Sentences with phrase «means more coal»

More electricity means more coal and natural gas burning, which, according to green dogma, means more greenhouse gas emissions and global warming.

Natural gas is the pivot point around which the energy debate revolves today: Cheap gas means renewables struggle, but no gas means more coal.

In theory, that was supposed to mean more coal mining jobs in southwest Virginia.

Not exact matches

But the coal has to get there, which means increased rail traffic, expanded port facilities and more ships plying the Salish Sea.

And it could mean a future viable source of energy that emits no pollution or radioactivity, burns no fossil fuels, and could be no more expensive to run than conventional coal or electric power plants.

Despite efforts to reduce emissions, unusually high gas prices in 2006 meant more electricity was generated by coal, the environment secretary explained.

That means China's entire continuing coal fleet could be more efficient than any existing U.S. coal plant, according to a report released in May by the liberal Center for American Progress.

This means developing more of America's own energy resources, including wind, solar, clean coal, biofuels, nuclear energy, as well as oil and natural gas — which will reduce our dependence on Middle Eastern oil and create thousands of jobs here at home.

Even the oil sands ultimate consumption in a gasoline, diesel or jet engine only results in 500 kilograms of CO2 - equivalent per barrel of refined petroleum products, meaning total oil sands emissions from well to wheel are considerably lower than those of this nation's more than 500 power plants burning coal to generate electricity.

That means that in some cases the removal of subsidies causes a switch to more emissions - intensive coal.

Concerns over climate change have encouraged governments and consumers to demand that electricity is decarbonised — which means no more burning of coal and gas wherever possible.

But getting at all that coal has meant the displacement of more than 12,000 people of the Navajo Nation, one of the largest removals of Native Americans since the 19th century.

That means, for a coal plant, we'd have to burn — and so pay for — an extra 10 - 40 % more coal with CCS than we would without it, and the electricity from that extra energy / coal consumed is not available to consumers for electricity.

Our bold, scientific approach to matching means more quality dates with deeply compatible singles in Coal Valley that truly understand you.

The problem is more people means more housing, more coal to heat them and more food so that they don't... well, die.

Positive can continue to dominate due to aspects related to psychological handling, and more heat has been shown to increase conflict potential, increased disruptions means increased rebuilding efforts, by all means (using wood and coal for burning if someone lacks technological advancements).

People's beliefs tend to align neatly with their interests, and in the absence of indisputable proof (and to non-scientists that means the equivalent of a ten - foot rise in sea level inundating South Beach) it is more «convenient» for people to use cheap oil, natural gas and coal.

India announced its leadership in an ambitious «solar alliance» that undoubtedly is meant to help blunt opposition to its continued demand (an appropriate one, to my mind) to increase its use of coal, albeit more efficiently and cleanly than in the past.

If we should have luck here in Germany, and the EEG does not fail, it would mean that in 20 years we'd have a grid mostly powered by renewable energy, paid by the private households alone, that will produce cheap electricity for the industry at a time when oil, gas and coal will be much more expansive than today.

That means no more oil imports from Canada and Venezuela and an end to coal mining in the United States and China.

One reason is that the game, while very much entertainment, forces players (at least the demo I saw) to make choices, to understand that forswearing coal means installing an amazing number of much more expensive wind turbines and solar panels.

The World Health Organization estimates that preventable deaths from air pollution, meaning soot and smog from burning wood, coal, oil and gasoline, total more than two million per year worldwide.

An important question that political and climate analysts will be examining is how much bite is in the regulations — meaning how much they would curb emissions beyond what's already happening to cut power plant carbon dioxide thanks to the natural gas boom, the shutdown of old coal - burning plants because of impending mercury - cutting rules (read the valuable Union of Concerned Scientists «Ripe for Retirement» report for more on this), improved energy efficiency and state mandates developing renewable electricity supplies.

Jaws should feel that coal train is real death train and understand this meaning more than other people then fight for global warming, ban coal power plants.

