Sentences with phrase «more coal and natural gas»

In 1984 he wrote an oped for the Chicago Tribune calling for a halt to the construction of Braidwood, an Illinois nuclear plant, saying more coal and natural gas should be burned instead.

And that meant Illinois was burning more coal and natural gas.

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

As electricity use spikes across the country in the summertime when more people use air conditioning, electric power companies turn to more coal and natural gas power plants to help meet the demand, reducing renewables» share of total U.S. power generation, Comstock said.

Not exact matches

Experts estimate that the US only has enough natural gas reserves to last 93 more years, and enough coal to last about 283 years.

Switching from coal to natural gas would reduce sulfur dioxide emissions by more than 90 percent and nitrogen oxide emissions by more than 60 percent.

These numbers are not only comparable to coal and natural gas (which average $ 100 per megawhatt hour, but in fact more attractive, on a global average basis.

OTTAWA — The federal Liberal government says its new regulations to phase out power plants fired by coal and natural gas will cost more than $ 2.2 billion, but potentially save the country billions more in reduced health care costs.

Last year China built 10 times more renewable power capacity than natural gas - fired power, and three times more than coal - fired power.

These forward - looking companies recognize that using natural gas, efficiency, and renewable energy are more profitable than retrofitting coal - fired plants — which are seen as being obsolete, inefficient, and highly polluting.

Solar power might be an undeniable part of our future — the industry created double the amount of jobs as coal did last year and accounts for nearly 40 % of new electric capacity added to the grid, more than wind or even natural gas — but SolarCity itself isn't.

Embedded below are the videos of Chanos» interview on CNBC: Video 1 on China Video 2 on tech stocks Video 3 on natural gas and coal Video 4 on what he looks for in short selling For more from this hedge fund manager, head to Chanos» recent China presentation.

«As the Alberta Electricity System Operator has noted, coal - fired power with carbon capture and storage is a far more expensive option to reduce carbon pollution compared to using natural gas, wind, solar and hydro power.

The stark drop in natural gas prices from an all - time high of more than $ 15 per 1,000 cubic feet in 2005 to near $ 4 today results from a range of factors including the global economic downturn, competitive coal prices, unusually warm winters, the improvement of hydraulic fracturing («fracking») drilling techniques, and the production of natural gas as a byproduct when drillers frack for petroleum.

To put this all in perspective: «Solar employs slightly more workers than natural gas, over twice as many as coal, over three times that of wind energy, and almost five times the number employed in nuclear energy,» the report notes.

Prices for electricity would be 4 percent lower by 2033 with a transition to more wind, solar and hydroelectric power than a persistent reliance on coal and natural gas, according to a report by Calgary - based environmental research firm Pembina Institute and Clean Energy Canada, a Vancouver - based organization that promotes renewable energy.

In 1980, at the Downs, Clive Osborne replaced coal with natural gas, which was more efficient and made it easier to regulate temperature, to produce crystals of the right size.

«The economic potential from the Marcellus Shale could provide a badly needed boost to the economy of the Southern Tier and even many environmentalists agree we want to produce more domestic natural gas that reduces the need for environmentally damaging fuel sources such as coal,» his campaign statement said, while adding, «Existing watersheds are sacrosanct, and Andrew Cuomo would not support any drilling that would threaten the state's major sources of drinking water.»

Drilling for natural gas has been promoted because it burns more cleanly than coal and can reduce dependence on imported energy sources, and it can also bring jobs to economically battered regions of the state.

It's the type of litigation that legal experts say may become more common as coastal cities and waterlogged counties draw the connection between rising waters and the burning of coal, oil and natural gas.

More than 60 percent of Africans are without basic energy services and coal, oil and natural gas may be a necessary bridge

Instead (in terms of fossil fuels) it is more likely to reduce your consumption of coal and natural gas.

I was encouraged by President Obama's calls for the construction of more nuclear power plants, as well as for increased offshore exploration of oil and natural gas, and the further development of clean coal technologies.

The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that methane locked in ice (known as hydrates) could contain more organic carbon than all the world's coal, oil, and nonhydrate natural gas combined.

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.

Natural gas, which is mainly methane, may generate less carbon dioxide than oil and coal when burned, but as recent research has found, there's more to greenhouse gas emissions than just combustion.

