Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Coal  (Read 358250 times)

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5555
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 753
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #950 on: January 09, 2018, 06:34:41 AM »

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Coal
« Reply #951 on: January 09, 2018, 07:09:08 AM »
20 GW coal generation to shutdown in the USA by 2020.

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/ferc-20-gw-of-coal-capacity-headed-for-retirement-by-2020/514277/

sidd

Might be higher than 20.  There are 13.6 GW planned for closure this year.  2019 would need to hit only 6.5 GW to bust past 20 GW.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17725
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: Coal
« Reply #952 on: January 09, 2018, 06:16:24 PM »
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17725
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: Coal
« Reply #953 on: January 14, 2018, 06:17:06 PM »
“Power companies plan to shutter more than 10 big coal plants in 2018, extinguishing a major portion of coal burning in the United States.”

Coal’s death spiral, in 3 charts
http://grist.org/article/coals-death-spiral-in-3-charts/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1331
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 250
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: Coal
« Reply #954 on: January 14, 2018, 08:11:45 PM »
Looks like a large amount of that coal is going to be replaced with natural gas, which simply gives the illusion of emissions reductions because we only count the CO2 and don't/vastly undercount the CH4.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17725
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: Coal
« Reply #955 on: January 14, 2018, 08:24:48 PM »
Looks like a large amount of that coal is going to be replaced with natural gas, which simply gives the illusion of emissions reductions because we only count the CO2 and don't/vastly undercount the CH4.

But most of the gas plants will be peaker plants, rather than base power plants, won’t they?  Which means much of the time they won’t be operating.  And they will run less and less, as we ramp up renewables and storage.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Coal
« Reply #956 on: January 14, 2018, 09:26:43 PM »
Looks like a large amount of that coal is going to be replaced with natural gas, which simply gives the illusion of emissions reductions because we only count the CO2 and don't/vastly undercount the CH4.

No.  It's unlikely many more gas peakers (simple turbines) will be installed.  Batteries are starting to edge them out. 

Gas plants that are added going forward are likely to be combined cycle plants which will have short startup times due to their turbine stage but won't reach full output for a few hours when their steam stage is hot enough to operate.

The need going forward, as we add wind and solar, is going to be for longer hour fill-in for when both wind and solar output is low for extended periods.  Batteries are likely to provide short term fill-in but are still too expensive to provide more than a few hours of fill-in.

What it likely to happen for a while is that CCNG plants will start to operate a few hours before batteries are due to be depleted.  The grid will be supplied by batteries and turbine stages plus whatever generation is available.  With proper timing the CCNG plants should be at max output before battery power is used up.
--

Most CH4 leakage seems to be urban distribution systems. 

There is a significant amount of CH4 released when coal is mined and more released when coal is pulverised before  use.

The coal/NG CH4 issue is complicated.  I've not yet seen anyone do a good study comparing CH4 and CO2 emissions for electricity generation.


But most of the gas plants will be peaker plants, rather than base power plants, won’t they?  Which means much of the time they won’t be operating.  And they will run less and less, as we ramp up renewables and storage.

numerobis

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Coal
« Reply #957 on: January 14, 2018, 09:29:24 PM »
There's way too much natural gas in the grid for it to all be peakers.

IIRC, the current calculation is that on a 25-year timescale, the natural gas is as bad as coal due to leaks. On a century timescale, natural gas is less bad. The Obama rules to improve leakage should make the tradeoff better.

No argument that natural gas is still fossil.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Coal
« Reply #958 on: January 14, 2018, 09:45:43 PM »
Peakers are too inefficient to be used for general generation.  They get used for short term purposes.  US peaker plants run, on average, about 5% of the time.  CCNG plants run 50% to 60% of the time.

I have not seen a coal/NG study that

1) Took into account only the CH4 leaked at well, in the main distribution pipes, and at the CCNG plant.  I've seen calculations which use all NG leaks including very leaky urban distribution systems.

2)  Included CH4 (coal gas) for coal along with the CO2 emitted by coal burning.  Coal mines have to be constantly ventilated to remove coal gas and monitored for pockets of build up.  When coal mines explode it's the coal gas that didn't get ventilated out.

