Sentences with phrase «taking coal burning»

Oil depletion could have a dramatic slowing effect on economic activity taking coal burning with it.

Not exact matches

Coal - burning plants are banned in Ontario and Wynne says now the province can take that influence elsewhere.

In Isaiah's vision, a seraphim touched his lips with a burning coal from the altar and said, «Behold... your guilt is taken away, and your sin forgiven» (Isa.

Add the grape clippings to the coals, arrange the quail skin side down on the rack and grill for 2 minutes, taking care not to burn them.

Two bricks or a heavy - duty Dutch oven Elevating the pans above the coals allows the food to take on a smoky flavor without burning.

It is difficult to add wood during the grilling process because it takes so long for it to burn down to coals.

The state is taking the Trump administration to court for not taking steps to reduce air pollution from predominantly coal - burning states upwind that is causing chronic smog in metropolitan New York City.

The coal boom of the early century is turning to bust as China burns less and renewables slowly take over new investment.

Finding a plug for «leakage» Harstad's theory builds upon the concept of «carbon leakage,» which holds that countries opting out of climate agreements will produce more greenhouse gases as their neighbors take steps to ratchet down greenhouse gas emissions and regulate the sources of such emissions, like coal - burning industrial plants or motor vehicle fleets.

Generic information, such as «take care of the environment» or «stop burning coal and wood,» lack specific solutions for action.

Since then, cheap natural gas and shallow, easy - to - mine coal burned in traditional power plants have prevented the technique from taking off.

Then, beginning early in the nineteenth century, the burning of fossil fuels, especially coal, took off.

But when existing trees are burned for bioenergy, bioenergy takes carbon that would otherwise be stored and puts it into the air, just like burning coal or oil.

In Krakow, Poland, where the study took place, as in many areas worldwide, coal burning is an important air pollution source.

The nation has already overtaken the U.S. as the world's largest greenhouse gas emitter largely because of the more than three billion metric tons of coal it burns annually — and several thousand miners die each year digging up the dirty black rock to feed China's energy needs, not to mention the health toll taken by choking air pollution caused by coal burning in the Middle Kingdom, estimated by the World Bank to cost the country $ 100 billion a year in medical care.

Finally, taking a more worldly view, they estimated replacing coal - fired power plants in Japan with liquid - natural - gas plants that burn fuel imported from the United States would also be a net - plus for the environment, with a 15 percent emissions savings.

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.

Burning fossil fuels like coal, natural gas and oil to heat and cool our buildings and run our vehicles takes a heavy toll on the environment, contributing significantly to both local problems like elevated particulate levels and global ones like a warming climate.

Current plans are to build many more coal burning plants, without taking into account what we now know about climate.

Yes, a major concern is that a scheme to take the co2 out of the air will just encourage the proliferation of coal burning.

He took the silver thurible of burning coals and incense from its bearer and swung it by its chain over the altar — seven times on this side, and then, walking round, a separate censing on each of the other three.

When you flip the switch on the wall and the light goes on, you know exactly what it costs — all you have to do is take a deep breath and feel the burn of coal smoke in your lungs.

The New York based gallery Ameringer McEnery Yohe has announced a forthcoming solo exhibition by the Brooklyn based artist Brian Alfred which will present recent works under the title It Takes A Million Years To Become Diamonds So Let's All Just Burn Like Coal Until The Sky Is Black.

His works, including the new pieces in It Takes a Million Years To Become Diamonds So Let's All Just Burn Like Coal Until The Sky Is Black solo exhibition, are often inspired by technology, how it alters our perceptions of the world and how we process information.

Current plans are to build many more coal burning plants, without taking into account what we now know about climate.

(Don't take that as good news, because it has correspondingly lower energy content so you burn more of it as compared to higher carbon coal like Anthracite; Powder River coal is mined largely because of its low sulfur content).

Peak coal may be a lot closer than most people think, especially if we go into gasification or liquefying, which take considerable energy leaving less net energy gain than if we just burn the coal directly.

Warming caused by burning coal in a power plant can be felt in the atmosphere within 95 days — the time it takes for the emissions released from the plant to trap enough heat to exceed the amount generated from the plant itself, according to the study.

Germany increased burning of lignite coal for exports as JE says, and as a bridge after nuclear was taken offline after the Fukushima disaster as follows.

When we think about coal, we mostly think about burning it and mining it, but the TVA spill should burn into our memories the fact that disposing of all that coal ash can lead to a whole other series of environmental disasters (soon after the TVA spill, a second one took place in Alabama).

Take the worst thing that anybody could possibly do, ever, and coal burning is just as bad» or if it's a calculated method of seeking attention.

Two factors make much of India's and China's coal expensive or inaccessible; it takes a lot of water, which is in short supply, to extract and burn the coal at mine - mouth, and it takes a lot of diesel fuel, increasingly expensive, to train / truck / ship it to coastal power plants and load centers....

I'm really not sure what is said with these words since the fossil carbon deposits (coal, I guess) did not require a billion years to form (or would take a billion years to burn up).

The International Energy Agency reported flat CO2 emissions in 2014 and 2015 but BP said it did not take into account numbers that became available later on with regard to Chinese carbon output related to higher grade coal it had been burning.

Energy prices will rise in the future, especially if we take climate change as seriously as it deserves; sustainable energy is more expensive than burning coal.

3) claim we need to take no action to decarbonize 4) claim that our current burning of coal is fine The case for CAGW being far from proven, why should we?

had taken place which led to unbridled amounts of coal burned in the big cities.

A carbon tax on coal destined to be burned will increase the price of electricity, but income tax, GST, or other taxes could be reduced so that the cost of living, and the total tax take, would remain the same.

Burning fossil fuels, such as coal, oil and gas, takes ancient carbon that was locked within the Earth and puts it into the atmosphere as CO ₂.

Peter, millions of people in China and the rest of the developing world take a wheelbarrow to a hill and pick up the coal they will burn in their iron stoves.

The LCOE of electricity from coal, for example, takes into account both the cost of building a coal - fired power plant and the cost of buying and burning coal.

Finally, let me take on the anti-environmentalists» last line of defense — the claim that whatever we do won't matter, because other countries, China in particular, will just keep on burning ever more coal.

But tar sands are between 12 and 20 percent more carbon intensive than even regular oil, especially when burning of the, worse than coal, coke bi-product is taken into account.

More likely is collapse of the petroleum infrastructure which will also take down coal - burning on the present scale along with most other large - scale activity.

While it is true that most of the CO2 - caused warming in the atmosphere was there before humans ever started burning coal and driving SUVs, this is all taken into account by computerized climate models that predict global warming...

So when you take the combination of the cheapness of the BTUs, coupled with the 7,000 heat rate, versus 10,000 heat rates in some coal units, you just burn it more efficiently.

These forests grow back slowly, so it takes a long time to repay the initial «carbon debt» incurred by burning wood instead of coal.

The two are far from the same, and making burning coal and tar expensive will very likely drive down the long term cost of energy as Moore's Law takes over in solar, wind, ocean and geothermal.

All of the partner governments have agreed to take action to reduce the substances, for instance by fitting scrubbing equipment to coal - fired power plants or burn landfill gas — methane — for energy.

And he must not pretend to be ignorant of the consequences of continuing to burn coal or take refuge in a «carbon cap» or some «target» for future emission reductions.