Sentences with phrase «of coal subsidies»

The prices were supposed to balance out the hidden costs of conventional power, from pollution to decades of coal subsidies.

«The Polish Climate Coalition, a network of environmental NGOs, pointed out that while Polish ministry representatives are giving their support to the implementation of the Paris Agreement in Bonn, other members of the government were working on a new set of coal subsidies that could be adopted next week.»

Last week, the G7 leaders pledged to eliminate «inefficient fossil fuel subsidies» but talks on phasing out a form of coal subsidy ended in stalemate.

Not exact matches

«Previous governments in Alberta and Ottawa offered to provide a subsidy of $ 779 milliontoward the $ 1.4 - billion price tag for TransAlta's proposed coal - fired carbon capture and storage project, but even with taxpayers shouldering more than half the cost, there wasn't a viable business case and the project was shelved.

«Bankrupt state - run electricity boards, an acute shortage of coal, skewed subsidies which end up benefiting rich farmers, power theft, and underperforming private distribution agencies are to blame,» wrote Soutik Biswas, the BBC's Delhi correspondent.

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

Senator Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico, opposed big subsidies for coal - based fuels until mid-June, when he moved to offer up to $ 10 billion in loans for coal - to - liquid plants.

$ 8 billion) over first ten years for deficit reductionObeys PAYGO; Starting in 2026, 25 % of auction revenues for deficit reductionFuels and TransportationIncrease biofuels to 60 million gallons by 2030, low - carbon fuel standard of 10 % by 2010, 1 million plug» in hybrid cars by 2025, raise fuel economy standards, smart growth funding, end oil subsidies, promote natural gas drilling, enhanced oil recoverySmart growth funding, plug - in hybrids, raise fuel economy standards $ 7 billion a year for smart growth funding, plug - in hybrids, natural gas vehicles, raise fuel economy standards; offshore drilling with revenue sharing and oil spill veto, natural gas fracking disclosureCost ContainmentInternational offsetsOffset pool, banking and borrowing flexibility, soft price collar using permit reserve auction at $ 28 per ton going to 60 % above three - year - average market price» Hard» price collar between $ 12 and $ 25 per ton, floor increases at 3 % + CPI, ceiling at 5 % + CPI, plus permit reserve auction, offsets like W - MClean Air Act And StatesNot discussedOnly polluters above 25,000 tons of carbon dioxide equivalent a year, regional cap and trade suspended until 2017, EPA to set stationary source performance standards in 2016, some Clean Air Act provisions excludedOnly polluters above 25,000 tons of carbon dioxide equivalent a year, regional cap and trade pre-empted, establishes coal - fired plant performance standards, some Clean Air Act provisions excludedInternational CompetitivenessTax incentives for domestic auto industryFree allowances for trade - exposed industries, 2020 carbon tariff on importsCarbon tariff on importsReferences: Barack Obama, 2007; Barack Obama, 8/3/08; Pew Center, 6/26/09; leaked drafts of American Power Act, 5/11/10.

Global energy - related emissions could peak by 2020 if energy efficiency is improved; the construction of inefficient coal plants is banned; investment in renewables is increased to $ 400 billion in 2030 from $ 270 billion in 2014; methane emissions are cut in oil and gas production and fossil fuel subsidies are phased out by 2030.

That's not the only methodological issue: their study also undercounts subsidies to oil, gas, and coal production, relying on an estimate of $ 23 billion in production subsidies instead of the more than $ 70 billion we've identified in G20 countries alone.

Less commonly, countries spoke of reducing the use of inefficient coal - fired power plants, lowering methane emissions from oil and gas production, reforming fossil fuel subsidies, and carbon pricing, the report says.

What we know from reading the actual findings of this study, as well as several other analyses of the climate impacts of fossil fuel subsidy removal, is that nixing oil, gas, and coal subsidies would be a big win for the climate, would saves money, and could free up resources to help the poorest and most vulnerable.