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1331
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 250
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: Coal
« Reply #959 on: January 15, 2018, 02:05:54 AM »
There's way too much natural gas in the grid for it to all be peakers.

IIRC, the current calculation is that on a 25-year timescale, the natural gas is as bad as coal due to leaks. On a century timescale, natural gas is less bad. The Obama rules to improve leakage should make the tradeoff better.

No argument that natural gas is still fossil.

Trump has suspended the Obama rule on methane leaks

https://www.denverpost.com/2017/12/07/donald-trump-suspending-methane-oil-gas-pollution-limit-rule/

numerobis

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Coal
« Reply #960 on: January 15, 2018, 02:31:47 AM »
The bastard. He already was under court order to retain that rule.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17725
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: Coal
« Reply #961 on: January 19, 2018, 09:56:37 PM »
Pruitt was a fossil-fuel-booster Attorney General in Oklahoma before he became head of the EPA.

Pruitt’s EPA wants to let states handle coal ash. Oklahoma shows why that’s so dangerous.
Oklahoma is the first state to get approval from the agency to regulate coal ash at a state level.
Quote
On January 16 — with little public notice — the EPA published its approval of Oklahoma’s state coal ash disposal program, which would supersede federal regulations. In short, it would give state agencies sole authority to issue — and enforce — permits for the handling and disposal of coal ash throughout Oklahoma.
https://thinkprogress.org/oklahoma-state-coal-ash-epa-333e6061fc7d/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

ghoti

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 767
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: Coal
« Reply #962 on: January 21, 2018, 01:19:54 AM »
Another failure of an Australian coal fired generator - not an old plant. Coal is so unreliable and intermittant in Australia.

Quote
The sudden outage of the Loy Yang B unit is the 13th failure of a major coal unit this summer.

http://reneweconomy.com.au/coal-unit-trips-in-heatwave-as-tesla-big-battery-cashes-in-85623/

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8653
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3377
  • Likes Given: 25
Re: Coal
« Reply #963 on: January 22, 2018, 07:30:28 PM »
Another nail in the coffin for coal?

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/21/lloyds-of-london-to-divest-from-coal-over-climate-change
Quote
Lloyd's of London to divest from coal over climate change
Firm follows other big UK and European insurers by excluding coal companies from 1 April

Lloyd’s will start to exclude coal from its investment strategy from 1 April. The definition of what is a coal company and the criteria for divestment will be set over the coming months.

The firm has long been vocal about the need to battle climate change, with insurance one of the worst affected industries by hurricanes, wildfires and flooding in recent years.

The insurance market decided last month to implement a coal exclusion policy as part of a responsible investment strategy for the central mutual fund that sits behind every insurance policy written by the Lloyd’s market.


Inga Beale, Lloyd’s of London chief executive, said: “That means that in the areas of our portfolio where we can directly influence investment decisions we will avoid investing in companies that are involved mainly in coal.

“Is there more the insurance sector could be doing to help the world transition to a low-carbon economy by choosing sustainable or low-carbon stocks?”
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5555
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 753
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #964 on: January 23, 2018, 08:10:22 AM »

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17725
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: Coal
« Reply #965 on: February 04, 2018, 09:00:37 PM »
“Fossil-free steel” plant planned for Sweden.

Process would use iron ore pellets; and hydrogen rather than coke or coal.  Emissions would be water instead of CO2.

SSAB, LKAB AND VATTENFALL TO BUILD A GLOBALLY-UNIQUE PILOT PLANT FOR FOSSIL-FREE STEEL
https://corporate.vattenfall.com/press-and-media/press-releases/2018/ssab-lkab-and-vattenfall-to-build-a-globally-unique-pilot-plant-for-fossil-free-steel/

Animation available here:  https://twitter.com/unfccc/status/960171351410581505
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17725
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: Coal
« Reply #966 on: February 09, 2018, 09:23:59 PM »
Australia:

“last night bayswater coal power station dropped 650MW in an instant.
this afternoon callide (HELE coal!) tripped — 400MW gone!

wind and solar *never* subject our grid to destabilising stresses of this magnitude.

another day, another #coalfail.”
https://twitter.com/simonahac/status/961872932044652547
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17725
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: Coal
« Reply #967 on: February 09, 2018, 09:26:24 PM »
“Energy Secretary Rick Perry is considering using authority reserved for emergencies to save unprofitable coal power plants.“
    https://twitter.com/AriNatter/status/961779396133707776
    Link below.

