Word: co2
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...This is why it is so important not to delay projects like DESERTEC and the Sahara Forest Project. Such projects have the capacity to provide the power, fresh water and food essential to allow developing economies to move from subsistence living. That they help Europe with green power, absorb CO2 by "greening" deserts and mitigate rising sea levels, is a bonus not to be ignored. They also generate jobs both in the recipient countries and in the developed countries who will build most of the heavy and sophisticated equipment. Sounds like a win-win situation. John R Errey, GARMISCH-PARTENKIRCHEN...
Within Denmark, critics worry that the current government is squandering energy leadership. When Rasmussen's conservatives took power in 2001, they scaled back subsidies for wind and other renewables. New wind installations dropped precipitously, and between 2004 and 2006 CO2 emissions increased by 3%. "They stopped everything," says Auken. One high-ranking official admits the pullback was a mistake, and last year the government released a new policy that sets sharp targets for improving energy efficiency, increases the CO2 tax and promotes the development of new offshore wind turbines. Nonetheless, the Finnish consultancy Poyry argued in a recent report that...
...administrator Lisa Jackson announced that the agency would reconsider a Bush Administration decision not to regulate CO2 emissions from new coal power plants. The next day, she backed up that statement by telling the New York Times she was considering acting on an April 2007 Supreme Court decision that empowers the EPA to regulate CO2 as a pollutant under the Clean Air Act. If the EPA exercises that authority as expected - a process that would likely play out over months - it could potentially put in place one of the farthest-reaching regulations in U.S. history, affecting...
...However, carrying out the law will be anything but simple, nor will it be the most efficient way to protect the environment. The 2007 court case in question gave the EPA the authority to regulate CO2, when the Supreme Court ruled in favor of 12 states, led by Massachusetts, that brought suit against the government to force it to regulate greenhouse gases. The Bush Administration largely ignored the implications of that decision for the next two years, likely in part because of complaints from industry that regulating CO2 would be expensive and maddeningly complicated. That's a point well taken...
...using the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions directly would be unreasonably difficult, because of carbon dioxide's sheer ubiquity. In 2000, the U.S. emitted less than 18 million tons of the pollutant sulfur dioxide, chiefly from cars, power plants and factories. In the same year, national CO2 emissions reached nearly 6 billion tons, from virtually every aspect of modern life. Regulating emissions would be like trying to gather up the ocean. In addition, the Clean Air Act technically requires "major" sources of pollutants - meaning those that emit more than 250 tons a year - to acquire costly...