Not exact matches
When
fossil fuels run
out we shall have invented
ways of using the energy
of the sun to drive our industries.
Groups such as Friends
of the Earth warn the UK can not «plant its
way out»
of climate change but instead must reduce its use
of fossil fuels.
Unlike Governor Cuomo, they have both gone
out of their
way to take positive steps on climate change; A.G. Schneiderman by issuing a report detailing the need to address climate change at the state level, Comptroller DiNapoli by effectively pressing the world's largest
fossil fuel companies to disclose how their business plans fare in a low - carbon future.»
Environmental Advocates
of New York says the Cuomo team deserves credit for its aggressive State Energy Plan, but cautions the goals may be just
out of reach should the state go the
way of re-firing outdated
fossil fuel plants and raiding carbon abatement programs like the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.
If we could pull carbon
out of the air and use it to wean cars off
fossil fuels, that would go a long
way toward reducing humankind's production
of greenhouse gases without impeding technological progress.
«Our kids are likely going to spend a good part
of their adulthood, maybe all
of it, just dealing with the climate implications
of our profligacy and now our leaders are telling them the
way out is offshore drilling for more climate - changing
fossil fuels.
First let's get the blindingly obvious
out of the
way: energy does not have to come from
fossil fuels.
If my math and physiology is correct, breathing puts
out way more, about 200 times, CO2 than Mark's 4 cans
of soda per week — and it is a net add from long sequestered carbon (though most not near as long as
fossil fuel).
If only the alternative were to be seen as a cheap
way out of a terribly expensive
fossil fuels adventure which we are seeing today, and which has been scientifically proven, time and time again, to be exceptionally risky.
And, so long as burning
fossil fuels is the cheapest and easiest
way of achieving that, they'll continue to burn
fossil fuels — and, in the process, they'll continue to lift millions
of people
out of poverty.
This is a point routinely mentioned at the top
of the list
of challenges for wider deployment
of clean energy (and too often blown
way out of proportion by
fossil fuel interests).
You should apologise to your grandchild for me, as I am one
of those lucky people who hasn't yet been fired from the oil industry (though I imagine it will happen soon enough), so, as such, I am an evil
fossil fuel sympathiser, going
out of my
way to actively promote wars, poverty, death, and environmental rape.
I accept a level
of hypocrisy because to engage with every injustice all the time is not only to open ourselves up to
way too much suffering but can lead to a form
of self - disarmament (consider for example the committed climate activist who won't use
fossil fuel transportation on principle and therefore can't get to the action to shut down the coal plant — who comes
out losing?)
The three demands strengthen one another — after all, one
way of achieving a 100 % renewable future is to phase
out fossil fuels, yet that won't happen if our cities, universities, schools or places
of worship keep funding the
fossil fuel industry.
Matt Lucky points
out that while people view CCS as a
way to produce greener power while prolonging the supply
of fossil fuels like coal, that's not the current reality anywhere in the world.
The
way to read this letter is that it is the
fossil fuel industry that is trying to short - circuit the decisionmaking process by taking the science
out of it, and basically getting Congress to oppose any carbon - related policies.
But states often serve as laboratories
of democracy, and a successful carbon tax in Massachusetts could help to broaden support for a national or even global carbon pricing system — if powerful
fossil fuel companies like ExxonMobil get
out of the
way.
Climate economists repeatedly have pointed
out that such energy innovation is the most effective climate solution, because it is the surest
way to drive the price
of future green energy sources below that
of fossil fuels.
I am convinced that the real hope
of sustainability lies in getting every Exxon / Shell / racist / misogynist / fat / lazy
fossil fuel funded politician worldwide
out of any kind
of power position they have lied their
way into.
Pointing
out the similarities (and differences) between slavery and the use
of fossil fuels can help us engage with climate change in a new
way
If people want and need
fossil fuel energy, if they're willing to pay for it, then someone will find a
way to get the
fossil fuels out of the ground.
Radiative Transfer Physics does not depend entirely on the simple absorbtivity
of CO2, which by the
way is effectively permanent in air when added by burning
fossil fuels, compared to water which saturates and precipitates
out depending on climate conditions, such as warming due the GHE, as a marginal shift in the dynamic equilibrium through feedbacks.
because when
fossil fuels are burned, the
fossil fuels are running
out more and more and so scientists are trying to figure
out a
way for
fossil fuels to become more
of a renewable resourse then a nonrenewable resource so that
way we have more
of a likely cause that we will have a future use
of all the
fossil fuel that are about to run
out just like an extinct species.
And yes
fossil fuels will carry on being burned a) because, as Hansen says, they're the cheapest
fuels out there and b) because, as he probably meant to say,
fossil fuels are God's
way of telling us He wants us to be rich and warm, not cold and poor.
You might like to ponder what has changed since I wrote a letter on 16 Feb 1979 quoting the Chairman
of the U.K. Central Electricity Generating Board, Mr R England, who wrote ``... the only proven
way in which the predicted shortage
of fossil fuels can be counterbalanced in the field
of electricity generation is by increasing
out investment in nuclear power... In view
of the drawbacks involved, the CEGB is not carrying
out any work
of its own on harnessing solar energy... it is too early to say whether geothermal energy is feasible, or what the likely cost would be...»
China and India «have,
of course, every right to raise their people
out of poverty the same
way we did, by burning
fossil fuels.»
Other federal agencies have gone
out of their
way to nurture
fossil fuel producers, bolstering our deadly reliance on carbon.
Now,
out here in the real world the most charitable
way to describe this lunacy
of forcing the nations
of the world to give up
fossil fuels is to... to... well, now that I think about it, there is no
way to describe this as anything but a pathetic joke which if implemented will cause untold economic disruption, disaster, and death.
He's still undecided whether we're about to run
out of fossil fuels and the lights will go
out or we're about to fry ourselves to death with
fossil fuels, but he KNOWS that doomsday is coming soon, either
way.
You know, the idea that the problem we need to solve with regard to phasing
out fossil fuels is to find other
ways to «satisfy the energy hunger
of suburbia» has got to go.
I don't see a
way out of this: we're already going to do it anyway, i.e., burn enough
fossil fuels to exceed the 2 degree limit, and within a few decades, to the 4 degree limit.
We Need to Phase
Out Fossil Fuels, Quickly & Regardless
of Cost - It's the Moral Thing to Do Slavery wasn't abolished, either in the United States nor in Great Britain, because a more economically efficient
way of plowing, planting and picking produce was developed, not a better method
of keeping houses clean, or building, or... or anything.
shows that the political will is there, if only the entrenched interests
of the
fossil fuel lobbies would get
out of the
way.
Speaking about the broader health impacts
of climate change, Wonky Health author Dr Tim Senior pointed
out that the only
way to maintain the extraction and use
of fossil fuels is to choose someone and somewhere to sacrifice.