Trump Administration Is Weighing Emergency Aid for Some Coal Plants
https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2018-02-09/rick-perry-is-said-to-be-weighing-another-way-to-save-coal-units
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8653
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3377
  • Likes Given: 25
Re: Coal
« Reply #968 on: February 11, 2018, 12:25:18 PM »
Clean Coal? Black Lung Epidemic in Appalachia

https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/02/black-lung-makes-lethal-comeback-coal-miner-epidemic-is-the-largest-in-history/

WHAT YEAR IS THIS? —

Doctors floored by epidemic levels of black lung in Appalachian coal miners

The cases are more severe, and miners are dying younger.


Quote
An epidemic of severe and rapidly progressive black lung disease is emerging among coal miners in Appalachia. Case counts from just three clinics in the region reveal the highest disease levels that doctors have ever reported, according to a study published in JAMA this week.

Between January 2013 and February 2017, researchers at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health documented 416 coal miners with the condition. Prior to the discovery, researchers largely thought that black lung cases were a thing of the past. Diagnoses have been rare since the late 1990s

The clinics, run by Stone Mountain Health Services, would typically see five to seven cases each year, Ron Carson, who directs Stone Mountain's black lung program told NPR. Now, the clinics see that many in two weeks, he said. And in the past year, they’ve diagnosed 154 cases.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17725
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: Coal
« Reply #969 on: February 11, 2018, 08:19:53 PM »
Clean Coal? Black Lung Epidemic in Appalachia

https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/02/black-lung-makes-lethal-comeback-coal-miner-epidemic-is-the-largest-in-history/

WHAT YEAR IS THIS? —

Doctors floored by epidemic levels of black lung in Appalachian coal miners

The cases are more severe, and miners are dying younger.


This is horrible!  I could only think it might be the result of older miners with lifelong exposure, but no.  From your article:

Quote
In the study, co-authored by Carson, researchers also noted that the disease is more severe than in the past. Many of those diagnosed had worked in the mines for less than 20 years yet had severe, rapidly progressing disease. “Miners are dying at a much younger age,” Carson said.

According to an investigation by NPR, the skyrocketing case numbers and increasing disease severity may be due to longer shifts and mining thinner strips of coal, which can create more dust.

The number of mining deaths due to trauma has doubled, as well.  Most victims were young and inexperienced.
The 2017 death toll was the highest since 2014—when there were roughly 60,000 more miners at work in America.
http://www.newsweek.com/coal-miners-safety-health-trump-788576

Of course, Trump’s pick for Mine Safety regulator is a former coal executive—with a history of safety problems:
https://www.propublica.org/article/trumps-mine-safety-nominee-ran-coal-firm-cited-for-illegal-employment-practices
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17725
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: Coal
« Reply #970 on: February 12, 2018, 02:08:28 PM »
U.S.:  Power Plants' Coal Ash Reports Show Toxins Leaking into Groundwater
Utilities with ash ponds were required to complete water monitoring this year. Of the first 14 to file reports, 9 had 'significant increases' of toxic substances.
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/07022018/coal-ash-power-plant-toxic-pollution-groundwater-data-epa-monitoring
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sleepy

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1202
  • Retired, again...
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #971 on: February 12, 2018, 03:15:00 PM »
WHAT YEAR IS THIS? —
We don't have coal mines but we do have silicosis and similar work related lung diseases, primarily from mining.
http://da.se/2015/12/stendammet-skordar-nya-offer/
Quote
Sven Johansson's case became an alarm clock. The Work Environment Authority began to inspect the stone industry in southern Sweden. More silicone cases were found due to negligence with protection and measurements. For a long time, it was thought that the disease was extinct. Knowledge in both industry and healthcare was therefore lost. The last radiologist who was able to recognize silicosis was just retiring.
And:
http://da.se/2015/12/dodsfarorna-som-glomts-bort/
Quote
Dagens Arbete, in cooperation with the Medical Journal, has investigated how well Swedish physicians can track diseases to patients' jobs. The answer is: not well at all. Few doctors even ask why.

