Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Coal  (Read 267431 times)

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 371
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 47
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: Coal
« Reply #1300 on: April 23, 2019, 09:04:52 PM »
Interesting article on the economics of coal vs renewables in China.

https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=post;topic=347.1300;last_msg=196099

Quote
The majority of electricity in China is still derived from coal generating stations, and the International Energy Agency says the country will still be the largest consumer of coal through 2023. China’s booming (until recently) economy has been powered by access to abundant low cost electricity and most of that has come from coal powered plants.

Data released by the National Energy Administration on April 15 showed China’s investment in thermal energy during the first quarter of 2019 fell by 30% compared to a year ago. By contrast, spending on hydro power and wind power projects rose 48% and 30%, respectively. Coal mining stocks fell in Shanghai on the news. China Coal Energy shares were down 3.5%, while Yanzhou Coal Mining lost 2.9%.


Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 371
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 47
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: Coal
« Reply #1301 on: April 26, 2019, 06:45:28 PM »
This article sums up the fate of coal in the USA.  It conveniently ignores that natural gas has basically put coal on life support, renewables are taking the blame for pulling the plug.

https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Renewable-Energy/A-Wave-Of-Clean-Energy-Policies-Are-Killing-Coal.html

Quote
Washington State just passed a bill requiring 100 percent clean and renewable electricity by 2045, while also completely eliminating coal-fired power by 2025. New Mexico passed a similar bill that calls for 100 percent clean energy by 2045. Along with previously passed 100 percent clean energy mandates in California and Hawaii, there are now four states with such laws on the books.

Nevada’s Governor just signed into law a bill that would require 50 percent renewable energy by 2030. Maryland is moving forward on similar legislation – 50 percent by 2030.

There are countless policies at the municipal level that also push the envelope. Notably, New York City just passed a law aiming to slash emissions from buildings by 40 percent by 2030. Buildings are responsible for nearly three-quarters of the city’s emissions. New York’s effort targeting commercial buildings has been called “unprecedented.”

Most states have renewable portfolio standards in some form, requiring utilities to generate or procure a portion of electricity from renewable or otherwise low-emissions sources. At the start of the year, there were 29 states plus the District of Columbia that that had renewable portfolios in place, according to the EIA. States with legally binding requirements accounted for 63 percent of electricity retail sales in 2018, the agency said. At present, there is no federal requirement for renewable energy, although that is something that is gaining a bit of traction in Congress.

Quote
Looking forward, the battle between fossil fuels and clean energy on the U.S. grid is already won. Solar and wind will capture the majority of new capacity additions for at least the next two years, according to the EIA, a trend that should only accelerate over time. Utility-scale solar will grow by 10 percent this year and another 17 percent in 2020, while wind will expand by 12 percent and 14 percent in 2019 and 2020, respectively. Natural gas generation will also grow, but coal-fired power plants will continue to close, as they have for the last decade.

For years, renewables fought with coal and gas over which was cheaper in terms of new additions. But renewable energy is increasingly the cheapest option even when compared to existing coal-fired power plants. In other words, it is increasingly cheaper to build new solar and wind than it is to simply operate an existing coal plant.

Quote
The energy transition, in many respects, is inevitable. The question is just how quickly it will unfold. The ratcheting up of renewable portfolio standards will accelerate the changeover.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 14049
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 195
  • Likes Given: 116
Re: Coal
« Reply #1302 on: April 27, 2019, 08:46:32 PM »
U.S.

Close Coal Plants, Save Money: That's an Indiana Utility's Plan. The Coal Industry Wants to Stop It
Quote
When Indiana's third-largest utility analyzed the economics of its power plants last year, it decided it was time for a big shift—away from the coal power that had long sustained the business and toward renewable energy.
The coal plants simply weren't paying off anymore. In fact, shutting them down would save about $4 billion over 30 years.

But the utility, NIPSCO, knew it would face a fight. Indiana is second only to Texas in generating electricity from coal, and the state has several coal mines and politically connected coal companies.

Coal interests launched a campaign to try to stop NIPSCO's plan and hired former Trump administration EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt as a lobbyist to persuade the legislature to intervene. But this fight, so far, isn't going as the coal industry had hoped. Many of the state's institutions, including legislators and even the Indiana Chamber of Commerce, have resisted coal's aggressive push.