Coal subsidies are notably sizeable: in 2013, 52 % of the post-tax subsidy was due to coal, while petroleum accounted for 33 % and natural gas 1Coal subsidies are notably sizeable: in 2013, 52 % of the post-tax subsidy was due to coal, while petroleum accounted for 33 % and natural gas 1coal, while petroleum accounted for 33 % and natural gas 10 %.

If that person took subsidies or relies on the grid for the storage of daytime power for night time use, it is certain that person's use of an electric motor ultimately connects to coal use.

Reuters explains: «Subsidies on oil, gas or coal are meant to help the poor by lowering the price of energy but the report, issued on the sidelines of a 160 - nation U.N. climate meeting in Ghana, said they often backfired by mainly benefiting wealthier people.»

Paul Dietz wrote in # 38: «Wind is -LSB-...] without subsidies or consideration of CO2 externalities -LSB-...] twice as expensive as coal in the US.

The ridges surrounding our little desert metropolis display something on the order of 400 1 megawatt wind turbines, built primarily by private capitol with the incentive of a 1.5 cent per kwhour subsidy for wind power (which is about how close wind power is to being competitive with coal and nuclear power at this time).

On a levelized basis, and without subsidies or consideration of CO2 externalities, it's twice as expensive as coal in the US.

Their critics say their stance, however well intentioned, will produce the real delays, given how much can be done now simply by cutting energy waste with tools already on the shelf — ranging from strengthening efficiency standards to eliminating billions of dollars in persistent fossil - fuel subsidies that continue to make coal and oil much cheaper than they really are when all their hidden costs are revealed.

Regardless of what the Heritage Foundation thinks, the government can and does have a role to play... cut taxes on businesses and individuals who help us build a green future, conduct research or provide subsidies for private companies to do it, help people make their homes energy efficient, and educate, educate, educate the American people as to what's at stake if we don't pry ourselves away from the oil / coal / gas faucet.

The question of hidden, and not so hidden, subsidies for oil, as well as coal, keeps coming up in environmental debates.

They involve billions of dollars of subsidies of fossil fuel industries, of airport expansion and of road building, regulations which favour dirty technologies over clearn ones, granting planning permission for coal fire stations but refusing it for wind turbines, etc..

There will be some concern that renewable energy subsidies have now indirectly spawned additional support for coal and gas, and that both will raise European energy prices which are already some of the highest in the world.

As Lester Brown says in Plan B 4.0: A world facing economically disruptive climate change can no longer justify subsidies to expand the burning of coal and oil.

If you add the indirect subsidies, like the cost of sickness caused by coal pollution, the global subsidy is five trillion a year.

According to the article, about 70 percent of all federal energy subsidies goes toward oil, natural gas and coal (billions of tax dollars every year!)

Coal received $ 2 billion in fossil fuel consumption subsidies, just 0.4 percent of the total.

The 237 - page bill introduced by U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R - AK)-- S. 2012, the Energy Policy Modernization Act of 2015 — includes provisions that would expedite the liquefied natural gas (LNG) export permitting process, heap subsidies on coal technology, and fund research geared toward discovering a way to tap into methane hydrate reserves.

The smallest subsidies on a per unit basis were for coal, natural gas and petroleum liquids, and municipal solid waste, all at less than $ 0.45 per megawatthour of generation.»

Tuesday, December 5, 2017: The Estonian EU Presidency has opened the door to allowing massive coal subsidies in the new EU power market rules, proposing changes eliminating the carbon intensity threshold for existing coal plants at the 11th hour of negotiations.

There was some bad news for Drax recently as the UK government decided that biomass subsidies would not keep climbing as the «carbon price floor» — levied on fossil fuel production (and due to rise further)-- on electricity consumption has caused a backlash from manufacturers, consumer groups and energy suppliers who are concerned that the «tax will push up prices, make the UK uncompetitive and force the premature closure of coal - fired power plants, increasing the risk of blackouts.»

Oil subsidies make up over half of the total fossil fuel consumption subsidies, while electricity makes up 24 percent, natural gas 22 percent and coal 0.4 percent.