- Dusty working conditions cause diseases on the lungs. Yet everything is blamed on the cigarettes, says specialist physician Jonas Brisman.

Pulmonary diseases are a new-age occupational health problem. For example, around 100,000 Swedes have had COPD (Chronic Obstructive Disease) because of their jobs.
And:
http://www.lakartidningen.se/Klinik-och-vetenskap/Originalstudie/2015/11/Allvarlig-silikos-finns-annu-i-Sverige/

It's more or less the same companies behind a lot of those cases, who has (for the last two years) spent over 100 million (tax payers) SEK to investigate “fossil-free" steel plants.
But it's nice that they at least try to provide hopes for carbon free emissions in 2045...
Omnia mirari, etiam tritissima.
-
Science is a jealous mistress and takes little account of a man's feelings.

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8653
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3377
  • Likes Given: 25
Re: Coal
« Reply #972 on: February 12, 2018, 03:21:08 PM »
Sit at a cafe on a busy London district and - inhale.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 18763
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2028
  • Likes Given: 255
Re: Coal
« Reply #973 on: February 18, 2018, 04:37:43 PM »
It looks like the happy talk about the rapid decline of US coal, may be greatly exaggerated:

Ottmar Edenhofer et al. (2018), "Reports of coal's terminal decline may be exaggerated", Environmental Research Letters, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaa3a2

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aaa3a2/meta

Abstract: "We estimate the cumulative future emissions expected to be released by coal power plants that are currently under construction, announced, or planned. Even though coal consumption has recently declined and plans to build new coal-fired capacities have been shelved, constructing all these planned coal-fired power plants would endanger national and international climate targets. Plans to build new coal-fired power capacity would likely undermine the credibility of some countries' (Intended) Nationally Determined Contributions submitted to the UNFCCC. If all the coal-fired power plants that are currently planned were built, the carbon budget for reaching the 2 °C temperature target would nearly be depleted. Propositions about 'coal's terminal decline' may thereby be premature. The phase-out of coal requires dedicated and well-designed policies. We discuss the political economy of policy options that could avoid a continued build-up of coal-fired power plants."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Shared Humanity

  • Guest
Re: Coal
« Reply #974 on: February 18, 2018, 05:45:40 PM »
With regards to coal fired electricity, the capital investment of a single plant represents a nearly certain amount of coal consumption and resultant CO2 emissions for likely 30 years. In the system of capitalism, any decision to shutter a plant after a very short period of time is fiscally disastrous for the company that would make such a decision. This is true for any fixed investment.

The capacity-weighted average age of operating coal facilities in the U.S. is 39 years.

In 2012 in Chicago, much was made of the shuttering of the last two coal fired plants. One plant was 89 years old. The other was 111 years old. I am not making this up!!!

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-crawford-fisk-sites-1130-biz-20141126-story.html

I have said this before and I will say this again. The decisions we need to make regarding CO2 emissions (the complete cessation within a couple of decades) will need to occur completely outside the system of capitalism. Relying on market forces will seal our doom.

"So what makes you the expert?" is a legitimate response to my statement. I don't like doing this but I feel it is necessary. I am a business professional with an economics degree and MBA from the University of Chicago. I've spent my entire career evaluating and making recommendations on long term capital investments. Companies go out of business when they get these decisions wrong and there is a great deal of resistance from within a company, resulting in decisions to weather extended fiscal nightmares due to changing economics because of this.

What do I mean by this? The companies that invested heavily in shale oil and tar sands continue to produce oil at a rapidly increasing rate, despite the fact they are literally throw money into a deep dark whole. Failure to do this would result in certain bankruptcy. They are desperately hoping to hang on till the next spike in oil prices.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2018, 05:59:14 PM by Shared Humanity »

Shared Humanity

  • Guest
Re: Coal
« Reply #975 on: February 18, 2018, 06:04:58 PM »
But, but, but, we are rapidly transitioning to renewables! The markets are working and this rapid transition is only accelerating and the dramatic drop in coal demand is causing mines to be shuttered, forcing coal companies into bankruptcy. These very same trends make the existing coal fired plants even more profitable and market decisions are driven entirely by the profit making potential of such decisions.