Through it all, NIPSCO and its president, Violet Sistovaris, have not wavered.

"Our conclusions were solely driven by economics and driving for more affordable rates for the state and ultimately for lower-cost energy for customers," Sistovaris said. ...
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/26042019/coal-power-plant-shut-down-cost-saving-renewable-energy-indiana-nipsco-vectren-pruitt
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 851
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1303 on: April 28, 2019, 09:28:19 PM »
This article sums up the fate of coal in the USA.  It conveniently ignores that natural gas has basically put coal on life support, renewables are taking the blame for pulling the plug.

https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Renewable-Energy/A-Wave-Of-Clean-Energy-Policies-Are-Killing-Coal.html

So much sloppy/rose tinted glasses journalism in this area. Fracked NG is as bad as coal, so no climate benefit apart from the small amount of coal replaced with renewables. The problem is that such journalism puts most people in a happier mood rather than realizing where we really are.

Globally coal use will probably stabilize or show small growth over the next few years, due to China, India and Indonesia etc. Compared to them the remaining coal use in the EU28 and USA is pretty small and therefore any cuts there easily offset by Asian growth. May not be good news for Australia though, as China is expanding its coal mining capacity.

https://energy.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/coal/indias-thermal-coal-consumption-to-reach-1076-mt-by-2022-23-crisil/65475033

https://www.worldcoal.com/power/22112018/coal-to-remain-king-in-indonesia-for-now/

http://www.mining.com/web/indonesias-push-electrification-impact-domestic-coal-report/

https://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/11107-China-s-coal-consumption-on-the-rise

https://www.argusmedia.com/en/news/1820312-viewpoint-china-coal-supply-may-increase-in-2019

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 371
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 47
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: Coal
« Reply #1304 on: April 29, 2019, 07:12:37 PM »
Given that solar and wind are now cheaper than coal, when do you think the last new coal power plant will be built?  How long do you think it will be until the last coal power plant is retired?

In the US, it's difficult to foresee any coal power plants operating after 2030.  There is a strong economic motivation for utilities to shut down operating coal power plants as soon as there is enough solar or wind power to replace them.  Most of the EU is in the same position or will be within a few years.

Once you get to a critical number, there won't be enough demand for coal to keep the coal mines operating and to keep the coal trains running.  But we have fewer than 60,000 coal miners in this country.

In China and India with millions of miners, it seems the Governments are inclined to support coal until the labor force can be shifted to other industries.  So it may take a while longer to make the transition.  But I doubt it will lag by much more than a decade.  Some EU countries, like Poland, are more reliant on coal to so there timeline may be closer to China's than the US.  Many other lesser developed countries, such as Indonesia and Vietnam, will follow the China timeline.

So I would guess that the last new coal power plant will be built around 2025 and the last operating coal power plant will be retired in 2050.

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3363
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 139
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Coal
« Reply #1305 on: April 29, 2019, 09:02:59 PM »
Once you get to a critical number, there won't be enough demand for coal to keep the coal mines operating and to keep the coal trains running.  But we have fewer than 60,000 coal miners in this country.

??? If there is any demand for coal, there will be some mining to provide it.

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2452
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 187
  • Likes Given: 63
Re: Coal
« Reply #1306 on: April 29, 2019, 09:12:02 PM »
Coal continues to be a 'required' commodity for the making of steel from iron ore.  So even after "all" coal mines that produce fuel for electricity generation are closed, there will still be some coal mined.
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 371
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 47
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: Coal
« Reply #1307 on: April 29, 2019, 09:41:06 PM »
Coal continues to be a 'required' commodity for the making of steel from iron ore.  So even after "all" coal mines that produce fuel for electricity generation are closed, there will still be some coal mined.

Nope.  There are ways to make steel without using coal, and at least a couple of companies are on the verge of making them competitive in cost with current steelmaking processes.

https://www.ssab.com/company/sustainability/sustainable-operations/hybrit

Quote
HYBRIT - Toward fossil-free steel

In 2016, SSAB, LKAB and Vattenfall joined forces to create HYBRIT – an initiative that endeavors to revolutionize steel-making. HYBRIT aims to replace coking coal, traditionally needed for ore-based steel making, with hydrogen. The result will be the world’s first fossil-free steel-making technology, with virtually no carbon footprint.

