Sentences with phrase «produced by burning coal»

In his latest book, «The Revenge of Gaia: Why the Earth Is Fighting Back — and How We Can Still Save Humanity» (Perseus, 2006), Dr. Lovelock says that any risks posed by nuclear power are small when compared with the «fever» of heat - trapping carbon dioxide produced by burning coal, oil and other fossil fuels.

No, the Social Benefits of Carbon» claiming the government is vastly underestimating the social benefits of coal as well as the benefits from the carbon dioxide pollution produced by burning that coal, including enhancing photosynthesis and agricultural productivity.

Most of the energy consumed in California is produced by burning coal or natural gas.

Produced by burning coal, wood, petrol... Read more

The slight downward trend in temperature from about 1945 until about 1975 is due to the increase in Sulfate Aerosols (SO4), largely produced by burning coal that contains sulfur.

Just a decade ago, half of the electricity Americans consumed was produced by burning coal.

Behind this better mousetrap was a simple reality: energy produced by burning coal and wood is far superior to energy produced by the metabolic processes of horses and mules.

China's plan to build millions of electric vehicles will have little impact on the country's carbon dioxide emissions, a new analysis concludes, because so much of the country's electricity is produced by burning coal.

But that would still be only a fraction of the electricity produced by burning coal.

FACT: Seventy percent of our electricity is produced by burning coal and other fossil fuels, sources linked to global warming.

A tale of two solar press releases A new startup at MIT is working hard to create a kind of printable solar panel that could produce electricity that is cost - competitive with the electricity produced by burning coal.

Not exact matches

But for those who oppose fracking, there is this: Burning the natural gas produced by fracking may be much better for the environment and public health, over the long run, than burninBurning the natural gas produced by fracking may be much better for the environment and public health, over the long run, than burningburning coal.

New York must reduce its greenhouse gas emissions 38 percent by 2030 and the emissions - free power produced by Indian Point won't easily be replaced by plants that burn coal, natural gas or oil.

The $ 1.5 billion power plant is expected to produce 275 megawatts of electricity by turning coal into gas, thereby removing impurities including CO2, and burning the resulting pure gas to turn turbines to produce power.

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.»

By burning away all the pesky carbon and other impurities, coal power plants produce heaps of radiation

By adopting lighting technologies that use less energy the nations of the world will cut down on the fossil fuels, often coal, burned to produce that light.

Solar panels could produce electricity at the same price as coal - and natural gas - burning power plants by the end of this decade if countries direct resources at this rapidly advancing corner of the energy industry, according to the Paris - based International Energy Agency.

When coal is burned in a power plant, operators make sure the fire gets plenty of oxygen so that it burns hot enough to produce the most possible energy and the fewest by - products.

Keeping in mind the enormous stake that panel members ExxonMobil and Shell have in the oil, natural gas and coal industries, here is a look at the panel's take on why oil and coal have been so difficult to replace by the following alternative energy sources: Natural gas ExxonMobil favors boosting the U.S.'s consumption of natural gas, in part, because it produces at least 50 percent less greenhouse gas per hour when burned compared with coal, Nazeer Bhore, ExxonMobil senior technology advisor, said during the panel.

Environmental scientists led by the Virginia Tech College of Science have discovered that the burning of coal produces incredibly small particles of a highly unusual form of titanium oxide.

When atmospheric scientist Christine Wiedinmyer first went to Ghana in 2011 to investigate air pollution produced by burning different materials — from crop stubble to coal used in stoves — she noticed an unexpected potential source: burning piles of trash.

«Potentially harmful nanoparticles produced through burning coal: Environmental scientists led by the Virginia Tech College of Science have discovered that the burning of coal produces incredibly small airborne particles of a highly unusual form of titanium oxide with the potential to be toxic to humans.»

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

Black smoke and sulphur dioxide were produced mainly by burning fossil fuels (including coal, oil, diesel, petrol).

After conducting what he described as «more rigorous» calculations, Gervasi concluded «that the total release of CO2 from producing Natuna gas and burning of the LNG manufactured from the gas would be almost twice that emitted by burning an equivalent amount of coal.»

Fossil fuels have been a great gift — but as the greenhouse gases produced by burning them accumulate in the atmosphere, our continued dependence on coal, oil, and natural gas poses a grave threat to the climate on which all life depends.