Solar and wind power get 326 and 69 times more in subsidies than coal, oil, and natural gas per amount of energy generated.

Your point about coal vs. oil availability in the 19th century is well taken, although I would remind you that much oil exploration (outside of the middle east) is not done on the cheap, and is indeed supported by generous subsidies from governments.

We have wasted billions of dollars on such «strong» policies as coal - derived synfuels; subsidies for the commercialization of wind, solar and electric cars; and worst of all, the ethanol mandate.

According to an article in today's New York Times, even without subsidies, wind power is often cheaper (as low as 3.7 cents per kWh) than coal (low of 6.6 cents per kWh) or natural gas (low of 6.1 cents per kWh).

At the same time it is proposing spending an additional five billion dollars of taxpayer's money, on top of all the existing subsidies, to support the dying coal industry.

He also continued on the theme of reforming fossil fuel subsidies, so that the cost of fossil fuels can «better reflect the costs they impose on taxpayers and our planet», and investing in the clean technology of the future, particularly in the coal states that could suffer as their power plants shut down.

-- perhaps the «problem» is not big oil or big coal, both of which have discovered there is big money to be made from tax breaks and other subsidies justified in the name of combating carbon.

The EU's unilateral climate policy is absurd: first consumers are forced to pay ever increasing subsidies for costly wind and solar energy; secondly they are asked to subsidise nuclear energy too; then, thirdly, they are forced to pay increasingly uneconomic coal and gas plants to back up power needed by intermittent wind and solar energy; fourthly, consumers are additionally hit by multi-billion subsidies that become necessary to upgrade the national grids; fifthly, the cost of power is made even more expensive by adding a unilateral Emissions Trading Scheme.

In their official review of Germany's report, the governments of China, Indonesia, Italy, Mexico, New Zealand and the United States as well as the OECD concluded unequivocally that «there are additional subsidies that benefit the production of hard coal and lignite, yet have not been included.»

Only two of these twenty - two measures, with a value of EUR 1.4 billion in 2016, will be phased out in 2018 as part of the existing EU - wide commitment to end subsidies to hard coal — the rest will remain in place.

«Please please finally say NO to new coal burning power stations & NO to the billions of dollars in fossil fuel subsidies.

Meanwhile, natural gas, at 20 % of global fossil fuel reserves, offers the largest - scale, economic - without - subsidies substitute for either coal or oil.

To prevent coal subsidies causing chaos in other EU countries, the European Commission proposed a CO2 threshold of 550 grams per KWh of electricity to be eligible for receiving capacity payments (public money to remain online).

The World Bank's infrastructure program in Indonesia stipulates policies and government subsidies that promote the accelerated development of over 16 GW of coal power projects in the country ahead of developing feasible renewable alternatives.

Measures to enable, say, wind power to compete more effectively with coal - based electricity invite an outcome that is the worst of both worlds: coal combustion continues, even as wind power subsidies benefit developers while adding to budget woes.

UK coal was nationalised in 1947 so that it could run at a loss as a form of public subsidy to UK private manufacturing industries.

Reduce dependency on (imported) fossil fuels (balance of payments, reliance on potentially unfriendly or unstable nations as suppliers, high cost at the pump, all problems as seen from US viewpoint): — encourage nuclear power generation (cut red tape)-- encourage energy savings and improved efficiency projects (tax breaks)-- encourage basic research into new (non fossil fuel) resources (subsidies)-- encourage imports from friendly neighbor, Canada (Keystone pipeline)-- encourage local oil and gas exploration («drill, baby, drill»)-- encourage «clean coal» projects (tax incentives)-- set goal to become energy independent within ten years

It's more often the beneficiary of implicit or explicit government subsidies to make it more affordable for the coal industry to operate (the land is practically given to them for free, they get tax expenditures hand over fist, their roads are most often built for them by the state, they're exempted from waste - disposal regulations, allowed to dump and run, and use some of the most tyrannical and abject labor standards in the world).