Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Coal  (Read 186209 times)

sidd

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1818
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #850 on: September 02, 2017, 07:01:47 AM »
rampig efficiency will kill coal faster. Can spin up cold natgas turbine in minutes, coal fired boiler takes hours

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 570
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #851 on: September 15, 2017, 05:20:26 AM »
China’s thermal coal market may remain buoyant on multi factors

More news from China that confirms a significant jump in coal usage this year, and therefore most probably a jump in China's CO2 emissions.

"It is true that hot weather and lower-than-expected hydro output, partly for the control of floods, pushed up demand for coal-fired electricity in the past months. But, it is more persuasive that stronger power demand from the industrial sector is the major driver for sustained solid growth in coal demand. And, this is expected to underpin thermal coal demand continuously in the months ahead, after the end of the hot summer ... Daily coal consumption averaged 721,000 tonnes at China’s six major coastal utilities in July, up 10.5% from a year ago; while that reached 798,000 tonnes over August 1-18, rising 13.2% from the year prior, both far more than expected."

http://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/chinas-thermal-coal-market-may-remain-buoyant-on-multi-factors/




gerontocrat

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 793
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #852 on: September 27, 2017, 01:38:06 PM »
The Aussie Government is following the Trump Presidency game plan.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/27/25bn-on-an-unnecessary-coal-fired-power-station-thats-good-old-pork-barrelling

$2.5bn on a coal-fired power station? That's good old pork barrelling

"The Queensland Liberal-National party (LNP) are promising that if they are elected to government they’ll build a new coal power station in northern Queensland. And just this week the prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, announced that if Queenslanders elected the LNP at the next state election, all Australian taxpayers would help fund it.

It’s important to note that this would involve a serious amount of taxpayers’ money, because banks and power companies have made it clear they aren’t remotely interested in funding such a plant."
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9823
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #853 on: September 30, 2017, 05:08:31 PM »
Washington state deals blow to plan for coal export terminal
OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) — A company that wants to build and operate a large terminal to export coal from the western U.S. to Asia was denied a key permit by Washington state on Tuesday because of environmental concerns.

The Department of Ecology rejected a water quality permit that Millennium Bulk Terminals sought because the proposed facility near the city of Longview would have caused “significant and unavoidable harm” to the environment. The department cited effects to air quality, noise pollution and tribal resources, among others. ...
https://www.apnews.com/b7d0edb148d84d85baa666262ea572e7/Washington-state-deals-blow-to-plan-for-coal-export-terminal
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9823
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #854 on: October 04, 2017, 09:59:14 PM »
Explosion today at a coal gasification plant in Tennessee. :o
The cause was described as "a process upset in the coal gasification area."  ::)

No serious injuries reported, but local roads were closed, and nearby residents were instructed to Shelter in Place due to the possibility of dangerous fumes.

Short clip of raw video of the explosion:  https://mobile.twitter.com/6News/status/915608834781192193

News blogs: http://www.timesnews.net/Local/2017/10/04/Explosion-reported-at-Eastman

http://wjhl.com/2017/10/04/breaking-emergency-crews-respond-to-report-of-explosion-at-eastman/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2355
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #855 on: October 10, 2017, 09:03:49 PM »
Coal production in the United States decreased 33 percent from 2011 to 2016, and according to a recent Columbia University report, just 3.5 percent of that decline was due to environmental regulations. Even Rick Perry’s long-awaited Department of Energy report identifies cheap natural gas as “the biggest contributor” to coal plant closures.

Adding further evidence, an analysis from the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) released Tuesday found that 19 percent of coal-fired power is economically unviable compared to alternative energy sources such as renewables and gas.

“The transition away from coal over the past decade is poised to continue -- thanks primarily to market forces,” said Jeremy Richardson, a senior energy analyst at UCS, lead author of the analysis, as well as the brother and son of West Virginia coal miners. "The fundamental economics around coal-fired electricity have not changed, and rolling back the Clean Power Plan -- which was designed to put the U.S. on a pathway toward reducing carbon emissions responsible for global warming -- isn’t going to change that."

https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/economics-not-regulations-are-waging-a-war-on-coal

Perhaps Short Finger Donnie's stomping on the Clean Power Plan won't have much impact on closing coal plants.  As the price of wind and solar continue to fall more of the 61% now viable will join the present 21% which are not economically viable.  18% of existing US coal plants are scheduled for closure or conversion to NG.

Hopefully Donnie doesn't manage to get subsidies for coal.  That could keep some plants open longer than otherwise.

Democrats need to regain control of one house of Congress next fall so that they can block harmful legislation.  When we get a sane person in the White House they can undo Donnie's proclamations.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9823
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #856 on: October 11, 2017, 04:28:21 PM »
Dutch government:  We're stopping coal.  You say you just recently built a coal plant?  Tough luck!

Netherlands to close all coal plants by 2030
Announcement today by Dutch government seen as progressive step for renewables in the country. New legislation requires all coal-fired generation plants to be idled by 2030 and to meet more stringent emissions limits from 2021.
The Dutch government this week sent a positive message to the country’s renewable energy sector with the introduction of legislation that will see all coal-fired generation plants close by 2030.

The news will come as a blow to three utilities that as recently as 2015 commissioned three coal plants in the Netherlands – the newest in Europe – but will be welcomed by clean energy advocates across Europe.

