Sentences with phrase «more coal burned»

There will be no more coal burned in this office today, is that quite clear, Mr. Cratchit?»

Current plans are to build many more coal burning plants, without taking into account what we now know about climate.

Current plans are to build many more coal burning plants, without taking into account what we now know about climate.

Some Murdoch papers are running an ad that seeks to guarantee > 1.5, by claiming the world needs 1,200 more coal burning power plants to stave off the existential threat of the next Ice Age

Kelvin Kemm — The Moral Liberal — August 28, 2012 Wind and solar power + soaring electricity prices = outsourced jobs + more coal burning Meanwhile, eco activists demand «sustainable lifestyles» — for other people By Kelvin Kemm It is amazing how biased the international media is when it comes to reporting on energy generation, -LSB-...]

Not exact matches

The really compelling argument for disallowing the coal supply chain through Fraser Surrey Docks is that it effectively undoes that achievement in emissions reduction if the same hydrocarbons end up being burned and vented into the atmosphere in China, where if anything environmental protections are more lax.

But he added that there have been «terrific» innovations in making burning coal cleaner, and more could come.

While Peabody was only down about 10 % at the end of May 2014, the stock got crushed as the government proposed to reduce carbon emissions (stemming from fossil fuels like coal), which would burn up even more of Peabody's bottom line.

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.

· The oil - conservation adjustment (OCA), sometimes called the power - conservation adjustment, reflects the utility's need to burn coal, a more expensive fuel, during certain months.

If you need more power, just burn more coal.

This understanding of the burning coals makes more sense, doesn't it?

Tekakwitha's dedication to ritual mortification became more intense and consuming over the remainder of her life; she included prolonged fasting, flogging, cutting, sleeping on a bed of thorns, and burning herself with hot coals.»

«Burning coals on enemies» head» is not correct for the text did not talk about more or less coals.

Place the crostinis topping side up over the coals, but no more than 6 at a time otherwise you will burn one or two

If you are using charcoal briquets, soak hardwood chips in water before placing them on the coals so the wood will burn slower and create more smoke.

A pound of dioxin from chlorine bleaching in a pulp mill is far more dangerous than a pound of sulfur dioxide from a coal - burning power plant that runs a washing machine.

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.

The 1.9 - megawatt array is anticipated to produce nearly 3 million kilowatt hours of electricity annually, avoiding the greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to burning 2.4 million pounds of coal or more than 5,000 barrels of oil each year.

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.

«I think coal is at a very low place right now,» Barnett said in an interview, noting that coal has lost about 10 percent of its market share for electricity generation as more utilities convert their plants to burn natural gas.

The sentence marked with an asterisk was changed from «In fact, fly ash — a by - product from burning coal for power — and other coal waste contains up to 100 times more radiation than nuclear waste» to «In fact, the fly ash emitted by a power plant — a by - product from burning coal for electricity — carries into the surrounding environment 100 times more radiation than a nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy.»

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.

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.

Europe's powerhouse is leading the fight against climate change, but its push for renewables has left it burning ever more coal

But despite some commercial demonstrations of such carbon sequestration technology, largely to help recover more oil from depleted fields, none have approached anywhere near the scale necessary to significantly impact the 9.3 billion metric tons of CO2 — and rising — emitted every year from burning coal.

Burning coal produces more than half the country's electricity, despite its immense human and environmental costs.

Much of that comes from power plants that burn coal or natural gas — emitting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, even more than was captured.

Burning coal produces more than 100 million metric tons of coal ash per yearthe gray or black sooty aftermath of our fossil fuel habit.

Even all the oil reservoirs in the world could not handle the more than 13 billion metric tons of CO2 that come from burning coal each year, even if pipelines and the rest could be built.

The more coal and oil burned, the more black spheres formed, making such soot the perfect record of a swelling fossil - fuel pyromania.

