Sentences with phrase «if air emissions»

Conversely, if air emissions from these devices are below federal thresholds they may be exempt from permit requirements.

Not exact matches

But if deployed across the entire US, they would also help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, clean up our air, promote energy independence, and make energy distribution more cost - effective and convenient.

If the UK government complied with EU air quality and emissions rules, then we would all be breathing much cleaner air than at present.

«If done right, you would see mobility improve, carbon emissions that contribute to climate change cut, and better air quality for New Yorkers.»

Phasing out coal is one of the first steps the Cuomo administration must make if it hopes to meet its goal of drastically reducing air emissions by about 40 percent in the next decade, said Lisa Dix, senior New York representative for Sierra Club.

«It's already too late for our breaking the European legal limits, but if we are to clean up London's dirty air we need this zone now, with a zero emission target.

On Monday, Gina McCarthy, the E.P.A. assistant administrator for air issues, told state environmental officials in a letter that if Texas would not regulate carbon emissions from smokestacks, the federal government would seize control of the state's permitting program on Thursday.

«This was a unique opportunity to explore what would happen to air quality if power station emissions were reduced,» he says.

If the process could be applied to other common industrial metals such as copper, it would have the potential to significantly lower prices as well as reduce the air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions associated with traditional production.

«You might expect air quality would decline if ammonia emissions go up, but this shows it won't happen, provided the emissions from combustion go down,» said Fabien Paulot, an atmospheric chemist with Princeton University and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration who was not involved in the study.

Volk: When if the mind boggling facts This is no local pollutant: Every burst of CO2 that goes into the air from some power plant in Illinois is going to spread equally all around the world, and the same goes for CO2 emissions from China.

That means that even if we manage to significantly reduce our cars» tailpipe emissions, city air will still be polluted, to a large extent, with these other substances.

If CO2 emissions reductions are moderately reduced in line with current national pledges under the Paris Climate Agreement, biomass plantations implemented by mid-century to extract remaining excess CO2 from the air still would have to be enormous.

The study, published in the journal Environmental Research Letters, examined if ongoing power transmission capacity investment in China — driven largely by concerns over air pollution — could also reduce local adverse health impacts from air pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions.

If all American air conditioners also used the device, the savings in energy would equal the emissions from eight large power stations burning fossil fuels.

Communities of color and those with low education and high poverty and unemployment may face greater health risks even if their air quality meets federal health standards.A pervasive air pollutant, the fine particulate matter known as PM2.5 is a mixture of emissions from diesel engines, power plants, refineries and other sources of combustion.

The jist of this is that we must NOT suddenly switch off carbon / sulphur producing industries over the planet but instead we must first dramatically reduce CO2 emissions from every conceivable source, then gradually tackle coal / fossil fuel sources to smoothly remove the soot from the air to prevent a sudden leap in average global temps which if it is indeed 2.75 C as the UNEP predicts will permanently destroy the climates ability to regulate itself and lead to catastrophic changes on the land and sea.

«If atmospheric CO2 emissions and air temperatures continue to rise, the male god may soon never cross the lake again to visit the female god as he has in Shinto legend for centuries.»

Surprisingly we come into contact with heavy metals in everyday life — through the air we breathe (think vehicle emissions and other environmental pollutants), in the food we eat (non-organic foods that have been treated with pesticides and herbicides), if you have dental fillings made from mercury - containing amalgam, and certain types of large fish (such as king mackerel, swordfish, orange roughy, marlin, tuna steaks, and canned «white» albacore).

Hence, if the engine «believes» the coolant to be a different temperature than it is, it will put in more or less fuel than required, resulting in a faulty air / fuel ratio and potentially more CO emissions.

If you live in a cold environment and your car is equipped with California emissions you have a secondary air pump somewhere.

For example, if your assignment is to explore the main cause of global warming, your thesis statement can be the following: The high rate of chemical emissions into air is the main cause of global warming.

Or if you have emissions taking place far away, in the poor countries, the idea that you could do free air capture, like Carbon Engineering is trying to do and a few other people are trying to do — that would have to be part of the mix.

If only additional emissions were counted with reference to a stay - home scenario, air travel may well come out as the dominant emissions component.

I think that if we are serious about the need to cut greenhouse gas emissions we'd show it by drastically cutting air and highway travel beginning with a freeze on all non-essential travel by air.

If China can build its capacity to extract natural gas without substantial emissions to the air (and with careful standards for drilling and water pollution — which is hardly a given!)

And if decreasing carbon emissions turns out not to affect global temperatures, at least it will free us from petroleum dependency and clear up the air.

If we can not agree on that step, then we can not have markets as the main force in solving problems, since markets do not define the problems to be solved without costs being assigned to «free» things like air, water and CO2 emissions.

