Sentences with phrase «lower than fossil fuel»

While prices for biomass fuels are lower than fossil fuel prices and have generally remained stable, rapidly increasing demand may push prices up in the future.

We've seen the cost curves for renewables drop dramatically to the point they're at parity, or lower than fossil fuels.

Thus a carbon price more accurately reflects this true cost in the market price, and also aids in the transition to other energy sources whose true cost is actually lower than fossil fuels.

Not exact matches

Solar power still amounts to less than 1 % of the nation's electrical - generating capacity — coal produces about 40 % — and its proportion will stay in the low single digits until it becomes cheaper than fossil fuels.

As he stated flatly in an exclusive interview with Fortune: «The core mission of the company is selling clean energy at a lower cost than fossil fuels.

But ten years later, the price would be four per cent lower than it will be under continued fossil fuel generation.

For example, if the world population hits only 8.3 billion by 2050 instead of the 9.7 billion figure typically cited by the UN, fossil fuel consumption could end up being 17 percent lower in 2050 than the oil industry thinks.

In 2013, for the first time, the world added more low - carbon electricity capacity than fossil fuel capacity.

The replacement not only has to be green, it has to be less expensive than fossil fuel, or enough short sighted people will go to the polls and vote in legislators to restore their lower power bills.

«What's more, biorefineries have trouble competing with low oil prices» — since biofuels are two to three times more expensive than fossil fuels.

Damage by such pollutants to the environment from renewables is 3 to 10 times lower than damage from fossil fuel based systems, the report says.

Amalgamated, a left - leaning bank with roots in the labor movement that manages more than $ 40 billion in assets under management, said it would adopt new policies about lowering its exposure to the fossil fuel industry in its own investments and its loans.

«When it comes to life cycle greenhouse gas emissions, wind and solar energy provide a much better greenhouse gas balance than fossil - based low carbon technologies, because they do not require additional energy for the production and transport of fuels, and the technologies themselves can be produced to a large extend with decarbonized electricity,» states Edgar Hertwich, an industrial ecologist from Yale University who co-authored the study.

(5) reduction in transportation sector emissions through increased transportation system and vehicle efficiency or use of transportation fuels that have lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions that are substantially lower than those attributable to fossil fuel - based alternatives;

Plug - in hybrids benefit from the more efficient use of fossil fuels in electricity generation even now and so have lower emissions than internal combustion engine cars, and if they get their juice from renewables, emissions would be very low indeed.

Further, it is not obvious to us that there are physical or economic limitations that prohibit fossil fuel emission targets far lower than 1000 GtC, even targets closer to 500 GtC.

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.

This is no surprise because fossil fuels have lower 13C / 12C ratios than the atmosphere.

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 Army is in the midst of a significant transformation of its fleet of 70,000 nontactical vehicles (NTVs), including the current deployment of more than 500 hybrids and the acquisition of 4,000 low - speed electric vehicles at domestic installations to help cut fossil fuel usage.

Indeed the inefficiencies of fossil fuel uses in lower income countries would be «burdened» more than in those more efficient uses in developed countries, but overall use in developing countries is lower.

Since fossil fuels are ultimately derived from ancient plants, plants and fossil fuels all have roughly the same 13C / 12C ratio — about 2 % lower than that of the atmosphere.

d. Changing perceptions of the risks and benefits of nuclear power leads to increasing public support for nuclear > allows the NRC licensing process to be completely revamped and the culture of the organisation to be changed from «safety first» to an appropriate balance of all costs and risks, including the consequences of retarding nuclear development and rollout by making it too expensive to compete as well as it could if the costs were lower (e.g. higher fatalities per TWh if nuclear is not allowed to be cheaper than fossil fuels);

Such co-production systems, when considered as power generators, can provide decarbonized electricity at lower costs than is feasible with new stand - alone fossil fuel power plants under a wide range of conditions, according to the study by Liu et al. published in the ACS journal Energy & Fuels.

It is not too late for the transition to a lower - carbon economy to be an orderly one, with fossil fuel companies steadily shrinking overall but delivering the best results for their shareholders by focusing on value rather than volume.

However, you don't want to argue for a rational solution — i.e. cheap nuclear power (which also happens to be 10 to 100 times safer than our currently accepted main source of electricity generation, fossil fuel) and also happens to be a near zero emission technology (in fact much lower than renewables given they need fossil fuel backup, and given solar needs about 10 times as much material per TWh on an LCA basis).

The Way Forward As China seeks a cleaner, softer path of development, renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, and geothermal are attractive not only because of their lower carbon emissions profiles, but because they use far less water than their fossil fuel counterparts.

With global GHG emissions and concentrations continuing to increase; with climate change intensifying changes in ecosystems, ice sheet deterioration, and sea level rise; and with fossil fuels providing more than 80 % of the world's energy, the likelihood seems low that cooperative actions will prevent increasingly disruptive climate change over the next several decades.