An overwhelming majority of scientists say the burning of oil, gas and coal is a driver of global climate change, causing sea level rise and more frequent violent storms.

Efforts such as GreenGen bode well for resolving those complaints, but China is also moving ahead with efforts to turn coal into liquid fuel — a costly transformation that emits twice as much CO2 as does simply burning the black rock and consumes yet more energy.

The reason: it requires extra energy to turn the coal to gas and then to capture the CO2 as well — in effect requiring the burning of more coal to generate the same amount of electricity.

Finding a plug for «leakage» Harstad's theory builds upon the concept of «carbon leakage,» which holds that countries opting out of climate agreements will produce more greenhouse gases as their neighbors take steps to ratchet down greenhouse gas emissions and regulate the sources of such emissions, like coal - burning industrial plants or motor vehicle fleets.

In fact, if one of today's plug - ins draws its juice from a current coal - burning power plant, then overall it will cause slightly more carbon dioxide to be released into the air than a standard hybrid.

Coal - burning power plants in the United States emit about 2.1 billion tons of carbon dioxide each year — nearly 17 percent of worldwide coal emissions — and finding technologies that reduce those emissions in the United States and China, which burns even more coal than we do, is crucial to combating global warmCoal - burning power plants in the United States emit about 2.1 billion tons of carbon dioxide each year — nearly 17 percent of worldwide coal emissions — and finding technologies that reduce those emissions in the United States and China, which burns even more coal than we do, is crucial to combating global warmcoal emissions — and finding technologies that reduce those emissions in the United States and China, which burns even more coal than we do, is crucial to combating global warmcoal than we do, is crucial to combating global warming.

By their estimations, coal - fired power plants coming online since the turn of the millennium will emit more CO2 than all other human coal burning has since the dawn of the industrial age: 660 billion metric tons over their 50 - year lifetime versus 524 billion metric tons between 1751 and 2000.

The Department of Energy estimated in May 2007 that a new power plant burning pulverized coal and equipped with amine scrubbers to capture 90 percent of the CO2 would make electricity at a cost of more than $ 114 per megawatt - hour (compared with just $ 63 per MWh without CO2 capture).

Designed to burn gas from coal and pump carbon dioxide emissions into geological reservoirs, FutureGen II could cost $ 2 billion or more.

And if all the known reserves of coal, oil and gas are burnt, the figure will eventually rise to more than 4 trillion tonnes.

Instead of Australia dumping millions of tonnes of sludge onto their Great Barrier Reef so they can export more coal to be burned (8 February, p 7), why don't they send it to an island country that needs it because of rising sea levels caused by climate change, such as Tuvalu in Polynesia?

The purity makes the capture process cheaper than what is needed to capture CO2 from the burning of coal, which creates a much more complex stream of gases than a wet corn mill.

And attaching the Calera process to the nation's more than 600 coal - fired power plants or even steel mills and other industrial sources is even more attractive as burning coal results in flue gas with as much as 150,000 parts per million of CO2.

Crude MCHM, or 4 - methylcyclohexane methanol, is used to purge impurities so coal burns more cleanly.

The world will burn around 1.2 billion more tons of coal per year by 2017 compared to today, equivalent to the current coal consumption of Russia and the United States combined.

The Chinese government shut down more than 2,000 highly polluting factories in Linfen and forced those that remained to install cleaner - burning coal - fired devices.

Yet, even if every planned reactor in China was to be built, the country would still rely on burning coal for more than 50 percent of its electric power — and the Chinese nuclear reactors would provide at best roughly the same amount of energy to the developing nation as does the existing U.S. fleet.

The nation has already overtaken the U.S. as the world's largest greenhouse gas emitter largely because of the more than three billion metric tons of coal it burns annually — and several thousand miners die each year digging up the dirty black rock to feed China's energy needs, not to mention the health toll taken by choking air pollution caused by coal burning in the Middle Kingdom, estimated by the World Bank to cost the country $ 100 billion a year in medical care.

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).