The steel industry is one of the highest CO2-emitting industries, accounting for 7% of CO2 emissions globally. A growing global population and an expanding urbanization are expected to trigger a rise in global steel demand by 2050. The carbon footprint in the steel industry is thus a challenge for Europe and the rest of the world.

This is why, in 2016, SSAB, LKAB (Europe’s largest iron ore producer) and Vattenfall (one of Europe’s largest electricity producers) joined forces to create HYBRIT, an initiative that endeavors to revolutionize steel making. HYBRIT aims to replace coking coal, traditionally needed for ore-based steel making, with hydrogen. The result will be the world’s first fossil-free steel-making technology, with virtually no carbon footprint.

Sweden has unique conditions for this kind of project, with good access to fossil-free electricity, Europe’s highest-quality iron ore and a specialized, innovative steel industry. HYBRIT has also started to investigate the possibilities of broadening the project to include Finland.

A pre-feasibility study was conducted 2016-2017. The conclusion is that fossil-free steel, given today’s price of electricity, coal and cost of CO2 emissions, would be 20-30% more expensive. With declining prices in electricity from fossil-free sources and increasing costs for CO2 emissions through the European Union Emissions Trading System (ETS), the pre-feasibility study considers that fossil-free steel will, in future, be able to compete in the market with traditional steel.

http://fortune.com/2019/01/09/boston-metal/

Quote
A venture capital firm led by Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates has invested in a startup that is trying to significantly cut carbon emissions from steel manufacturing.

Breakthrough Energy Ventures led a $20 million funding round in Boston Metal, which is developing a process to reduce carbon emissions in steel making by using electricity instead of traditional pollution-heavy techniques.

Quote
Boston Metal uses a process called metal oxide electrolysis, which allows pure metals to be produced without carbon emissions. The only byproduct is oxygen.

The process uses a “soup of oxides,” Carneiro told Fortune. “Depending on the metal you want to produce, you have a different soup of oxides.”

The other oxides in the mixture must be relatively stable so that when electricity is introduced to the electrolytic cell—the container in which the metal is reduced—the desired metal pools in a pure liquid form at the bottom. The cell is tapped every so often to extract the metal, the hole is plugged, and the process continues.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 851
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1308 on: April 29, 2019, 09:49:10 PM »
There has been a huge coal plant building program in the past decade plus in China, India and Indonesia (the latter still building, as with SE Asia), and elsewhere. A lot of spare capacity that can be used to increase coal consumption without the need for new coal plants.

In the end coal plants provide a quick way to deliver very large amounts of baseload power on a small footprint  for fast growing nations, especially when that coal is a local resource and is mined underground (i.e. no need to pay for imports and small surface footprint). Solar and wind are not baseload power, but variable power, and therefore comparing costs is akin to comparing apples and oranges.

We are at least a decade, if not two, away from having the scale of battery implementations (excluding the hydro batteries) to be able to stand in for the periods of low/no light and low/no wind (just look at the grid-level battery industry forecasts). Therefore non-variable sources will be paid a premium over variable ones for a good while to come.

P.S. Currently looking out the window at a cloudy, rainy, windless day in Southern Ontario. The "batteries" here are nuclear and hydro (could be much more if we built proper interconnects to Quebec and Manitoba). The kilowatt hours to power Ontario for just a day of such weather are 10's of times what will be feasible within the next decade. Its the nuclear and hydro which allowed for the retirement of coal and gas, together with falls in electricity use due to deindustrialization and more efficient devices (e.g. fridges).

Quebec has massive hydro already in place, plus a very large possible wind resource. So Ontario could use that instead of spending $30 billion+ "refurbishing" the old crappy Candu reactors, but the local politicians seem to unconditionally love the local nuclear industry.

Most countries/regions do not have a good size of hydro resource, and therefore need something else to provide the backup. Interconnects with other regions can help, but there are periods when large regions (e.g. Northern Europe) are dark (its called winter and night) and not very windy. Places like Denmark and Germany benefit from interconnects with countries that have large amounts (on a relative basis) of fossil fuel and/or nuclear capacity and/or hydro.

