Coal
in sentence
1278 examples of Coal in a sentence
Moreover, its democracy has matured, and its economy is advancing toward modernity, driven by an economic bonanza of mineral resources, mainly oil, coal, and gold.
This reflects an electricity system based 70% on coal, as well as China’s global leadership in heavy industries such as steel, cement, and chemicals.
But China is already by far the biggest investor in wind and solar power, and is now canceling plans for further
coal
investment.
But it is the third group that is by far the most powerful politically: oil and
coal
interests, which contributed hundreds of millions of dollars to the 2014 campaign.
Germany is providing lavish support for the construction of new
coal
plants.
They should pledge to eliminate all subsidies by the time they arrive at the UN’s COP 21 climate-change summit in Paris in 2015, starting next year with the withdrawal of all support for gasoline and for coal, oil, and gas exploration.
And even if the lights had been produced with dirty old coal, the emissions could have been entirely offset on the European Trading System for about €120.
In response,
coal
advocates ask what happens when the wind doesn’t blow or the sun doesn’t shine.
As a result, while past projections assumed that
coal
use in India must rise to at least 1,500 million tons per year, it could peak at 900 million tons and then decline.
Indeed, China’s
coal
consumption has been falling for three years.
On July 24, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin initiated the first act by fiercely attacking, without evidence, the timid owner of the giant
coal
and steel company Mechel for price-gouging and tax evasion.
Political leaders in countries that produce coal, oil, and gas – like the US, Australia, and Canada – have pretended that climate change is a mere hypothesis.
That report was unequivocal: there is a powerful scientific consensus that human activity, mainly the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, gas), as well as deforestation and other land uses (such as growing paddy rice), leads to massive emissions of carbon dioxide into the air.
But why can’t the US bring itself to raise taxes on gasoline and other sources of carbon emission like
coal
burning power plants?
For this reason, a wide range of economists favor a uniform (“harmonized”) global tax that would tax carbon emissions equally everywhere in the world, and from whatever source – whether coal, oil, or gas, and whether consumers or businesses.
While a few energy-exporting countries in the Middle East and elsewhere reap huge profits, the rest of the world is suffering as the price of oil has topped $110 per barrel and that of
coal
has doubled.
Yet global supplies of oil, natural gas, and
coal
cannot easily keep up, even with new discoveries.
Yet
coal
is an inadequate substitute, partly because of limited supplies, and partly because
coal
emits large amounts of carbon dioxide per unit of energy, and therefore is a dangerous source of man-made climate change.
The most important technology for the safe environmental use of
coal
is the capture and geological storage of carbon dioxide from coal-fired power plants.
This would not only be good economics, but also good politics, since it could unite the world in our common interest, rather than dividing the world in a bitter struggle over diminishing oil, gas, and
coal
reserves.
Europe’s founding fathers understood this when they hatched the idea of creating the European
Coal
and Steel Community: encouraging old enemies to pool some of the most powerful tools of war under the pretext of advancing their economic interests was a strategy of rare intelligence.
There is an obvious solution, similar to the
Coal
and Steel Community implemented by our founding fathers: a European energy, environment, and research community (E3RC).
There is no “green” energy source that is affordable enough to replace
coal
in the near future.
At the same time, natural gas accounts for 51% of energy consumption, compared to 32% for oil and barely 17% for coal, renewables, and hydroelectric and nuclear power.
Coal
is not faring any better.
Following China’s announced moratorium on new coal-fired power plants at the end of last year, Peabody, the world’s largest
coal
company, recently filed for bankruptcy protection in the US, after it could no longer make its debt payments, partly because of waning demand for
coal.
By backing campaigns and mass actions aimed at stopping the world’s most dangerous fossil-fuel projects – from
coal
plants in Turkey and the Philippines, to mines in Germany and Australia, to fracking in Brazil, and oil wells in Nigeria – Break Free hopes to eliminate the power and pollution of the fossil-fuel industry, and propel the world toward a sustainable future.
One kilogram of coal, by contrast, provides about 7 kWh of energy – 20,000 times more.
In fact, nuclear fuel has 100,000 times the energy density of coal, so that a one-gigawatt nuclear plant would require only 15 hectares of land.
Trump, who once called climate change a Chinese hoax intended to weaken the US economy, has already repealed the Stream Protection Rule, which bars
coal
producers from dumping waste into waterways.
Back
Next
Related words
Energy
Which
Power
Would
Plants
Their
Other
Emissions
Natural
Electricity
Carbon
There
Nuclear
Climate
Global
While
Fuels
Countries
Could
Production