Sentences with phrase «if coal prices»

Even if coal prices remain steady, which it thinks is unlikely, it believes that the continuing fall in PV prices means that solar energy will be more economic than coal by 2020.

If coal prices rebound, debt can be a good thing.

Not exact matches

So we asked in our research: What would happen if current low natural gas prices or pollution control policies caused all US coal - burning power plants to be replaced by natural gas generators?

Strike Energy's share price has been on a white knuckle ride over the last few weeks as investors desperately try to work out if it is going to be the next large cap gas producer in Australia, or fail whilst daring to create a new technical frontier in the search for coal seam gas riches.

Many utilities can generate power using either coal or natural gas, so if the latter's price gets cheap enough — typically below $ 4.50 per MCF — power companies will make the switch.

If the price is going to continue to rise, then coal's price will follow.

If those projections are even remotely accurate, what do you think that will do to coal and oil prices?

If Teck does sanction that project, and copper prices improve, then it's possible that copper could rival steelmaking coal as its biggest moneymaker in the future.

A large proportion of canal construction was explicitly undertaken to reduce the cost of coal in centers that promised to become large - scale consumers if the price could be lowered.

However, coal demand can continue to decline if natural gas prices stay low for a very long time allowing further replacement of coal - fired power plants with gas - fired ones.

Powder River Basin coal will likely be the first choice, especially if the price of coal per ton is the only factor.

Other things equal, subsequent declines in spot prices for iron ore and coking coal would, if sustained, see the terms of trade fall further over the next few quarters.

Barnaby Joyce says he would be» 100 %» behind the government constructing coal - fired power stations if that would lower the price of electricity.

If, for example, a company were planning to sell the federal coal in the United States, where coal prices are low, BLM would theoretically charge it less than if the company planned to sell it in more lucrative marketIf, for example, a company were planning to sell the federal coal in the United States, where coal prices are low, BLM would theoretically charge it less than if the company planned to sell it in more lucrative marketif the company planned to sell it in more lucrative markets.

Other mitigating factors for coal - fired electricity would be if thermal coal prices dropped off steeply or the cost of building a coal - fired power plant came down.

If we continue to rely on coal to keep the lights burning and gasoline to keep our cars running, we are bound to pay a heavy price.

Adding a price on carbon emissions at even a «modest» level of $ 25 per ton would make new nuclear energy competitive with coal and natural gas even if the risk premium remains, the MIT study concludes.

This risk factor pushes the «levelized» or all - in price of nuclear power from new units to 8.4 cents per kilowatt - hour, the MIT study concludes, versus 6.2 cents for coal - fired plants and 6.5 cents for natural gas generation (if gas is priced at $ 7 per million British thermal units, or roughly 1,000 cubic feet of flowing gas).

If new plants can be built on time and on budget, the risk premium could fall, bringing the price of power from new plants down to 6.6 cents per kilowatt - hour — competitive with gas and coal — the report says.

Coal industry executives contend that it can compete against gasoline if oil prices are $ 50 a barrel or higher.

And, even if those targets are met, greenhouse gas pollution may remain: Rising prices for natural gas in the U.S. meant an uptick in coal burning in 2013 — and an attendant 2 percent rise in CO2 from electricity production.

Solar panels could produce electricity at the same price as coal - and natural gas - burning power plants by the end of this decade if countries direct resources at this rapidly advancing corner of the energy industry, according to the Paris - based International Energy Agency.

Some want to emulate the success of the United States in bringing down energy prices via shale gas - a fossil fuel that can help cut greenhouse emissions if it replaces coal but at the same time can divert investments from cleaner energy.

And coal disappears from the map if you add the environmental and public health costs associated with various energy sources (the third map), including a $ 62 per metric ton price on carbon dioxide emissions.

«The big thing is if gas stays low [in price] then coal has a tough time.»

If the price on carbon is high enough to penalize coal consumption, the theory is it creates economic incentives to retrofit coal plants or use gas or wind power to generate electricity.

If you look at page 20 you will see that in the reference case, oil and coal prices go up over time despite the improvement in technology happening simultaneously.

Trying out high - priced ports of earlier games might be a good canary in the coal mine to see if people are receptive to spending big money on Nintendo games on mobile up front.