« Last Edit: April 29, 2019, 09:56:15 PM by rboyd »

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 851
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1309 on: April 29, 2019, 10:02:17 PM »
Coal continues to be a 'required' commodity for the making of steel from iron ore.  So even after "all" coal mines that produce fuel for electricity generation are closed, there will still be some coal mined.

Nope.  There are ways to make steel without using coal, and at least a couple of companies are on the verge of making them competitive in cost with current steelmaking processes.

https://www.ssab.com/company/sustainability/sustainable-operations/hybrit

Quote from the article:

Quote
To be able to carry out the HYBRIT initiative, however, significant national contributions are still required from the state, research institutions and universities. There has to be good access to fossil-free electricity, improved infrastructure and rapid expansion of high voltage networks, research initiatives, faster permit processes and the government’s active support for the pilot and demonstration facilities and long-term support at EU level.

They are still at quite an early stage, with a transition once commercially proven taking decades in the absence of a "war like" effort to force through the required changes.

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 371
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 47
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: Coal
« Reply #1310 on: April 29, 2019, 10:48:36 PM »
Battery costs  have come down even faster than wind and solar costs.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/04/29/trump-wrong-about-wind-power-electricity-battery-storage-226755

Quote
But now another technology revolution is underway that could help solve that problem: an electricity storage boom. The cost of lithium-ion batteries has plunged 85 percent in a decade, and 30 percent in just the past year, so utilities across the U.S. have started attaching containers full of them to the grid—and they’re planning to install far more of them in the coming years. Electricity has always been the toughest commodity to manage, because unlike water, grain, fuel or steel, it has been largely impossible to store for later use. But that is changing fast, and even though the dramatic growth of batteries on the grid will be invisible to most Americans, it has the potential to transform how we produce and consume power, creating more flexible and resilient electricity systems with less waste, lower costs and fewer emissions.

Quote
Overall, the consultancy Wood Mackenzie expects U.S. storage additions to double in 2019, triple in 2020 and increase 13-fold over the next five years, which would store enough electricity to power more than 5 million homes. The forecasters at Bloomberg New Energy Finance expect more than $600 billion in global investment in battery storage by 2040. The storage boom, like so many green trends in America, first took hold in California, but Ravi Manghani, the head of energy storage research at Wood Mackenzie, says it is spreading much faster than anyone expected, ending the era when power had to be distributed and used the instant it was generated.

“Every time we do a new forecast, we have to revise it up for deployment and down for cost,” says Ravi Manghani, head of energy storage research at Wood Mackenzie. “We’ve been proven wrong again and again.”

A 13-fold increase in 5 years!  And an acknowledgement that they often underestimate the  growth rates and cost reductions.

Quote
Shah says the spectacular growth in storage built by utilities alongside solar plants might eventually be dwarfed by homes and businesses installing “behind-the-meter” battery units to store solar power from their rooftops; last year, 15,000 individual battery storage units like the Tesla PowerWall were installed in the U.S., still a tiny slice of the market but a fivefold increase over the previous year. Utilities are also building batteries alongside wind farms, storing excess nighttime generation for use during morning peaks when families are getting ready for work and school. The Southwest Power Pool, which runs the grid serving 14 states in the windy and predominantly Republican middle of the country, now has 5 gigawatts worth of storage projects in its queue, nearly four times the current U.S. total.

“It gives you an idea of the magnitude of interest,” says Bruce Rew, vice president for operations. “We’ve got lots of wind, and storage will help us manage it.”

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 851
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1311 on: April 29, 2019, 11:45:36 PM »
I answered this on the renewables thread, i.e. 13 * a really really small number (when compared to global electricity usage) is still a really small number.

All growth rate forecasts should be combined with the base from which the growth is forecast from, otherwise they are next to meaningless if not misleading.

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 371
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 47
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: Coal
« Reply #1312 on: April 30, 2019, 07:27:17 PM »
Japan is cancelling many of the coal fired power plants it planned to build after the Fukishima disaster.

https://www.reuters.com/article/japan-coal/japanese-utilities-turn-away-from-coal-plans-amid-green-energy-boom-idUSL3N2280MH

Quote
TOKYO, April 29 (Reuters) - Japanese utilities are turning away from new coal-fired power projects in the country amid tighter environmental regulations and increasing demand for greener energy from their key customers.

