Sentences with phrase «plant emissions taxes»

Examples include a carbon tax to combat climate change, fuel taxes to limit congestion and oil dependence, and vehicle / plant emissions taxes to improve air quality.

Not exact matches

Alberta is boosting its use of renewable energy, closing power plants that burn coal and in January increased its tax on carbon emissions by 50 percent.

Many of the same warnings Mario Cuomo heard in the 1980s about Shoreham are the same ones his son hears today from supporters of Indian Point: Closing a nuclear plant will result in blackouts, a less reliable electric grid and increased air pollution as fossil fuels are burned to replace the lost emissions - free nuclear power; customers could face higher bills; more than 1,000 jobs will be lost, and tax revenue for schools and towns will dissipate.

The organizers said the main goals of the event were to persuade Cuomo to block all new natural gas infrastructure in the state, including pipelines and power plants; move toward 100 percent renewable energy, and tax emissions to fund the transition.

Key finding: innovation + policy = economic growth A third scenario includes a $ 30 per ton price on carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, redistributed to taxpayers through proportional tax payments.

Cutting power plant emissions is helpful, but the magnitude of the climate problem warrants a carbon tax

He drew the line at trading the Clean Power Plan, President Obama's regulatory program aimed at power plants, for a federal carbon tax, saying more than one program is needed to cut emissions.

Furthermore, the relatively quick process of converting coal - fired plants to biomass - fired generation is an attractive benefit for power generators whose generation assets are no longer viable as coal plants due to the expiration of operating permits or the introduction of taxes or other restrictions on fossil fuel usage or emissions of GHGs and other pollutants.

Those costs could come through taxes on emissions, caps on the amounts of emissions, bans on new coal - fired plants, or some combination of methods.

This scenario would change if there were a significant tax on carbon emissions, or if an equivalent economic penalty were imposed on fossil - fueled plants through a cap on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions or a requirement that CO2 be sequestered.

His critics show few signs of ever accommodating the ideas he now presses, which include a prompt moratorium on new coal - burning power plants until they can capture and store carbon dioxide and a rising tax on fuels contributing greenhouse - gas emissions, with the revenue passed back directly to citizens, avoiding the complexities of «cap and trade» bills.

My point is this: In my view, the Times should find out, and convey to the public (in one place and in organized fashion), the views of each and every Congressperson, and person running for Congress, regarding a moratorium on coal - fired power plants (until their carbon dioxide emissions can be eliminated), a carbon «cap - and - auction» or «cap - and - trade» system, or carbon tax, and related matters having to do with global warming.

If we want to reduce CO2 emissions, make the coal, gas, and oil fired powerplants install CO2 scrubbers / processors and give tax incentives and lawsuit immunity to private investment for Nuke Plants.

For example, coal - fired power plants could be taxed in proportion to their emissions.

In fact, Pielke has supported carbon taxes and the EPA's carbon dioxide emissions limits on power plants.

Air pressure changes, allergies increase, Alps melting, anxiety, aggressive polar bears, algal blooms, Asthma, avalanches, billions of deaths, blackbirds stop singing, blizzards, blue mussels return, boredom, budget increases, building season extension, bushfires, business opportunities, business risks, butterflies move north, cannibalistic polar bears, cardiac arrest, Cholera, civil unrest, cloud increase, cloud stripping, methane emissions from plants, cold spells (Australia), computer models, conferences, coral bleaching, coral reefs grow, coral reefs shrink, cold spells, crumbling roads, buildings and sewage systems, damages equivalent to $ 200 billion, Dengue hemorrhagic fever, dermatitis, desert advance, desert life threatened, desert retreat, destruction of the environment, diarrhoea, disappearance of coastal cities, disaster for wine industry (US), Dolomites collapse, drought, drowning people, drowning polar bears, ducks and geese decline, dust bowl in the corn belt, early spring, earlier pollen season, earthquakes, Earth light dimming, Earth slowing down, Earth spinning out of control, Earth wobbling, El Nià ± o intensification, erosion, emerging infections, encephalitis,, Everest shrinking, evolution accelerating, expansion of university climate groups, extinctions (ladybirds, pandas, pikas, polar bears, gorillas, whales, frogs, toads, turtles, orang - utan, elephants, tigers, plants, salmon, trout, wild flowers, woodlice, penguins, a million species, half of all animal and plant species), experts muzzled, extreme changes to California, famine, farmers go under, figurehead sacked, fish catches drop, fish catches rise, fish stocks decline, five million illnesses, floods, Florida economic decline, food poisoning, footpath erosion, forest decline, forest expansion, frosts, fungi invasion, Garden of Eden wilts, glacial retreat, glacial growth, global cooling, glowing clouds, Gore omnipresence, Great Lakes drop, greening of the North, Gulf Stream failure, Hantavirus pulmonary syndrome, harvest increase, harvest shrinkage, hay fever epidemic, heat waves, hibernation ends too soon, hibernation ends too late, human fertility reduced, human health improvement, hurricanes, hydropower problems, hyperthermia deaths, ice sheet growth, ice sheet shrinkage, inclement weather, Inuit displacement, insurance premium rises, invasion of midges, islands sinking, itchier poison ivy, jellyfish explosion, Kew Gardens taxed, krill decline, landslides, landslides of ice at 140 mph, lawsuits increase, lawyers» income increased (surprise surprise!)