«Along with new policies that spur competition in several other countries, this Chinese dynamic has led to record - low announced prices of solar PV and onshore wind, which are now comparable or even lower than new - built fossil fuel alternatives.

me warming of the earth's temperature, but that the observed rate of warming (both at the earth's surface and throughout the lower atmosphere) is considerably less than has been anticipated by the collection of climate models upon whose projections climate alarm (i.e., justification for strict restrictions on the use of fossil fuels) is built.

• global emissions from fossil fuels are reduce by 50 % in 50 years • Due in part to lower cost energy, the world will be much richer than current projections suggest; as a result, population growth rate slows to the low end of projections.

The value of global fossil - fuel consumption subsidies in 2016 is estimated at around USD 260 billion, lower than the estimate for 2015, which was close to USD 310 billion.

Deploying near - term technology solutions (efficiency and operational measures and alternative fuels with lower lifecycle emissions than fossil jet fuel);

What's lost in a lot of the discussion about human - caused climate change is not that the sum of human activities is leading to some warming of the earth's temperature, but that the observed rate of warming (both at the earth's surface and throughout the lower atmosphere) is considerably less than has been anticipated by the collection of climate models upon whose projections climate alarm (i.e., justification for strict restrictions on the use of fossil fuels) is built.

• nuclear power will be substantially cheaper than fossil fuel electricity generation • cheap electricity substitutes for some gas for heating and oil for land transport (as in electric vehicles and low - cost electricity producing energy carriers).

Their enormous volumes of water can not become acidic — that is, plummet from an 8.2 pH level 150 years ago and their current 8.1 pH into the acidic realm of 7.0 or lower, due to the tiny amount of atmospheric CO2 attributable to fossil fuel use, in less than five centuries.

Moreover, they drive climate change by encouraging the consumption of polluting fuels while tilting the playing field against renewable power and energy efficiency: Fossil - fuel subsidies are five times greater than renewable energy subsidies, and they inflate domestic demand and discourage energy efficiency through artificially low energy prices, undermining the energy security of fossil - fuel importing counFossil - fuel subsidies are five times greater than renewable energy subsidies, and they inflate domestic demand and discourage energy efficiency through artificially low energy prices, undermining the energy security of fossil - fuel importing counfossil - fuel importing countries.

The 2009 State of the Climate report gives these top indicators: humans emitted 30 billion tons of of CO2 into the atmosphere each year from the burning of fossil fuels (oil, coal, and natural gas), less oxygen in the air from the burning of fossil fuels, rising fossil fuel carbon in corals, nights warming faster than days, satellites show less of the earth's heat escaping into space, cooling of the stratosphere or upper atmosphere, warming of the troposphere or lower atmosphere, etc..

The analyses published in Nordhaus (2008)[2] show the «cost competitive alternative to fossil fuels» policy (called «Low - cost backstop policy») is far better than the «Optimal carbon price» policy.

Known reserves of uranium (other than low concentrations in granite and seawater) are actually roughly equivalent in energy content to estimated fossil fuel reserves.

Renewable energy sources, excluding hydropower, are generally more diffuse and have lower net energy ratios than fossil fuels.

Climate projections calculated in this paper indicate that the future atmospheric CO2 concentration will not exceed 610 ppm in this century; and that the increase in global surface temperature will be lower than 2.6 DegC compared to pre-industrial level even if there is a significant increase in the production of non-conventional fossil fuels.

However, Kelly Sims Gallagher is not merely a coincidentally handy local Tufts University professor, she has direct connections with the same set of leaked industry memo phrases seen within the growing numbers of California global warming lawsuits — the «reposition global warming as theory rather than fact» strategy phrase and the «older, less - educated males» / «younger, lower - income women» targeting phrases — which are widely repeated elsewhere as proof that the fossil fuel industry «pays skeptic climate scientists to participate in misinformation campaigns» undermining the certainty of catastrophic man - caused global warming (despite those memos being worthless as evidence, but that is another matter).

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 estimate).

Jacobson made a name for himself and became something of a media celebrity for publishing a study in 2015 that claimed the United States could provide 100 percent of its energy needs from wind, solar, and hydroelectric power by 2050 — and at a lower cost than with fossil fuels.

Our Producer - Limited Profile has future fossil - fuel production that is lower than all 40 of the IPCC scenarios, so it seems that producer limitations could provide useful constraints in climate modeling.

Meanwhile, low - carbon sources — in which the IEA includes nuclear and fossil fuels with carbon capture and storage (CCS)-- would more than triple to encompass 70 % of worldwide energy demand in 2050.

For example, rooftop solar can now provide electricity to businesses and households at a lower cost than fossil fuels and improvements in vehicle efficiency can easily pay for themselves.

Finally, it should be noted that socioeconomic hypotheses associated with the lower emission trajectories (such as the one commented upon by Tim Worstall) imply a greatly increased use of nuclear and fossil fuels, especially cooal and natural gas, and the share of renewable sources reaching much less than the «80 %» claimed by the recent «renewable energy» IPCC report.

For example: burning the fossil fuels necessary to provide the additional energy used by incandescents releases more mercury into the atmosphere than is contained in even a low - quality, relatively high - mercury CFL, whereas the CFL's mercury is contained within the bulb.