Osaka Gas last week pulled out of plans to build a 1.2 gigawatt coal-fired project, which followed the cancellation in January of a 2 GW coal power station by Kyushu Electric Power , Tokyo Gas and Idemitsu Kosan.

In December, Chugoku Electric Power and JFE Steel scrapped plans to build a 1.07 GW station.

These moves come as renewable energy is on the rise in Japan and elsewhere, and as the government brings in stricter regulations on new coal-fired power plants.

They also come as some investors around the world have been pressuring companies to divest coal-related assets and pushing banks to stop financing such projects.

crandles

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2188
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Coal
« Reply #1313 on: May 01, 2019, 12:59:50 PM »
The cost of lithium-ion batteries has plunged 85 percent in a decade, and 30 percent in just the past year
I couldn't see a reference source for this claim. Do you know where they get this from?

I would guess the 85% comes from

https://about.bnef.com/blog/behind-scenes-take-lithium-ion-battery-prices/

In December 2018, BloombergNEF published the results of its ninth Battery Price Survey, a series that begin in 2012 looking back at data from as early as 2010. The annual price survey has become an important benchmark in the industry and the fall in prices has been nothing short of remarkable: the volume weighted average battery pack fell 85% from 2010-18, reaching an average of $176/kWh.



(never mind this being 8 years not 10.)

but that doesn't seem to support 30% in past year

see also
https://about.bnef.com/blog/behind-scenes-take-lithium-ion-battery-prices/
for answers to comments like
“Current prices are far lower than this in reality.”
“Current prices are far higher than this in reality.”
“Batteries will fall much faster than you are forecasting.”
“Battery prices are increasing, not falling.”
“What comes after lithium-ion?”
« Last Edit: May 01, 2019, 01:19:04 PM by crandles »

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 851
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1314 on: May 03, 2019, 11:31:37 PM »
India accounts for more than a quarter of net global primary energy demand growth
between 2017-2040 and 42% of this new energy demand is met through coal, meaning CO2 emissions roughly double by 2040. BP


Ok its BP, but even if they are off by quite a bit, it means that India's col consumption will keep rising for a long time.

Quote
Robust growth in prosperity and population size drives a massive increase in India’s primary energy consumption, which expands by 1.2 billion tonnes of oil equivalent or 156% by 2040, making India by far the largest source of energy demand growth in the outlook.

Quote
India’s population increases by more than 267m, and the economy nearly trebles in size, meaning income per capita roughly doubles. This growth in absolute terms means India’s share of global primary energy demand jumps from 6% today to 11% by 2040.

Quote
India’s total net CO2 emissions roughly double to 5Gt by 2040, meaning India’s share of global emissions increases from 7% today to 14% by 2040.

https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/corporate/pdfs/energy-economics/energy-outlook/bp-energy-outlook-2019-country-insight-india.pdf

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 14049
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 195
  • Likes Given: 116
Re: Coal
« Reply #1315 on: May 07, 2019, 02:21:15 AM »
Quote
UK Coal (@UK_Coal) 5/6/19, 5:17 AM
Last Week's GB National Grid #Coal generation

Coal Generation : 6.30 GWh (0.12%)
GB Generation 5.23 TWh
Time with no Coal Generation: 148 hours, 40 minutes
https://twitter.com/uk_coal/status/1125328662323187712
First image below.

———
From April 22:
Quote
4/22/19, 12:18 PM
This #Coal-free run ended at 90 Hours 45 Minutes.
This is a modern record for Great Britain
Generation during this time was met by: Gas 42%, Nuclear 23%, Wind 12%, Solar 11%, Imports 7%, Biomass 4%, Large Hydro 1%, Storage 0%
https://twitter.com/uk_coal/status/1120361362717384704
Second image below. Others at the link.

