Sentences with phrase «less coal going»

Not exact matches

In India, for example, the average life expectancy is 301/2 years, compared to 681/2 years in the United States; the average annual income is less than $ 40, compared to $ 1,469 in the U.S. Energy utilized annually per capita, which is a rough index of living standard, is in some countries equivalent to.02 tons of coal, compared to 8 tons, or 400 times as much, in the U.S.. Two thirds of the world usually goes to bed hungry at night.

The slump in commodity prices has caused a number of railroad stocks to go on sale, and CN looks particularly interesting since it has less exposure to the weakest commodity — coal.

Peak coal may be a lot closer than most people think, especially if we go into gasification or liquefying, which take considerable energy leaving less net energy gain than if we just burn the coal directly.

The economics means that the oil price will go up as demand exceeds supply and at that point we will turn to less likely sources of oil, such as the tar sands, but eventually we will reach a point where converting coal to the usual oil products, such as chemicals and gasoline, will be a more economically viable route.

Hard to believe that many of the countries that burn less than 2 %, the other 17.6 % are going to ramp up and import a lot of coal.

«I think it's more likely he's going to relax the regulation of natural gas and coal and that would make it essentially less economic for solar and wind,» Potts said.

It takes six decades between the time the decision is made to go with a particular energy generation form and the time it's end of life; committing to coal or natural gas right now, today, is the less economical choice, and fiscally irresponsible, because by the time the plant is built, there will be a 50:1 ratio of cheaper solar / wind / hydro / geothermal / wave years of service committed to.

If renewables did not work and we did not go back to coal it would be a very different world, no global catastrophe but a much less energy intensive existence.

Going forward, more filtration may be the best we can hope for (and even that will continue to be a fight), though really, from a health perspective, the only good future for coal would be less of it.

Too bad, as the New York Times point out, that even though natural gas does have a far less impact on global warming than does coal, if we're going to reduce carbon emissions by 2050 enough to prevent the worst of climate change, the increase in natural gas usage won't cut it.

Simply replacing the NE coal firing with 60 % less CO2 clean and cheap CCGT you have to go woud be by far the most effective short - medium term solution for the USA, no debate required if the facts are what matters.