If you live in (for example) Houston if your current roof is dark, making the next one light colored will save slightly on air conditioning, and reduce your carbon emissions a bit as welIf you live in (for example) Houston if your current roof is dark, making the next one light colored will save slightly on air conditioning, and reduce your carbon emissions a bit as welif your current roof is dark, making the next one light colored will save slightly on air conditioning, and reduce your carbon emissions a bit as well.

If EPA had, beginning in 1990, exercised the authority it got under the Clean Air Act to regulate mobile sources (vehicles) of the emission of highly carcinogenic aromatics (benzene, toluene, xylene) then OPEC's founding a decade earlier would have had far less consequence.

Meanwhile it became clear that even if all emissions could be instantly halted, the gases already in the air would bring some additional warming for millennia.

The agency's finding — which the White House will now review — comes in response to an April 2007 Supreme Court decision that greenhouse - gas emissions could be regulated under the Clean Air Act if the EPA determines they pose a threat to public health and welfare.

To address this need, a policy instrument similar to a Renewable Portfolio Standard could work wonders — if countries / states mandated that an increasing fraction of their emissions be offset through direct air capture, it would create a bankable demand driver that would stimulate further investments in technology research and development.

But Fuhr and Hallstrom are wrong that these negative consequences definitely «would» happen, especially if a large portfolio of CDR approaches (spanning not just bio-CCS but also biochar, direct air capture, reforestation / ecosystem restoration, land management, and enhanced mineral weathering) were pursued to provide negative emissions.

If Congress were to not only eliminate EPA's regulatory authority, but take CO2 completely out of the Clean Air Act, it would still be up to the courts to decide whether or not that would eliminate state authority over vehicle tailpipe emissions.

Even if Obama halted the popline, Canada has signaled its interest in selling the same crude to China, which would require much more intensive transport and would still send the same emissions into the air.

If the U.K. sold its shale gas both domestically and abroad to replace coal, it could reduce local air pollution significantly and reduce global carbon emissions by 170 megatons.

But, if fully adopted, the original Clean Power Plan was projected to prevent an estimated 90,000 asthma attacks each year by reducing the dirty power plant emissions choking the air we breathe.

For example, the CO2 in the air would increase if the emissions and sequestrations both reduced if the sequestration reduced by more than the emission reduced.

Most environmentalists and sympathetic politicians want you to believe that carbon dioxide (CO2) is a «dirty,» dangerous air pollutant and human emissions of it must be reduced by any means possible if the world is to survive.

They add: «Direct air capture could become a major industry if the technology matures and prices drop dramatically... Direct air capture might require much less land [than other negative emissions techniques], but entail much higher costs and consumption of a large fraction of global energy production.

Fabien Paulot, an atmospheric chemist with Princeton University and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration who was not involved in the study, said, «You might expect air quality would decline if ammonia emissions go up, but this shows it won't happen, provided the emissions from combustion go down.»

Our results suggest that if a 2.0 Ã «Â warming is to be avoided, direct CO2 capture from the air, together with subsequent sequestration, would eventually have to be introduced in addition to sustained 90 % global carbon emissions reductions by 2050.

Obama's plan doesn't go anywhere nearly as far as it might go in reducing America's carbon emissions, if the full authority of the EPA under the Clean Air Act were to be vigorously applied.

Under the Clean Air Act, the EPA is required to grant California a waiver on air pollution emissions standards if the state has «compelling and extraordinary circumstances,» which California argued a decade ago, and which the Obama administration agreed that it doAir Act, the EPA is required to grant California a waiver on air pollution emissions standards if the state has «compelling and extraordinary circumstances,» which California argued a decade ago, and which the Obama administration agreed that it doair pollution emissions standards if the state has «compelling and extraordinary circumstances,» which California argued a decade ago, and which the Obama administration agreed that it does.

Researchers two years ago predicted that extreme heat and humidity could make some parts of the planet uninhabitable if drastic steps were not taken to cut fossil fuel combustion, and the greenhouse gas emissions that are amplifying surface air temperatures to dangerous levels.

Many advocates fear that communities now devastated by pollution will miss out on air - quality gains if the state lets these industries trade their emissions.

If those emissions had simply accumulated in the air, the concentration of carbon dioxide would have increased from 280 parts per million (ppm), as it was before the Industrial Revolution, to about 550 ppm today.

Moreover, the EPA promulgated a final agency action last summer that threatens another 36 state programs with Clean Air Act federal takeovers, if States do not radically alter their air quality strategies to control emissions due to malfunctions and other uncontrollable evenAir Act federal takeovers, if States do not radically alter their air quality strategies to control emissions due to malfunctions and other uncontrollable evenair quality strategies to control emissions due to malfunctions and other uncontrollable events.

Starting in January 2011, large industrial facilities that must already obtain Clean Air Act permits for non-GHGs must also include GHG requirements in these permits if they are newly constructed and have the potential to emit 75,000 tons per year of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) or more or if they make changes at the facility that increase GHG emissions by that amount.