Sentences with phrase «so less fossil fuels»

The amount of electricity generated in a power grid must always equal the amount being consumed, so when wind turbines put power into a grid other generators, often fossil - fuelled, generate less; so less fossil fuels are burned.

Not exact matches

Then I tried the economic freedom line: «A carbon tax makes fossil fuels more expensive, so people have an incentive to consume less.

When God created the earth (less than 10,000 years ago), He created everything including the so - called fossil fuels.

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.

McKibben: No, exactly, and so the question becomes in effect, my sense is that all of this will happen more or less logically; that it flows from the physics and chemistry of the world that we're moving into, just like the centralized world floating logically from the physics and chemistry of fossil fuel.

It would be cheaper for me to have my sewer ending in my backyard, if I didn't mind the stench and disease and expense accompanying that economic choice; fossil fuel pollution is a little less obvious so we've been able to ignore it more easily until now.

If only that much people (one out of ten) could manage to have a really decent life, yet, with (and historically only once was) «easy» fossil fuel energy source available, is it reasonable to expect that 10 times more people will manage to do so in future without that exceptional source of energy and much less «easy» renewable energy sources?

Although solar often gets top billing in political announcements like Clinton's, it still represents less than 1 percent of our electricity generation, so it will take tremendous growth for many years for it to provide a meaningful offset to fossil fuels.

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.»

Oil is especially useful due to its portability (I don't expect coal - burning cars to come on the market any time soon), so I wouldn't expect the drop in oil consumption to be made up for with other lesser fossil fuels.

These assume a continuation of the past exponential growth rate of atmospheric CO2 of around 0.5 % per year despite a dramatic decrease of the population growth rate to less than one - third of the past rate so, even if the world per capita fossil - fuel based energy use increases by 50 %, these are most likely «upper limits» themselves.

So the issues are very much broader than the trillions of taxpayer and ratepayer dollars which the states are being forced to devote to the misguided effort to tear down fossil fuel plants and replace them with much more expensive and much less reliable wind and solar plants which will have no measurable impact on climate or anything else other than the profits of the solar / wind industries.

But a new study just published in the journal Nature Climate Change suggests that this link between conservative values and climate «skepticism» holds strongest in the U.S. and Australia, and less so in Canada, where fossil fuel vested interests are high.

So while I agree that the global risks of nuclear are far less than fossil fuels, the local specific risks of nuclear seem far greater.

Thought we had reasonable solution to use less fossil fuels, so we're still impact our ecology, unfortunate!

While solar energy won't entirely eliminate your company's reliance on carbon - intensive fossil fuels, a well - planned PV installation can play an important role in shifting your company onto a less - carbon - intensive track of growth — so that when regulators do throw the switch, you can hit the ground running.

The supposed purpose of doing so is to reduce the reliance on fossil fuels, thus causing «less» harm to the environment and the climate.

If that family uses less fossil fuel energy than average, their increased costs will be less than $ 1,000, so they'll come out ahead.)

So Gray and anyone so inclined is right to follow the money, but since 80 per cent of the global and U.S. economy runs on fossil fuels, if you do some real math the trail leads directly to those who profit most from fossil fuels, not those worth one - ten thousandth or less who study their effects.&raquSo Gray and anyone so inclined is right to follow the money, but since 80 per cent of the global and U.S. economy runs on fossil fuels, if you do some real math the trail leads directly to those who profit most from fossil fuels, not those worth one - ten thousandth or less who study their effects.&raquso inclined is right to follow the money, but since 80 per cent of the global and U.S. economy runs on fossil fuels, if you do some real math the trail leads directly to those who profit most from fossil fuels, not those worth one - ten thousandth or less who study their effects.»

We are hopeful that Mr. Trump and his campaign will take a closer look at energy efficiency as an energy resource to promote energy security so that current and future generations are less dependent on imported fuels as well as to ensure that we all have cleaner air to breathe since energy efficiency helps reduce the smog and global warming pollutants emitted from fossil - fueled power plants.

For skeptics, the so - called pause was proof that greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels have less of an influence on global temperatures than most studies have shown.

While it may be true, more or less, that the global «fossil fuel energy share has remained stable for more than three decades despite the growth in renewable energy...», it's not going to remain so much longer.

The clean and efficient burning of fossil fuels from centralised utilities less so I suspect.