Sentences with phrase «much about the fossil»

Not exact matches

The current rate of burning fossil fuels adds about 2 ppm per year to the atmosphere, so that getting from the current level to 1000 ppm would take about 300 years — and 1000 ppm is still less than what most plants would prefer, and much less than either the nasa or the Navy limit for human beings.

There are frequent rail accidents and pipeline explosions, evidence of long term water contamination esp around Dimock PA and in WY, non disclosure agreements forced on people whose health has been damaged from exposure to toxic emissions, secrecy about all of these issues, and climate changes caused by too much fossil fuel emissions.

We think we can do a much cleaner alternative, and if the governor is serious about moving away from burning fossil fuels that he should be using the Empire State Plaza as a model.»

That said, in general - in the United States, at least - the issue isn't so much about denying global warming as much as it is about protecting and favoring the major fossil fuel industries:

But that's irrelevant to the spirit of the question, since (1) Democratic politicians in fossil fuel states pretty much do the same thing (See West Virginia's Democrat Manchin); and (2) Such behavior is really industry agnostic, and every politician of every party whose constituents are over-represented in a particular industry will of course behave the same way about competing disruptive industry; and (3) The main opposition is not on alternative energy per se, but on measures to tax / disrupt fossil fuel one.

We don't know much about phallus evolution (external genitalia generally don't mineralize, so the fossil record is of little help), but we can compare the expression of phallus genes from organism to organism.

Instead, the fossil record indicates they vanished during the Earth's glacial - interglacial transition, which occurred about 12,000 years ago and led to much warmer conditions and the start of the current Holocene period.

According to the researchers, the newly described penguin lived about 61 million years ago and reached a body length of approx. 150 centimeters — making it almost as big as Anthropornis nordenskjoeldi, the largest known fossil penguin, which lived in Antarctica around 45 to 33 million years ago, thus being much younger in geological terms.

Natural gas, which now supplies 25 percent of the nation's electricity, is the cleanest - burning fossil fuel, producing about half as much carbon per watt of power as coal.

This relates to the whole area of development for people talking about biofuels, which is this idea of trying to develop replacements for the conventional sorts of fossil fuels that we have to at least — if we are going to be burning some sort of hydrocarbons of some kind — to try to get them [so] that they are being derived from a different source, and potentially or ideally, ones that would actually burn without delivering as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere too; that's great if you can get that.

Yeakel created a timeline based on existing records from paleontology, archaeology, and art, which picks up about where the fossils leave off and zooms in on a much shorter time scale.

Actually if you calculate, you think about those 600 fossil fuel power plants, and if you calculate how much money is spent to purchase the fuel, that's the big thing that people don't really think about.

«If the natural concentration had been a factor of two or more lower, the climate impacts of fossil fuel carbon dioxide release would have occurred about 50 or more years sooner, making it much more challenging for the developing human society to scientifically understand the phenomenon of humanmade climate change in time to prevent it,» he says.

Unfortunately, the earliest fossils are just spores and don't reveal much about what sort of plants they came from.

«So much of our study of the fossil record is about filling in the gaps in our knowledge of how animals came to look as they do or live where they are, and Diandongosuchus does that for phytosaurs.

Fossil bones don't clearly show whether modern - type birds fluttered about during the Cretaceous, but the treads in Shandong do, painting an improbable scene: Animals much like today's roadrunners were in fact scampering beside two - legged, plant - eating dinosaurs.

Natural gas is by far the cleanest - burning fossil fuel, producing about half as much carbon dioxide as the energy - equivalent amount of coal.

It's difficult to estimate how much I. avatar weighed, the researchers say, but the fossils recovered so far hint that adults may have had a wingspan of about 1.5 meters.

«Mammal - like reptile survived much longer than thought: Fossils in Japan overturn widely accepted theory about tritylodontid extinction.»

The Morocco fossils indicate that humankind's emergence involved populations across much of Africa, and started about 100,000 years earlier than previously thought, says paleoanthropologist Jean - Jacques Hublin of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany.

Decades of fossil discoveries have revealed much about the extinct members of our hominid family tree, but we're far from having all the answers.

The researchers can not conclude much about its possible appearance and behavior, but they can tell it possessed a large jaw and small teeth relative to other known human fossils.

It's amazing that sticking a fossil into a synchrotron can reveal so much about how it behaved as a real animal back when it was alive.»

As you know, the largely underplayed message of the I.P.C.C. report, which I wrote about but didn't get much coverage elsewhere, is that the atmosphere and climate won't notice the difference between a Gore - style immediate emissions freeze or a pedal - to - the - metal fossil - fuel party for more than 20 years.

In those figures KA is speaking about how much Nuclear is needed to REPLACE ALL FOSSIL FUELS ENERGY USE GLOBALLY.

