Not exact matches
Mild winters mean
less home heating, lower natural gas prices and therefore lower
coal use.
New research from North Carolina State University and the University of Colorado Boulder finds that steep declines in the
use of
coal for power generation over the past decade were caused largely by
less expensive natural...
Coal used to be up close to 80, but it is less and less economic to run coal plants at a
Coal used to be up close to 80, but it is
less and
less economic to run
coal plants at a
coal plants at all.)
If
using a grill, you want a lower heat so
use less coals.
Combination of economic trends and policies Still, for now an array of Obama administration actions and economic trends are conspiring to cut emissions, according to EIA: Americans are
using less oil because of high gasoline prices; carmakers are complying with federal fuel economy standards; electricity companies are becoming more efficient; state renewable energy rules are ushering wind and solar energy onto the power grids; gas prices are competitive with
coal; and federal air quality regulations are closing the dirtiest power plants.
In fact, much of the overall decrease in energy consumption can be traced to the shift from
coal to gas, because modern gas - fired plants may
use up to 46 percent
less energy to produce the same amount of electricity.»
«The model is capturing the fact that you have a lot of low - cost opportunities to reduce
coal, from heavy - industry direct
use as well as the electric power sector, from facilities
using less energy - efficient technology or processes.»
By FRED PEARCE The large enterprises that mine
coal and drill for oil and gas face a world increasingly determined to
use less of their products.
By adopting lighting technologies that
use less energy the nations of the world will cut down on the fossil fuels, often
coal, burned to produce that light.
If I recycle a bit more, if I make some energy efficiency, if I travel
less, if I try to generate
less carbon — what is the
use of that when China is building another
coal - fired power station next week?»
As these
coal plants get
used less and
less, many will retire in the next few years.
China's massive jump in
coal use - to 3.8 billion metric tons in 2012 from 2.5 billion metric tons in 2006 - drove prices of benchmark Asian thermal
coal to average $ 121 a metric ton in 2011, from
less than $ 50 five years earlier.
So it would cost
less to insulate every home than to burn
coal to provide the energy now
used to heat and cool uninsulated houses.
The challenge is made tougher as we
use less coal.
With more money for development of novel designs and public financial support for construction — perhaps as part of a clean energy portfolio standard that lumps in all low - carbon energy sources, not just renewables or a carbon tax — nuclear could be one of the pillars of a three - pronged approach to cutting greenhouse gas emissions:
using less energy to do more (or energy efficiency), low - carbon power, and electric cars (as long as they are charged with electricity from clean sources, not
coal burning).
It hopes to make
less use of
coal - burning stations and more of combined - cycle gas - turbine stations.
Less work required to capture the same amount of CO2 results in lowering the cost of
using CCUS technology, making
coal - to - chemicals factories a promising sector to reduce carbon emissions.
Of the
coal ash produced,
less than.02 percent is recycled for agriculture production, Li said, making it one of the least
used byproducts of
coal combustion.
«With
less than 5 percent of world population, the U.S.
uses one - third of the world's paper, a quarter of the world's oil, 23 percent of the
coal, 27 percent of the aluminum, and 19 percent of the copper,» he reports.
The new reductions will bring
coal use in the city to
less than 7 million tons this year, down from around 22 million tons in 2013
For example, a study by Vasilis Fthenakis and Hung Chul Kim of Columbia University (2009) found that, on a life - cycle electricity - output basis — including direct and indirect land transformation — utility - scale PV in the U.S. Southwest requires
less land than the average U.S. power plant
using surface - mined
coal.
The process would also generate solid byproduct materials that leach
less contaminants, making them more stable than the original
coal fly ash
used as feedstock for the process.
Shell states that tar sands are
less damaging that
coal: Well since when was
coal and oil
used to the same ends unless they are talking about widespread adaption of CTL technology which could happen in some countries with large scale
coal rserves I guess but even I doubt that CTL projects will scale to 3 — 5 mbpd which is the projected output of Albertas oil sands come 2030.
Less commonly, countries spoke of reducing the
use of inefficient
coal - fired power plants, lowering methane emissions from oil and gas production, reforming fossil fuel subsidies, and carbon pricing, the report says.
None of the numbers regarding openings and closings are likely to matter in the long run because electric power companies are
using less and
less coal to generate electricity — the primary
use of
coal in the U.S.
Less understood — and more difficult to measure — is the influence of aerosol particles from human sources, particularly the
use of
coal and other fossil fuels.
