gigawatts of new renewable generating capacity by 2020, over half of it from wind, would be more than enough to replace all the coal and oil and 70 percent of the natural gas now used to generate electricity.

Though China leads, many other countries also are building small - scale structures, as the economics of generation increasingly favor renewable sources over fossil fuels.

The Commission might well question Dominion's plan to lock its customers into a bad investment in fossil fuels over the next twenty years at the expense of smarter renewable alternatives.

Renewable energy is projected to be the fastest growing source of primary energy over the next 25 years, but fossil fuels remain the dominant source of energy.

Government giveaways in the form of permanent tax breaks to the fossil fuel industry — one of which is over a century old — are seven times larger than those to the renewable energy sector.

Because by pushing power generators to ditch fossil fuels for cleaner alternatives, the plan aimed to not only protect our planet, but accelerate the renewable energy revolution already underway across the country and grow jobs in the green - tech sector that already employs over 3 million Americans.

But of course, there are good reasons to favor zero - fuel - cost renewables over fossil fuels and increasingly uneconomical nuclear generation.

In accord with those values, we now move that the University makes a binding public commitment to phase out, at the least, over no more than five years, all investments in fossil fuel companies listed in the Carbon Tracker Top 200, seeking where advisable alternative investments in renewable energy.

In fact, since the RFS expanded renewable fuel volumes in 2007, over 1/3 of corn production and nearly 1/4 of the oil produced from soybeans have been diverted to biofuels.1 As the EPA points out, «because many biofuel feedstocks require land, water, and other resources, research suggests that biofuel production may give rise to several undesirable effects.»

A campaign is a sustained effort toward a specific outcome, like getting a city to ban fossil fuel development or a public institution to commit to a just switch to renewable energy that communities have more control over.

There are immense direct and indirect public benefits in transitioning to an efficient renewable energy system in terms of reduced incidence of diseases such as asthma, freeing up of most of the supplies of water that are now used for thermal electricity generation (and hence reduced conflict over water), reduced air, water, and soil pollution that accompanies fossil fuel production, processing and use, and greatly improved prospects of avoiding the worst consequences of climate change.

Although Pennsylvania voters agree that climate change is causing problems now — and 69 % want the state to prioritize renewable energy over fossil fuels to drive down greenhouse gas emission — legislators haven't updated the state's woefully outdated Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard for fourteen years.

Experts agree we need a substantial reduction in CO2 over the next 40 - 50 years and this means we need renewable energy to replace fossil fuels now.

In any event, we no longer need to go slow: In the last few years, engineers have brought the price of renewables so low that, according to many experts, it would make economic sense to switch over even if fossil fuels weren't wrecking the Earth.

The biofuels / ethanol debate has moved over to National Journal's Energy Experts Blog, with this week's posts addressing whether the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) that mandates biofuel use should be left alone, amended or repealed.

So in that time period, the US favored «subsidies» to fossil fuels (including the Strategic Oil Reserve, which I guess will count as a negative subsidy this year) over renewables by a ratio of ~ 2.5:1.