Energy is not the same as CO2: it's perfectly possible to get all the energy we really need without burning fossil fuels, the arguments have been about which technologies to use, how much they'll cost, and how soon they might be brought on line.

However, as a climate scientist I remain much more concerned about the fossil fuel industry than I am about Arctic methane.

It says nothing about people rushing to stoke the engine with more and more coal, or how much actual coal is added (thus the actual range of speeds to expect), or the possibility of a precipice with bridge out up ahead (runaway GW), how dangerous that might be at various speeds, entailing greater or less number of deaths, or how far or close that precipice is, which we don't know either (except we have some fossil evidence of train wrecks in which 90 % of life died, so we know it could be bad).

Hales» pioneering research in ocean carbon chemistry underlies much of what we know about the role carbon dioxide from fossil fuel emissions plays in changing the chemistry of Northwest seas.

The inventory of CO32 -, the buffering agent, is about 2000 Gton C, which is about how much fossil carbon we are projected to release under business as usual by the year 2100.

Two fossil fuel facts define the basic actions that are required to preserve our planet's climate: (1) it is impractical to capture CO2 as it is emitted by vehicles (the mass of emitted CO2 is about three times larger than the mass of fuel in the tank), and (2) there is much more CO2 contained in coal and unconventional fossil fuels than in oil and gas.

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).

And the original work: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1034/j.1600-0889.1999.00013.x/abstract (From the abstract) «Between 1850 and 1990, changes in land use are calculated to have added 124 PgC to the atmosphere, about half as much as released from combustion of fossil fuels over this period.»

This shouldn't be too much of a surprise, if only because moving a substantial amount of carbon from the lithosphere into the atmosphere (via burning fossil fuels) means that there is more carbon sloshing about.

While much of the opposition came from people who were genuinely (although usually needlessly) concerned about wind power developments, a great deal also came from people and organisations with financial links to the fossil fuel industry.

The current rate of burning fossil fuels adds about 2 ppm per year to the atmosphere, so that getting from the current level to 1000 ppm would take about 300 years — and 1000 ppm is still less than what most plants would prefer, and much less than either the nasa or the Navy limit for human beings.»

The government has been clear about its intention to invest 60 percent of the $ 18 billion that it will reap annually from fossil - fuel subsidy reform into much - needed infrastructure programs.

For decades Exxon and their fossil fuel industry peers covered up how much they knew about climate change.

Just about nothing else would cost so much and do so little, so the bunnies have asked Eli why Roger and the Breakers are doubling down CO2 capture at the source (fossil fuel power plants, cement kilns) imposes a cost on the fossil fuel industry.

The fact is that if we can't greatly reduce fossil fuel use by the 2030 - 2040 range, by 2075 be will see a global average temperature rise of 3.5 to 4.0 degrees Celsius, which is also just about the time frame for world phosphate supplies to enter critical shortages that will eventually cut crop yields in half and require twice as much land and water to grow the same yield as previously.

But the play's «questioning» is not about why our politicians won't provide leadership, why much of the public is so apathetic, or why the fossil fuel lobby has been so successful.

The ugly truth about climate change is that unless we make green energy much cheaper, we (and especially the developing world, including China and India) will continue to use cheap fossil fuels.

Unlike Kiehl and Trenberth who base much of their argument on published supposition and make the horrible error of not leaving any energy in their balance to create fossil fuels, Miskolczi rigorously sets about working from the actual spectral effects from atmospheric gases and provides a properly justified but theoretical scientific case for demonstrating the errors of Kiehl and Trenberth.

Some readers still buy the «pox on both their houses» idea about this election, — the fossil fuel industry knows that is definitely not so, and would very much like you Johnson / Stein folks to stay strong and express your inner child.

As close ties between fossil fuel billionaires Charles and David Koch and the Trump Administration come more to light, a group of Democratic Senators led by Sheldon Whitehouse (D - RI) is demanding answers about how much influence the Koch brothers have had in shaping key federal policies.

Although these extremes are both unlikely they represent about a 5 C difference in global temperature just from the chosen fossil fuel policy, and it is no wonder that energy policy has got the world's attention now because we can make that much difference despite what you read in op - eds, blogs and certain thinktank reports.

He said: «Energy price freezes are a temporary solution to a much bigger, long term problem that is also about energy efficiency, reducing energy usage, the UK's carbon footprint and our dependence on fossil fuels.

There is almost as much carbon in fossil fuel reserves as there carbon in atmosphere (within about 10 %).

Our representatives in Washington are certainly sharply divided in their views on which of these trends we should back and which ones we should try to stop — with a big block only excited about fossil fuels and another wanting to bet pretty much everything on cutting consumption and promoting new energy sources.

According to the World Bank, fossil fuel energy supplies about 80 % of the world's energy production — a value which has been pretty much constant for the past 40 years.