Certainly, it is going to be needed to some degree, we have substantial amounts of coal and nuclear and natural gas — central generation currently in this country — but because of the distributed generation from wind, solar, geothermal and hydrokinetic, I think we are going to have to develop a different grid that can accommodate that in a much more efficient way.

We're seeing a lot more natural gas because of its price and the retirement of coal - fired power plants.

Policymakers and the energy industry have been looking to natural gas in recent years as a more climate friendly fuel with half the greenhouse gas emissions of coal, but EPA research is casting doubt on that plan

Further steps could include pushing for more renewable energy; an aggressive cut in the use of coal and natural gas to make electricity; wider use of electric cars, biofuel, and hydrogen fuel; changes in farming practices; and putting a price on carbon pollution.

Industrialized civilization relies on coal, oil and natural gas — the stored sunlight collectively known as fossil fuels — for more than 80 percent of the energy that enables everything from driving to reading on a computer screen.

Coal - powered synthetic natural gas plants being planned in China would produce seven times more greenhouse gas emissions than conventional natural gas plants, and use up to 100 times the water as shale gas production, according to a new study by Duke University researchers.

Coal - powered synthetic natural gas plants being planned in China would produce seven times more greenhouse gas emissions than conventional natural gas plants, and use up to 100 times the water as shale gas production, according to a new study.

NuScale claims it will be able to produce power at about seven to nine cents per kilowatt - hour — roughly the same as big nuclear plants, only a few cents more than the cheapest modern natural gas — fired or coal - fired plants, and one - third the cost of a typical diesel generator.

Interest in hydrates has skyrocketed in recent years because global deposits are thought to harbor more fuel energy than all the world's coal, oil and natural gas reserves combined.

Thermal power plants — those that consume coal, oil, natural gas or uranium — generate more than 90 percent of U.S. electricity, and they are water hogs.

The numbers are even more sobering when you consider all the fossil fuels — coal, natural gas, and oil — that people consume.

Fracking to free more natural gas from shale can help displace even more polluting coal in more developed countries such as the U.S. but can only serve as a bridge — and a very short bridge — to the zero - greenhouse - gas pollution future, unless also outfitted with carbon capture and storage to eliminate pollution.

In large swathes of the U.S., where more electricity comes from coal and natural gas than nuclear or renewables, that is a harder claim.

Although solar thermal collectors are better than photovoltaic panels or wind turbines at generating reliable power around the clock, solar thermal power is also expensive; at present energy costs, it would require government subsidies to compete with coal and natural gas, which can generate electricity much more cheaply.

It produces less carbon dioxide emissions than coal for electricity or gasoline and diesel for fuel, but even a small amount of natural gas release — which is essentially methane — packs a greenhouse gas punch about 30 times more powerful than the same amount of carbon dioxide.

Tack on the CPP (middle map), which would require coal plants to capture some of their carbon emissions, and coal (red) cedes more territory to wind and natural gas.

Natural gas is often touted as more sustainable than coal and oil because it releases fewer pollutants when it burns.

Natural gas might still have an advantage over coal when burned to create electricity, because gas - fired power plants tend to be newer and far more efficient than older facilities that provide the bulk of the country's coal - fired generation.

However, as the UK has shifted focus from coal - and oil - fired electricity generation to being more reliant on natural gas as the fuel of choice (irrespective of wind, solar, nuclear and other alternatives), this makes the electricity grid somewhat vulnerable to accidental and incidental problems with the flow of data and to malicious manipulation for the sake of sabotage, criminal or online military / terrorist action.

As rumored, EPA will require that all new natural gas - fired plants emit no more than 1,000 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt - hour, and coal plants no more than 1,100 pounds per megawatt - hour.

At present pace, the trillionth tonne would be emitted just before Christmas in 2040, according to calculations by Oxford physicist Myles Allen, and there's more than enough coal, oil and natural gas left in the ground to cook the climate.

India, China and many other countries are poised to rely more heavily on natural gas, which has less than half the warming emissions of coal.

Because economic growth continues to boost the demand for energy — more coal for powering new factories, more oil for fueling new cars, more natural gas for heating new homes — carbon emissions will keep climbing despite the introduction of more energy - efficient vehicles, buildings and appliances.

The relatively low growth is linked to both the adoption of more fuel - efficient vehicles and the replacement of coal - powered electricity with renewable energy sources and relatively cleaner - burning natural gas.