Those two ancient coal fired plants in Chicago were not closed due to economics. They were closed due to unrelenting political pressure (2 decades worth) from the communities surrounding them.

Alexander555

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1209
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 119
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: Coal
« Reply #976 on: February 18, 2018, 06:21:21 PM »
The decisions we need to make regarding CO2 emissions (the complete cessation within a couple of decades) will need to occur completely outside the system of capitalism. Relying on market forces will seal our doom.


The strange thing is that this is also not correct. But i think i understand the idea. The problem is, how far are we still a market ? The world has become a giant money printing machine. That means there is not a real market anymore. If you look at that oil price, there was almost no difference in demand when the price was above 100 usd or below 50 usd. Because they print whatever it takes. That means there will always be enough people to pay the price. And that we have the risk to hit the wall at full speed. In a market you dont have money printing, that's when your market stops beinig a market. Capitalism is maybe not good, but the rotten part sits in that financial sector . And now the world turnend into state controled communism. And that's probably far worse. Now it's a swamp. A globalist swamp.

mitch

  • New ice
  • Posts: 99
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #977 on: February 18, 2018, 06:22:46 PM »
I disagree that the 2 Chicago coal plants were closed solely by political pressure.  If they lasted through the 80's, they had to be significantly cheaper to run than replacing them.  Now, not so much. 

I do agree that political pressure made the job easier.  The least cronyist of the political pressures that can be applied would be to have a reasonable carbon tax. And, we could use part of  the revenues to repair infrastructure. 

Shared Humanity

  • Guest
Re: Coal
« Reply #978 on: February 18, 2018, 07:04:25 PM »
A carbon tax would work but, in order to have it cause us to cease CO2 emissions in the next 2 decades, a reasonable tax won't do. It would have to be so draconian as to render our current carbon based infrastructure immediately and permanently unprofitable. It would need to be permanently unprofitable as a long term but uncertain profit picture does not do the trick. Keep in mind, these companies that have invested in shale oil and tar sands are shoving billions of dollars into a dark hole. They are doing this, not because they like losing money. They are doing this because they are anticipating profits in the future.

So lets look at the decision to enact a worldwide draconian carbon tax. This is not an economic decision. This is a political decision and thus is outside of the market and not a decision that capitalism nor its movers and shakers will support.

As regards the bankruptcy of energy companies, often touted as signalling the impending death of the carbon based energy industry. Companies going bankrupt, even the largest energy companies on the planet does nothing to the underlying asset. These assets will get scooped up for pennies on the dollar and new entities, no longer saddled with the debt that the now bankrupt companies were saddled with, will continue production and at a much lower break even point.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2018, 08:56:08 PM by Shared Humanity »

Shared Humanity

  • Guest
Re: Coal
« Reply #979 on: February 18, 2018, 07:10:31 PM »
So as not to be misunderstood, we have, at our disposal, everything we need to make the needed transition, the technology, the manpower and the scientific understanding to make wise choices.

What we lack is the political will.

And now that I have totally demoralized myself, I am off to run errands.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17725
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: Coal
« Reply #980 on: February 18, 2018, 09:14:25 PM »
With regards to coal fired electricity, the capital investment of a single plant represents a nearly certain amount of coal consumption and resultant CO2 emissions for likely 30 years. In the system of capitalism, any decision to shutter a plant after a very short period of time is fiscally disastrous for the company that would make such a decision. This is true for any fixed investment.

...

And yet, it is possible for a country to look beyond the obvious capitalistic implications:

Quote
Dutch government:  We're stopping coal.  You say you just recently built a coal plant?  Tough luck!
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,347.msg131157.html#msg131157


Plus, because new solar and wind are increasingly cheaper than existing coal plants, utilities are shuttering coal plants and going with the cheaper options.  Who’d’a thunk it? ;)
« Last Edit: February 18, 2018, 09:19:36 PM by Sigmetnow »
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Shared Humanity

  • Guest
Re: Coal
« Reply #981 on: February 18, 2018, 10:01:21 PM »
And the Dutch should be commended for doing so and it highlights the political nature of such a decision. I'd be curious to know if they purchase any electricity from neighboring countries.