02/07/2018 - While
less new
coal - fired power plants are now being built in China and India, the planned expansion in the
use of
coal in fast - growing emerging economies, such as Turkey, Indonesia and Vietnam, will in part cancel out the reduction.
A new report by the U.S. Energy Information Administration found that U.S.
coal use is down 29 percent compared to 2007 levels, and nearly every state is
using less of the environmentally destructive resource.
[166] The study considered the mix of power sources for 13 U.S. regions that would be
used during recharging of vehicles, generally a combination of
coal, natural gas and nuclear energy, and to a
lesser extend renewable energy.
It was then
used to power very big and inefficient steam engines that pumped water out of mines; when James Watt developed his steam engine that
used 75 percent
less coal than the Newcomen engine it replaced, the common thinking was that the increased efficiency meant that they would burn
less coal.
The increasing proliferation of these tools has the potential to raise awareness among environmentally - minded people and perhaps bring pressure to bear upon utilities to
use more renewable energy sources (or at least
less coal mined from the tops of mountains!)
~ 13 times
less than land
use changes (3.4 gigatons) ~ 11.5 times
less than light - duty vehicles (3.0 gigatons) ~ 5.3 times
less than concrete production (1.4 gigatons) ~ 2 dozen 1000 MW
coal - fired power plants (2 % of the world's
coal - fired electrical generation) Or, roughly the same CO2 emissions as Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Poland or South Africa.
Cut the number of
coal plants in USA / EU and just get people there to
use a lot
less electricity.
Researchers at Stanford University who closely track China's power sector,
coal use, and carbon dioxide emissions have done an initial rough projection and foresee China possibly emitting somewhere between 1.9 and 2.6 billion tons
less carbon dioxide from 2008 to 2010 than it would have under «business as usual» if current bearish trends for the global economy hold up.
When
used to generate electricity, the shale - gas footprint is still significantly greater than that of
coal at decadal time scales but is
less at the century scale.
Demonstrating that the overall environmental damage is
less than that from
coal does not imply that gas production and
use is cost - free, and the sooner we reduce our dependence on fossil fuel sources of energy of all kinds the better.
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.
I would be inclined to look for something
less than «full exploitation» just as I would be inclined to look for moderate
use of
coal.
It seems that we have to strive to substitute non-emissions based methods for
coal whenever possible so if substantial solar, for example, is in place, and
less coal can be
used while the solar is being effective then that would be good.
But there's mounting evidence that the U.S. — and even the world at large — may be deciding that it prefers to
use less coal.
In May 2010, American Electric Power announced it planned to run 10 small
coal - fired power units on a part - time basis starting in June as «the weak economy reduced demand and low natural gas prices have made the
use of some
coal units
less profitable,» according to the company.
The decline in
coal - related emissions is due mainly to utilities
using less coal for electricity generation as they burned more low - priced natural gas.
Since the countries with low cost power are burning
coal while the countries with high cost power are
using less CO2 intensive energy supplies, the net result is a gobal increase in CO2.
Power generators are turning away from
coal for a host of reasons: In some instances natural gas is cheaper; many states are requiring utilities to generate a certain portion of electricity from renewable resources; individual cities (and even an entire Canadian province) have decided to stop purchasing electricity created by burning
coal; and new Environmental Protection Agency regulations are making it more expensive and
less economical to
use coal plants.
The United States clearly is
using less coal: Domestic consumption fell by about 114 million tons, or 11 percent, largely due to a decline in the
use of
coal for electricity.
But despite the fact that they are
using less coal overall, the pace at which countries built new
coal plants in 2015 was faster than it has been since 2011.
The upshot is that existing
coal plants are being
used less across major
coal - burning economies.
Decarbonizing the world's electricity supply,... would deliver a little
less than half the reduction in carbon dioxide emissions necessary by 2035 to limit the eventual increase in global temperatures to two degrees Celsius,... The carbon intensity of electricity has increased by 6 % since 1990, largely due to growing
use of
coal for power generation in emerging economies, it said.
By «
using more reasonable» data, Cathles and his colleagues confirm that «gas has
less than half and perhaps a third the greenhouse impact as
coal.
But delivering those same services with
less energy, more productively
used, could shrink 2050 usage to 71 quads, eliminate the need for oil,
coal, nuclear energy, and one - third of the natural gas, and save $ 5 trillion in net - present - valued cost.