Because if coal to liquids was profitable at the present price of oil, we'd be seeing someone open a coal to liquids plant and making a profit based on the difference.

Experts say that if we bought $ 50 to $ 200 billion worth of solar panels over the next 10 — 20 years, the price of solar could come to down to the price of natural gas and even coal, not just in the U.S. but even in developing countries like China, where coal is especially cheap.

U.S. coal exports, if they scale, will more likely than not displace coal with different price, heat, and pollution attributes in Asian markets.

But if you doubt the reality of this shift, just look at the news coverage from Monday of the drop in the price of shares in coal companies ahead of the speech.

Salt has been raked over the coals for his comment, with Millennial bloggers pointing out that, if you eat brunch once a week, it would take 9,100 $ 22 smashed avocado toasts and 175 years to save a 20 percent down payment for Sydney's median house price of $ 1 million.

If these real costs were added to the price of coal, the CTL fantasy would fade in a hurry.

If a country is a large enough player in coal export markets, then cutting back exports will increase prices for internationally traded coal, and hence give importers an incentive to use less.

Even while they are running adds criticizing governor Sebelius's decision, Peabody Energy is already incorporating a shadow price of carbon into their financial calculations when deciding if investments in new coal - fired power plants are viable.

The value of doing this is clear: «Experts say that if we bought $ 50 to $ 200 billion worth of solar panels over the next 10 — 20 years, the price of solar could come to down to the price of natural gas and even coal, not just in the U.S. but even in developing countries like China, where coal is especially cheap.»

If the full cost of a barrel of oil and the environmental costs of a ton of coal were reflected in their market price, many energy and environmental experts say, that might go a long way toward shifting the balance toward renewable energy sources.

If fuel prices stay the way they've been (that is, expensive and becoming more so), we can expect to see more funding for magnificent developments in alternative fuels (sadly, one of which is coal) as they supplant oil as an industrial, commercial and transportation energy source.

In the wake of Australia's move to add a price to carbon dioxide emissions — which is particularly notable considering the country is one of the world's big exporters of coal (and related CO2 emissions)-- I sent a query to some Australian analysts of climate and energy policy to see if this holds lessons for the United States.

Even if you trim off the ends of the curve of squalor and overindulgence, you end up with a huge energy gap, which may already be what is helping drive up oil and coal prices (keep in mind most experts on fossil fuels I talk to see no signs of «peak coal» any time soon).

But if natural gas continues growing at the pace it has, the price will keep falling and coal power will lose even more market share and clout in Washington.

Energy prices will rise in the future, especially if we take climate change as seriously as it deserves; sustainable energy is more expensive than burning coal.

But if the industry wants to surpass coal and fulfil its role as a «transition fuel», it should lobby for a carbon price to help it on its way.

So if Heinberg and Fridley are right, coal prices will increase, CCS will be confirmed as uneconomic and renewables will take over.

Barnaby Joyce says he would be» 100 %» behind the government constructing coal - fired power stations if that would lower the price of electricity.

If TCR / ECS are lower than assumed by IPCC experts, and if we use resource limits on oil, gas and coal (rather than using the hyper cornucopian figures used in RCP8.5), then the market, emerging technology driven by higher fossil fuel prices will reduce emissions to have concentration peak at ~ 630 ppm (that's a rough estimateIf TCR / ECS are lower than assumed by IPCC experts, and if we use resource limits on oil, gas and coal (rather than using the hyper cornucopian figures used in RCP8.5), then the market, emerging technology driven by higher fossil fuel prices will reduce emissions to have concentration peak at ~ 630 ppm (that's a rough estimateif we use resource limits on oil, gas and coal (rather than using the hyper cornucopian figures used in RCP8.5), then the market, emerging technology driven by higher fossil fuel prices will reduce emissions to have concentration peak at ~ 630 ppm (that's a rough estimate).

If these actions lowered prices sufficiently one could even conceive of making the US the new Saudi Arabia of oil, natural gas, and coal.

The price of coal would increase dramatically if it reflected the cost borne by society from the pollution that causes hundreds of thousands of premature deaths each year in coal - dependent countries.

That translates into $ 500 billion a year in lost revenues, if you take the IEA thermal coal price forecasts of $ 110 / tonne under its New Policies scenario as the benchmark.