Europe as a whole is far more willing to make the needed decisions.

numerobis

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Coal
« Reply #982 on: February 20, 2018, 11:43:05 PM »
Even with cheap coal and a nearly-free plant bought from some bankrupt entity, you need to pay the workers, the transportation fuel, and the spare parts. Just on that basis, coal plants are struggling against natural gas and renewables today.

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5555
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 753
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #983 on: February 25, 2018, 11:52:49 PM »

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8653
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3377
  • Likes Given: 25
Re: Coal
« Reply #984 on: March 02, 2018, 11:20:26 AM »
Clean Coal - more lies and damned lies. Another carbon capture pipe-dream bites the dust
Second link is from a Market Research Analysis on Southern Company - not a good place for your 401(k)?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/mar/02/clean-coal-kemper-plant-mississippi-problems

Quote
Bosses at world's most ambitious clean coal plant kept problems secret for years
Disclosure regarding the $7.5bn Kemper plant in Mississippi throws further cloud over promise of clean coal energy


Executives at the world’s most ambitious “clean coal” plant knew for years about serious design flaws and budget problems but sought to withhold key information from regulators before their plans collapsed, according to documents obtained by the Guardian......
But thousands of internal documents reviewed by the Guardian and a series of interviews with Kemper staff uncovered evidence that the company had information showing that the project would blow through state-imposed budget limits five years before the company decided to reverse course and become an exclusively gas-fired energy plant....

Kemper’s failure could be a serious setback for global climate policy and plans to reach the Paris climate targets. International climate agreements rely heavily on developing practical carbon capture technologies that have so far largely proved elusive......

Kemper, which received roughly $400m from taxpayers, managed to produce electricity from some of its clean coal equipment for “over 100 hours”, or roughly five days last June, before construction was shuttered for good amid further budget blowouts.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4151561-southern-companys-complete-commitment-completing-plant-vogtle

Quote
Southern Company's Complete Commitment To Completing Plant Vogtle

Summary
- Despite losses incurred on its gasification project, Southern Company is fully committed to completing its nuclear construction project as demonstrated in their Fourth Quarter 2017 Earnings Report.
- The financial impact of the company's past and future big bets will drive the company’s direction for the next 5 years.
- Investors who do not share the company's faith in nuclear power should consider the costs and invest in utilities that are more aggressively pursuing renewable energy and grid modernization.

For the full year, the company’s 2017 earnings came in at $0.84 per share compared to $2.57 for 2016. Much of that drop reflects a $3.366 billion (-$2.33 per share) loss caused by the failure of the company’s Kemper gasification project in Mississippi.
Southern Company....now believes that nuclear power is the future and the company is fully committed to completing its nuclear construction project at any cost.

« Last Edit: March 02, 2018, 11:30:31 AM by gerontocrat »
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17725
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: Coal
« Reply #985 on: March 06, 2018, 08:48:45 PM »
Reality sets in for the coal industry: Trump is powerless to save it
Coal plants now shutting down faster under Trump than Obama.
Quote
President Trump campaigned on a pledge to end the supposed “war on coal” that he claimed President Obama had been waging. But the reality is that more coal capacity was retired in the first 45 days of 2018 than in each of the first three years of the Obama administration.

In fact, Bloomberg New Energy Finance reported last week in its 2018 Sustainable Energy in America Factbook that by the end of last year, coal plant owners “had announced 12.5GW of planned retirements for 2018, foreshadowing the largest year for coal decommissioning since the 15GW of retirements in 2015.” ...
https://thinkprogress.org/coal-plants-now-shutting-down-faster-under-trump-than-obama-4da9d4554ec0/

Image: COAL PLANT RETIREMENTS AND ANNOUNCED RETIREMENTS AS OF MID-FEBRUARY. CREDIT: SIERRA CLUB.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17725
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: Coal
« Reply #986 on: March 09, 2018, 09:21:56 PM »
Volkswagen will stop burning coal to build cars
Quote
Europe's biggest automaker has been burning the dirty fuel to power its giant assembly plant in Wolfsburg, Germany. It said Thursday that would end.