Edit: ———
Quote
UK Coal (@UK_Coal) 5/6/19, 8:02 PM
GB National Grid: #Coal is currently generating 0.00GW (0.00%) out of a total of 24.59GW
Continuous hours without coal: 131
https://twitter.com/uk_coal/status/1125551342070661120
« Last Edit: May 07, 2019, 02:35:30 AM by Sigmetnow »
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 14049
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 195
  • Likes Given: 116
Re: Coal
« Reply #1316 on: May 08, 2019, 04:22:10 PM »
Quote
Morten Lund (@mortenlund89)5/8/19, 9:00 AM
ZERO watts of electricity was generated by coal the last week on the UK grid

     UK Coal (@UK_Coal) 5/8/19, 8:26 AM
     Great Britain's record #Coal free run has now passed one week. #CoalFreeWeek
https://twitter.com/uk_coal/status/1126101089340874752
Chart at the link.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

NeilT

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 882
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #1317 on: May 08, 2019, 06:01:35 PM »
I saw that.  It's not uncommon, today, for the UK to be very low coal at this time of year.  Checking Gridwatch and comparing year on year shows it is quite similar.  It also shows that when we had the major winter storms last year, coal was the energy backstop used to meet the demand.

More interesting is that it was only 2 years ago that the UK had one day without coal.  To years later and one week. Perhaps in another two years we'll see one month or more.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 14049
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 195
  • Likes Given: 116
Re: Coal
« Reply #1318 on: May 08, 2019, 06:36:33 PM »
I saw that.  It's not uncommon, today, for the UK to be very low coal at this time of year.  Checking Gridwatch and comparing year on year shows it is quite similar.  It also shows that when we had the major winter storms last year, coal was the energy backstop used to meet the demand.

More interesting is that it was only 2 years ago that the UK had one day without coal.  To years later and one week. Perhaps in another two years we'll see one month or more.


Still going!  (Eastern U.S. time zone)

Quote
UK Coal (@UK_Coal)
5/8/19, 12:02 PM
GB National Grid: #Coal is currently generating 0.00GW (0.00%) out of a total of 37.09GW
Continuous hours without coal: 171
https://twitter.com/uk_coal/status/1126155322907942916

UK Coal (@UK_Coal)
5/8/19, 8:28 AM
Generation during this #CoalFreeWeek was met by: Gas 45%, Nuclear 21%, Wind 11%, Imports 10%, Biomass 6%, Solar 6%, Large Hydro 1%, Storage 0%
We will provide a further update at the end of the run.
https://twitter.com/uk_coal/status/1126101572348522496
Images below.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

NeilT

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 882
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #1319 on: May 08, 2019, 06:47:29 PM »
Perhaps something to get used to.

Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

BeeKnees

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 57
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 28
Re: Coal
« Reply #1320 on: May 08, 2019, 08:37:21 PM »
Whilst the UK continues to import biomass from the US and burn it in coal power stations I find it hard to find any joy in this achievement. 
There is too much evidence that the imported wood isn't as renewable as claimed, pollutes through transportation, produces less energy than coal and the emissions may not be less harmful than the fuel it has replaced.

NeilT

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 882
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #1321 on: May 09, 2019, 06:15:56 AM »
Quote
These imports account for around a quarter of UK bioenergy
https://www.carbonbrief.org/ccc-uk-should-move-away-from-large-scale-biomass-burning

Scotland also has an action plan for Biomass fuel production.

https://www.gov.scot/publications/biomass-action-plan-scotland/pages/9/

Whilst Drax is important for energy production, it is only 6% of UK generating capacity and it burns almost all of the imported Biomass.

It is important to get off coal first.  Then local production of Biomass fuels can follow.  There is, however, a cost picture here and it comes from economies of scale.  The UK is one of the higher density populations in the EU and only Scotland has the space for the scale of crops for Biomass.  Still it is a far cry from the landmass available for crop growth available in the US or Canada.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

be cause

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 395
  • Citizenship .. a Lurker gets asylum
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 34
Re: Coal
« Reply #1322 on: May 09, 2019, 11:28:37 AM »
here in Norn' Ireland we have had the farce of HRI .. farmers being subsidised to burn pelleted trees from the USA .. while all support for biomass production locally was abandoned .. willow production here has stopped .. grubbed out or growing into inpenetrable thickets . Same fuel as Drax .. where the local coal is now being exportrd to India .. and the yUKky govt . waves it's green credentials .. b.c.
be the cause of only good
and love all beings as you should
and the 'God' of all Creation
will .. through you .. transform all nations :)

NeilT

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 882
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #1323 on: May 09, 2019, 03:59:44 PM »
If we want to talk Hypocrisy; Scotland, having met the Paris accord targets long ago and going much, much, further; whilst continuing to pump oil and gas to be burned for fuel.....  Banning FF vehicles from 2030, whilst expecting that petrochemical revenues will continue to bolster the economy for the foreseeable future.