But there can be too much of a good thing: In the last 200 years, humans have added a lot of extra carbon dioxide to the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas to produce energy.

Additionally, France also wants to phase out gas exploration on French territory and stop burning coal to produce electricity by 2022.

And the sort of FF burned during the first half of the 20th century was produced by the fuel most likely to generate sulfate aerosols: coal.

Even solar is thwarted because it would mean that we might need to burn less coal since a cetain amount of energy would be produced by solar.

One grand, overarching myth not discussed by Plumer is that the kind of solar technology produced by companies like Solyndra can play a substantial role in blunting the buildup of greenhouse gases driven largely by burning coal and oil.

And for those of you who want to insist that aerosols produced by the uncontrolled burning of coal neutralized the effects of AGW from 1940 to 1979, please explain how the same argument could not be made for the effects of coal - induced aerosols during this earlier period, when no constraints on the polluting effects of coal combustion were present at all.

What you have here is Senators from states that have lost a lot of manufacturing jobs — that have been sent abroad or that have been very hard hit by the state of the economy — or they're coal - producing states, or states that burn a lot of coal — so they have these domestic economic and political concerns that they have to answer to their voters on.

A study by a leading apparel company concluded that one pair of denim jeans produces 44 pounds of greenhouse gas emissions — equivalent to burning over 21 pounds of coal.

To make a long story short, and this is really a WAGNER (wild assed guess, no explanation required) what if the large amounts of SO2 injected into the northern hemisphere atmosphere by WWII and the unrestrained coal burning (see London, smog) produced huge amounts of sulfate aerosol which shadowed and cooled downwind rural measurement sites.

We know the vast amount of coal burned by China to produce manufactured goods (that could have been produced user cleaner energy if not for Kyoto) produces huge amounts of carbon soot that can change the albedo.

catalyzed by the growth and physiology of cyanobacteria in the Genus Synechococcus represents a potential mechanism for sequestration of atmospheric CO2 produced during the burning of coal for power generation.

Precipitation of CaCO3more» catalyzed by the growth and physiology of cyanobacteria in the Genus Synechococcus represents a potential mechanism for sequestration of atmospheric CO2 produced during the burning of coal for power generation.

After conducting what he described as «more rigorous» calculations, Gervasi concluded «that the total release of CO2 from producing Natuna gas and burning of the LNG manufactured from the gas would be almost twice that emitted by burning an equivalent amount of coal.»

The carbon dioxide that is building in the atmosphere, at least in part, gets there through human emissions of carbon dioxide that are the by - product of burning fossil fuels (coal, oil, natural gas) to produce the vast majority the energy that has powered mankind's industrial and technical ascent since the Industrial Revolution.

We also produce 50 % of our electricity by burning about a billion tons of coal each year.

I thought about that also, Wood doesn't burn as hot and I liked what Willis stated about «more flame» produced by Wood than Coal.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/apps/g/page/world/as-appetite-for-electricity-soars-the-world-keeps-turning-to-coal/1842/ «[T] wo - thirds of the world's electricity is still produced by burning fossil fuels, mostly coal — a proportion that hasn't budged for 35 years.

Fossil fuels have been a great gift — but as the greenhouse gases produced by burning them accumulate in the atmosphere, our continued dependence on coal, oil, and natural gas poses a grave threat to the climate on which all life depends.

It is the most important man - made greenhouse gas (we produce it by burning fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas) and is responsible for global warming leading to climate change.

Burning wood, which is celebrated by governments as a sustainable energy resource, actually produces more CO2 emissions than coal.

If life were a James Bond movie, the villain would be Chinese and he would hatch a diabolical plot to scare the western world into destroying its manufacturing base by making energy really expensive and to burden it with so many stupid regulations that 10s of millions of jobs would be exported to China where they would burn vast quantities of coal and produce so much CO2 that whatever western nations did it would never come close to reducing emissions at all.

What happened in China is that, as it industrialized, coal burning in open hearths and domestic stoves was replaced by coal burning in power stations to produce electricity.

Around half of our grid - based electricity could be supplied by means of a few very large power systems burning methane, either in the form of natural gas or the effluvium from underground coal gasification [the only way to employ coal cleanly, he argues], and burying the carbon dioxide they produce.