Volkswagen (VLKAF) will invest €400 million ($494 million) to modernize two power stations in the factory complex, converting them from hard coal to natural gas.

The two refurbished plants, which also supply heat to the city of Wolfsburg, should be using the new source of fuel by 2021 and 2022, it said.

"The Volkswagen Group ... must make its contribution to combating climate change and improving air quality," CEO Matthias Mueller said in a statement.

The company is trying to position itself as an environmental leader by ramping up its production of electric cars. At same time, it is still dealing with the aftermath of its global diesel scandal. Volkswagen admitted in 2015 it had rigged engines to cheat on emissions tests.

Half of the company's value was wiped out when the scandal broke, and sales of its cars plunged. Volkswagen's business and share price have recovered strongly, but there could be more penalties and lawsuits are still pending.
http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/08/news/volkswagen-coal-wolfsburg-factory/index.html
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

numerobis

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Coal
« Reply #987 on: March 10, 2018, 02:14:18 AM »
It’s 2018 and they’re bravely switching to *gas* to save the climate? That’s a bit of a reach.

zheega

  • New ice
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #988 on: March 10, 2018, 03:11:56 AM »
It’s 2018 and they’re bravely switching to *gas* to save the climate? That’s a bit of a reach.
Hey, they're the company that improved their sales more than any other company after the Dieselgate scandal. They were also the most responsible for the Dieselgate scandal, of course. What do they care?

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17725
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: Coal
« Reply #989 on: March 11, 2018, 01:00:13 PM »
Analysis: UK carbon emissions in 2017 fell to levels last seen in 1890
Quote
Carbon Brief analysis shows the UK’s CO2 emissions from fossil fuels fell by 2.6% in 2017, driven by a 19% decline in coal use.

This follows on the heels of a larger 5.8% drop in CO2 in 2016, which saw a record 52% drop in coal use. The UK’s total CO2 emissions are currently 38% below 1990 levels and are now as low as emissions were back in 1890 – the year the Forth Bridge opened in Scotland and Oscar Wilde’s The Picture of Dorian Gray was published. ...
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-uk-carbon-emissions-in-2017-fell-to-levels-last-seen-in-1890
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17725
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: Coal
« Reply #990 on: March 12, 2018, 08:57:41 PM »
”France only produces around 1 per cent of its energy from coal-fired stations, but the commitment is a signal that the country is determined to lead on climate issues.”

France to shut all coal-fired power stations by 2021, Macron declares
Quote
The 2021 goal sets a more aggressive target than the timeline advanced by Mr Macron’s predecessor, Francois Hollande, who sought to shut down the country’s coal-powered plants by 2023. ...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/france-coal-power-station-emmanuel-macron-davos-shut-2021-a8176796.html
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17725
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: Coal
« Reply #991 on: March 20, 2018, 07:10:37 PM »
A former coal baron who just finished a one-year sentence in federal prison for ignoring federal mine safety regulations resulting in the worst coal mining disaster in decades... is a leading candidate for the Republican West Virginia Senate primary.  Republicans are afraid he’ll win.

GOP fear next ‘election fiasco’ with ex-con coal baron’s soaring popularity
https://thinkprogress.org/national-republicans-worried-about-don-blankenship-2634f9c57817/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17725
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: Coal
« Reply #992 on: March 22, 2018, 04:15:24 PM »
U.S.:  Surprise!  Getting Dem. votes in coal country.

U.S. miners' union to endorse two more Democrats in coal country
Quote
The union sees Ojeda and Manchin as supportive of major issues facing coal miners, particularly efforts to preserve their pensions, the sources said. In addition, neither candidate has fully embraced the Democratic Party’s push for climate regulation, a sticking point for miners.