When asked about specific proposals to reduce climate change, most Democrats (90 %) and smaller majorities of Republicans (65 %) say that restrictions on power plant emissions would make a difference in reducing climate change, as would tax incentives encouraging businesses to reduce their carbon emissions (85 % and 65 %, respectively).

This would exclude credit for carbon sequestered during plant growth while also excluding taxes on upstream production - related emissions.

Despite all the windmills, solar panels, bio-fuel plants, carbon taxes and energy efficiency measures ad nauseum, by how much have we reduced worldwide CO2 emissions over the last 25 years?

These flexibility needs are rapidly expanding as a result of numerous industry trends: (a) recognition by policymakers that renewable energy resources are needed to meet long - term emissions reductions goals; (b) customers» increasing desire to voluntarily procure renewable energy or generate electricity on - site; and (c) substantial technological improvements that have driven down the cost of renewable resources to the point where, even before accounting for tax incentives, they are the lowest - cost option for new generating plants in some regions of the country.

Recent polls show a solid majority of Americans reject the man - made global - warming theory pushed by Obama, the UN, and other governments desperate to impose new taxes and regulations on CO2 — a natural gas exhaled by humans and required for plants, human emissions of which make up a fraction of one percent of all the greenhouse gases present naturally in the atmosphere.

Or fees charged to power plant for CO2 emission, should cost less to get the revenue and compared to hideous Federal and State tax return system.

Energy and Environment: Repudiate the Paris Climate Agreement Defund the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Overturn or at Least Defund the EPA's Clean Power Plan Repeal the EPA's Purloined Power to Legislate Climate Policy Repeal the EPA's Carbon Dioxide Standards for New Fossil - Fuel Power Plants Oppose Carbon Taxes Prohibit Use of Social Cost of Carbon as a Justification for Regulating Emissions Freeze and Sunset the Renewable Fuel Standard Require all Agencies to Meet Rigorous Scientific Standards Address Unaccountable Environmental Research Programs

As both the House and the Senate grapple with proposed carbon - cutting measures — carbon taxes and «cap - and - trade» schemes for big CO2 emitters such as coal - fired power plants; increased Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards for cars, SUVs, and trucks; and mandatory set - asides for clean renewable energy in the mix of energy generation options — emissions from aircraft seem, at least for the time being, to have gone over the heads of most policymakers engaged in the rush to cut carbon emissions.

Electricite de France SA, Britain's largest generator with eight nuclear plants, may earn as much as 154 million pounds ($ 242 million) of «extra profit» as a result of a tax on carbon - dioxide emissions from 2013, Citigroup Inc. said March 25.

So if you get in the business of limiting CO2 emissions, of taxing CO2 emissions, of creating a value in CO2 emissions where people trade them in this emissions trading scheme, you go to the coal plants first because of the fact that that's the greatest source — single source — of CO2 that there is.»

America doesn't have something so glorious as a carbon tax to repeal, but it does have the EPA's proposed rule to limit emissions from coal - fired power plants.

Why else would activists be denouncing the decision of statistics celebrity Nate Silver to add a University of Colorado professor to his new website's list of contributing writers — a professor who agrees that greenhouse emissions are warming the Earth, favors a carbon tax and, in his words, has «supported what President Obama has done to combat climate change, including stronger regulations on efficiency [and] power plants... ``?

And you and I would agree, I'm sure, that if the proper externality taxes and policies on safety (all energy sources, etc), power plant siting, mining, the electric grid, agricultural emissions, etc, were put in place, with maybe some public investments directed toward pre-mass market technologies, etc, then whatever mix of sources develops should be good.

Serious opposition to cap and trade generally comes in two forms: an argument that more direct action — in particular, a ban on coal - fired power plants — would be more effective and an argument that an emissions tax would be better than emissions trading.

Most economists consider a carbon tax a more effective instrument for reducing greenhouse gas emissions than the other major policy alternative, a cap - and - trade system that would require plant - by - plant emission measurements and could prompt companies to cheat.

But over the past three years, as they have devoted tremendous resources to the fight against TransCanada Corp.'s proposed oil pipeline, they potentially have diverted vast resources from other goals many environmentalists consider more important, such as limiting power plant pollution and taxing carbon emissions.