It is a bit similar to Norway.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

Sleepy

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1140
  • Retired, again...
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 113
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #1324 on: May 09, 2019, 04:28:54 PM »
... and Sweden.
https://www.ivl.se/toppmeny/pressrum/nyheter/nyheter---arkiv/2019-05-08-forbud-mot-bensin--och-dieselbilar-kraver-nya-beslut-i-eu.html
Quote
In 2030, it will no longer be permitted to sell new petrol and diesel cars in Sweden according to the Government's January agreement.
...
Sweden is currently prevented both from banning the sale of new petrol and diesel cars and to directly prohibit the sale of gasoline and diesel.  It is linked to harmonized EU rules that ensure the functioning of the EU internal market, more specifically the rules for type approval of cars and fuel quality, says Åsa Romson.
Pdf at the link, in Swedish as well.

We are all hypocrites.
Omnia mirari, etiam tritissima.
-
Science is a jealous mistress and takes little account of a man's feelings.

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2452
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 187
  • Likes Given: 63
Re: Coal
« Reply #1325 on: May 09, 2019, 05:04:56 PM »
Alas, my government is not hypocritical:  The U.S.ofA. denies AGW and supports coal, gas and oil, even Canadian oil sands, all it can.  So, let's hear it for hypocrisy!
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

NeilT

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 882
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #1326 on: May 10, 2019, 12:25:04 PM »
So, let's hear it for hypocrisy!

True, hypocrisy with at least some solid action is better than denial with no action.

Not good.  Just better.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

NeilT

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 882
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #1327 on: May 10, 2019, 12:32:11 PM »
Coal continues flat for the UK.

It is useful, however, to contrast France.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 851
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1328 on: May 10, 2019, 07:19:33 PM »
We will most probably soon have a non-hypocritical government in Canada, given the current polls. The "Progressive" Conservatives. The PC are already in power in Alberta (kicking out the super-hypocritical NDP that supported the expansion of the Tar Sands), Manitoba, Ontario (Liberals embedded with the nuclear industry), PEI, and New Brunswick. Plus a different, but very conservative, party in Saskatchewan.

Plus a rightish-wing government in Quebec, but at least they are not climate deniers. Quebec has huge amounts of hydro electricity, plus huge possibilities for wind - so not in its interests to be climate deniers. They have shut down the only nuclear plant. Hopefully they don't open the floodgates to fracking.

Half of Canadian coal production, mostly for export, comes from British Columbia. A place where fracking for natural gas is also being rapidly expanded. The "progressive" NDP/Green government there does not seem to be bothered by that.

Pretty Boy (Trudeau) stopped the NDP wave last election by making lots of promises he then reneged on, including climate change policies (and the NDP leader royally screwed up big to help him). Job done, so now back to the PC ... A Harper redux.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2019, 07:31:19 PM by rboyd »

b_lumenkraft

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 776
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 153
  • Likes Given: 971
Re: Coal
« Reply #1329 on: May 10, 2019, 07:34:17 PM »
Progressive Conservatives? As in dry water? That's funny.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 14049
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 195
  • Likes Given: 116
Re: Coal
« Reply #1330 on: May 11, 2019, 02:03:36 AM »
New York state on track to be coal-free by 2020
Quote
New York state is on track to close its last remaining coal-fired power plants by the end of 2020 after adopting final regulations that require state power plants to meet new, stricter CO2 emissions limits.

The newly adopted requirements will go into effect on June 8. The stringent limits on CO2 emissions will make it virtually impossible for coal plants to continue running within the state after 2020.

Coal is almost dead in New York as it is. It currently makes up less than 1% of energy production in the state, according to a recent report from the New York Independent System Operator.

There are only two remaining coal plants left in the state, and both are owned by Riesling Power. Those plants are managed by Beowulf Energy, which plans to turn the facilities into data centers, Bloomberg reports.