My sense is that they take green tech seriously as a global business sector and a way, internally, to limit coal and oil demand and dependence, but I don't perceive the Chinese taking low carbon seriously as an internal policy goal (if that means a carbon intensity trajectory more than a nudge below what will happen anyway for other reasons).

See this post for more info on what clean coal and other political rhetoric around energy means: / / green.yahoo.com/blog/amorylovins/61/understanding-our-clean-energy-options.

What this means in plain English is, for example, that making coal or crude oil combustion more efficient could count as climate finance.

U.S. coal peaked a few years ago in terms of BTU (heat value) per pound — meaning that we need to burn more coal for the same amount of heat / electricity.

Mitigating the environmental costs of digging up and burning coal thus means digging up and burning even more coal.»

The increasingly polluted air means people spend more time indoors, which increases energy demand from lighting and air conditioning, leading to more coal and wood use.

Given that typical coal plants can translate only 50 percent of the energy in coal into electricity, deploying CCS means that power plants will consume 40 to 60 percent more of the black stuff.

The transition of coal to geothermal takes advantage of existing infrastructure, means zero emissions with very low cost to operate, and saves jobs in moving to a more sustainable future.

In addition, the transition of coal to geothermal takes advantage of existing infrastructure, means zero emissions with very low cost to operate, can help manage waste water and saves jobs in moving to a more sustainable future.

That meant coal burned in newer supercritical plants, natural gas, nuclear, tire burning, and existing 50 - year - old hydroelectric plants all counted — and they already made up more than two - thirds of supply.

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.

«But these liquid fuels emit even more carbon dioxide than oil, so the end of oil can mean an increase in coal and even more carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere, and even more rapid onset of dangerous climate change.»

The recent recession has also left emissions permits undersold, meaning there's room, under the EU limit, to burn more coal or gas overall.

To replace a 1500 MW coal plant with wind turbines means you will need way more than 1500 MW of installed capacity of wind generation to get an average of 1500 MW of power even if you had a perfect energy storage system.

This brought not only great scrutiny of the approach, but — more important — it meant that all of the hostility to action on climate change, mainly but not exclusively from Republicans and coal - state Democrats, was targeted at the policy du jour — cap - and - trade.

If the answer is no — meaning that it is more expensive to produce electricity from that coal unit than it is to produce electricity from a competing source — then it is considered uneconomic.

Meaning, initiatives like President Obama's Climate Action Plan — the motivation for such things as the EPA's just - announced effective moratorium on future coal - fired power plants — would be even more unnecessary and ineffective than they are already.

This means energy storage resources can more quickly release or absorb energy, compared to conventional generators (e.g. coal or natural gas - fired power plants) that historically have provided frequency regulation.

This means that an energy / look at each source in more detailed And you are in charge of that... Coal Nuclear energy Biofuel — Other than Ethanol Ethanol and Natural gas Wind energy Hydroelectric and Geothermal Wave and Tide power Solar /

The United States is a net exporter of coal, meaning that it exports more coal to other countries than it imports.

Or does it mean that the UK can not build any more new coal plants without carbon capture and sequestration (CCS)?

Installations of wind and solar totaled almost 155 gigawatts (GW) last year, more than the entire installed power capacity in the U.K., meaning that renewables continue to far outpace coal - fired power plant development.

The fact that the coal and oil boys make more money doesn't mean they spend it on research and funding skeptics...

Berkeley Lab researchers have discovered a means by which the removal of carbon dioxide (CO2) from coal - fired power plants might one day be done far more efficiently and at far lower costs than today.

Oh noz, the industry has realized that the cheapest way (which is to say «the way that bes preserves living standards) to cut carbon emissions is to switch from coal to natural gas... which means that they're not taking the more expensive way (which is to say «way that destroys living standards») that we want them to.

Because Germany still needs energy, exiting nuclear energy means more reliance on coal.