Trump’s White House win in 2016 was due in part to his promise to revive the ailing coal industry, which has lost more than 40 percent of its work force in less than a decade, by rolling back environmental regulation. While his administration has chipped away at regulations, the coal sector remains in the doldrums, under pressure from cheaper and cleaner natural gas, more than a year into Trump’s presidency. ...
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-coal-endorsements-exclus/exclusive-u-s-miners-union-to-endorse-two-more-democrats-in-coal-country-idUSKBN1GY1YM
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5555
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 753
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #993 on: March 22, 2018, 08:16:35 PM »
Coal fleet in USA decreasing:

“I think what is happening is that operators are running their coal plants until they need major capital expenditures (capex), and then they are shutting them down.”

"Eventually, the remaining plants may reach the point where they're unable to earn sufficient margin to justify ongoing maintenance and will effectively be run to failure, ... "

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/a-complicated-calculus-keeps-the-remaining-coal-fleet-alive/519076/

sidd

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17725
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: Coal
« Reply #994 on: March 26, 2018, 10:07:42 PM »
Half of All U.S. Coal Plants Would Lose Money Without Regulation
- Many coal plants kept open to ensure grid reliabilty: BNEF
- ‘Plants persist even when they cost more to run than replace’
Quote
It’s long been clear that U.S. coal plants are struggling. A study released Monday shows how much -- concluding that barely half earned enough revenue last year to cover their operating expenses.

Power grids may face “massive” upheaval as more uneconomic plants close, according to the report by Bloomberg New Energy Finance. The problem is particularly bad in Florida, Georgia and elsewhere in the Southeast, where the distance from major coal mines drives up prices. The study examined the monthly economic performance of every U.S. coal plant in operation since 2012.

Still, many coal plants manage to shield themselves from economics. About 95 percent of those with operating expenses exceeding revenue operate in regions where regulators set rates, the study found. Instead of allowing market forces to determine their fate, regulators and utilities often keep struggling plants open to ensure stability on their grids.

“We find ourselves awestruck by the resilience of U.S. coal,” wrote William Nelson and Sophia Liu, the report’s authors. “Plants persist even when they cost more to run than replace.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-26/half-of-all-u-s-coal-plants-would-lose-money-without-regulation
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Shared Humanity

  • Guest
Re: Coal
« Reply #995 on: March 27, 2018, 12:11:20 AM »
Coal fleet in USA decreasing:

“I think what is happening is that operators are running their coal plants until they need major capital expenditures (capex), and then they are shutting them down.”

"Eventually, the remaining plants may reach the point where they're unable to earn sufficient margin to justify ongoing maintenance and will effectively be run to failure, ... "

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/a-complicated-calculus-keeps-the-remaining-coal-fleet-alive/519076/

sidd

I am certain you are correct.

numerobis

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Coal
« Reply #996 on: March 27, 2018, 03:43:31 AM »
Nice analysis from BNEF. I'm sure the Sierra Club is about to ready some lawsuits!

BenB

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 283
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: Coal
« Reply #997 on: March 27, 2018, 10:43:00 AM »
Even Duke, which has been a laggard in adopting renewables, plans to massively increase renewables while cutting coal in half by 2030. However, natural gas will also play a key role in replacing coal, while existing nuclear plants will keep operating as long as possible:

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/duke-issues-climate-report-charts-path-to-reduce-coal-use-by-2030/519779/

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17725
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 829
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: Coal
« Reply #998 on: March 31, 2018, 03:40:30 PM »
Hazard, Kentucky:  After the coal jobs disappear.

This Kentucky coal town is fighting for survival long after the war on coal is over
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/29/the-kentucky-coal-town-fighting-to-survive-after-coal-mining-closings.html
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5555
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 753
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Coal
« Reply #999 on: April 01, 2018, 10:02:33 PM »
Sons of bitches trying to squirm out of black lung medical costs: Decertify everybody but coal company doctors from diagnoses:

"The new law requires that only pulmonologists — doctors who specialize in the lungs and respiratory system — assess diagnostic black lung X-rays when state black lung claims are filed."

"Just six pulmonologists in Kentucky have the federal certification to read black lung X-rays and four of them routinely are hired by coal companies or their insurers ..."

https://www.npr.org/2018/03/31/598484688/kentucky-lawmakers-limit-black-lung-claims-reviews-despite-epidemic

I knew a guy who was given the runaround till he died of black lung.

sidd