Beowulf Energy’s managing director Michael Enright said in a statement that a proposed transition plan would retire the plants before the emissions deadline “while creating a viable new business and jobs in their place, using renewable energy.” ...
https://electrek.co/2019/05/10/ny-coal-free-2020/



Meanwhile, in the U.K.:
Quote
UK Coal (@UK_Coal)
5/9/19, 9:58 AM
This #Coal free run ended at 8 Days 1 Hour 25 Minutes.
This is the longest run without coal for Great Britain since 1882.
Generation during this time was met by: Gas 45%, Nuclear 21%, Wind 12%, Imports 10%, Biomass 6%, Solar 5%, Large Hydro <1%, Storage <1%
https://twitter.com/uk_coal/status/1126486631383478272
Charts at the link.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sleepy

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1140
  • Retired, again...
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 113
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #1331 on: May 11, 2019, 09:52:07 AM »
So, let's hear it for hypocrisy!

True, hypocrisy with at least some solid action is better than denial with no action.

Not good.  Just better.

Norway is down 3,5% since 1990.
https://www.ssb.no/en/natur-og-miljo/statistikker/nrmiljo/aar

Edit; changed the link to the English version. And why not add this crosspost as well:

Edward Hanrahan and Kevin Anderson on BBC yesterday, between ~1:15:45-1:20:48:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0004s9n

Short familiar sentences by Kevin Anderson:
30 years have passed.
We have fundamentally failed on climate change and we are passing that legacy onto our children.
Us high-emitters are still trying to find ways so that we can pay other people to compensate for our high-carbon lifestyles.

« Last Edit: May 11, 2019, 10:26:31 AM by Sleepy »
Omnia mirari, etiam tritissima.
-
Science is a jealous mistress and takes little account of a man's feelings.

Sebastian Jones

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 224
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 25
Re: Coal
« Reply #1332 on: May 11, 2019, 08:41:22 PM »
Progressive Conservatives? As in dry water? That's funny.

Look up Teddy Roosevelt early 1900s as one example. It has happened before. There were quite a lot of them during FDRs time as well. History repeats is more than a 'truism' - it actually happens - for good and ill. :)
The Progressive Conservative Party of Canada is extinct. Many of its members fled to the extreme right wing Reform party or to the separatist Bloc Quebecois just before the 1993 election. Eventually the Reform party absorbed the rump PCs to form the unfortunately named Conservative Reform Alliance Party (CRAP). Clearly finding that this acronym hurt their efforts to be seen as a serious party, they re-named themselves the Conservative Party of Canada- dropping all pretensions to progressiveness, reform or allies.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 851
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Coal
« Reply #1333 on: May 11, 2019, 11:32:04 PM »
Thankyou Sebastian - the Canadian Conservatives have certainly dropped all pretensions to being progressive in any way!

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4446
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 138
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #1334 on: May 12, 2019, 01:03:30 AM »
Another one bites the dust: Cloud Peak in bankruptcy

They own some of the Mordor around Gillette. You can see some of the coal mining and burning ops from I-90.

https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/post/cloud-peak-energy-voluntarily-files-bankruptcy#stream/0

sidd

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4446
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 138
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #1335 on: May 12, 2019, 01:07:25 AM »
Coal: Gift that keeps on giving

"391 MW San Miguel coal plant  ... most contaminated in the country"

"coal mine is unregulated by federal CCR rules "

"Duke Energy’s Allen Steam Station in North Carolina and PacifiCorp’s Jim Bridger power plant in Wyoming are the second and third most polluted plant sites in the country"

You can see the deathscape for that last one off I-80.

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/toxins-in-the-ground-inside-americas-most-polluted-coal-ash-site-and-indu/551339/

sidd
« Last Edit: May 12, 2019, 01:50:43 AM by sidd »

Ken Feldman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 371
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 47
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: Coal
« Reply #1336 on: May 14, 2019, 08:27:26 PM »
Good news on coal from the US:

https://phys.org/news/2019-05-coal-power-trump.html

Quote
Fifty coal-fired power plants have shut in the United States since President Donald Trump came to office two years ago, an environmental organization said Thursday.

The Sierra Club counted 50 closures, along with 51 announcements of closure, since Trump was sworn into office in January 2017.

Quote
In total, 289 have closed since 2010, comprising 40 percent of the US's coal power capacity, while an additional 241 plants remain open.

Quote
By this summer, coal is on course to provide only 25 percent of the US energy mix from its share of 35 percent in 2015.

Quote
US coal production has fallen by a third since its peak in 2008, according to official energy statistics, and more than half of all mines have closed since that time.