Engie, RWE and Uniper each invested heavily in Dutch coal plants completed in 2015, but now all three utilities will likely suffer massive losses on the write downs made on these coal plants, said Gerard Wynn, analyst at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA). ...
https://www.pv-magazine.com/2017/10/11/netherlands-to-close-all-coal-plants-by-2030/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9823
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #857 on: October 12, 2017, 02:09:45 AM »
Armed With NASA Data, South Korea Confronts Its Choking Smog
The government is taking some action now. South Korean President Moon Jae-in is overseeing a fine dust task force and is shuttering 10 of the country's oldest and most polluting coal plants. The city of Seoul issues fine dust alerts over mobile phones to better inform residents of dangerous days.
http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/10/10/552264719/armed-with-nasa-data-south-korea-confronts-its-choking-smog
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

numerobis

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 381
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #858 on: October 12, 2017, 03:10:39 AM »
Gutting the clean power plan doesn’t halt the transition, but it’s likely to slow it down. And it’s going too slowly already.

sidd

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1818
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #859 on: October 12, 2017, 09:56:36 PM »
25% of US coal power plants headed for closure or conversion, anothe 17% uneconomic


http://www.utilitydive.com/news/25-of-remaining-us-coal-fleet-headed-for-retirement-or-conversion-new-rep/506997/



sidd

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1818
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #860 on: October 17, 2017, 12:27:05 AM »
Another couple gigawatt of coal bites the dust:

"The utility will retire its Sandow Power Plan and Big Brown Power Plant in Central Texas, taking a combined nameplate capacity of roughly 2,300 MW offline. "

http://www.utilitydive.com/news/luminant-to-close-2-more-texas-coal-plants-despite-trump-support/507247/

sidd

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9823
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #861 on: October 24, 2017, 02:58:45 PM »
How can the government prop up the ailing coal and nuclear industries?  1) Find something only those two can do, even if it is not really necessary.  2) Pay them extra for it.

As for [Michael] Bloomberg’s opinion of the plan, he did not make his views a secret. “The Trump administration wants taxpayers to pay more for an earlier death,” he told journalists Wednesday. “This is one of the worst ideas Washington has ever come up with, which is saying a lot.”

Tesla Calls on U.S. to Drop Perry’s Plan to Rescue Nukes, Coal
(Image below.)
Elon Musk’s Tesla Inc. waded into an intensifying debate on Monday over whether U.S. coal and nuclear power plants should be paid for their ability to supply around-the-clock power.

U.S. Energy Secretary Rick Perry laid out a plan last month to create special payments for plants capable of stockpiling 90 days’ worth of fuel at their sites. In a filing made with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Monday, Tesla urged the agency to dismiss Perry’s proposal, saying it “completely excludes the benefits of energy storage and distributed energy resources.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2017-10-24/tesla-calls-on-u-s-to-drop-perry-s-plan-to-rescue-nukes-coal

Largest U.S. Grid Operator Opposes Perry’s Plan to Save Coal
- PJM Interconnection CEO calls pricing proposal ‘unworkable’
Grid operators respond to rule as comment deadline closes.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-23/largest-u-s-grid-operator-opposes-perry-s-plan-to-save-coal

Rick Perry Wants to Bail Out the Coal Industry
- Meanwhile, coal’s enemies are counting on the free market.
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/10/rick-perrys-plan-to-bail-out-the-coal-industry/542892
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2355
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #862 on: October 25, 2017, 09:45:47 PM »
Italy will close all coal plants by 2025.

US wind operator sues company for coal dust damage: The operator of a 50 MW wind farm in Maryland is suing Alliance Resource Partners (ARP) over damage to the blades on its wind turbines caused by dust pollution from a 65 metre high coal waste dump. Gestamp Wind North America alleges the coal dust has done extensive damage to the blades on nine turbines and caused the air-conditioning unit on one to fail. Gestamp argues it has incurred US$219,000 in losses since 2011 and estimates ongoing losses of US$103,000 a year. It wants ARP to be fined US$75,000 on each count of trespass, negligence and nuisance. (Courthouse News, Gestamp Wind North America)

Renewables undermine Siemens: Thousands of jobs are likely to be cut from the Power and Gas division of Siemens, a global engineering and services company, as demand for coal and gas turbines declines due to the rapid growth of renewables. In August, the company reported the Power and Gas division suffered a 41 per cent fall in orders in the three months to the end of June, attributing the change to “global energy trends”. At the time of the company’s quarterly results Siemens Chief Financial Officer, Ralf Thomas, described the downturn in the fossil fuel turbine sector as a structural shift in the market. (Reuters, Bloomberg)

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #863 on: October 26, 2017, 05:06:51 PM »

Renewables undermine Siemens: Thousands of jobs are likely to be cut from the Power and Gas division of Siemens, a global engineering and services company, as demand for coal and gas turbines declines due to the rapid growth of renewables. In August, the company reported the Power and Gas division suffered a 41 per cent fall in orders in the three months to the end of June, attributing the change to “global energy trends”. At the time of the company’s quarterly results Siemens Chief Financial Officer, Ralf Thomas, described the downturn in the fossil fuel turbine sector as a structural shift in the market. (Reuters, Bloomberg)

This is, quite simply, the most encouraging news I have read in months. The simple fact is that civilization is locked into certain energy consumption patterns due to the investment horizon of installed generation facilities. Dropping sales of these kinds of capital equipment does suggest a structural and, likely, irreversible shift in electricity generation and portends very favorable reductions of CO2 emissions that should be clearly evident within 30 years.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2353
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #864 on: October 26, 2017, 05:17:45 PM »

Renewables undermine Siemens: Thousands of jobs are likely to be cut from the Power and Gas division of Siemens, a global engineering and services company, as demand for coal and gas turbines declines due to the rapid growth of renewables. In August, the company reported the Power and Gas division suffered a 41 per cent fall in orders in the three months to the end of June, attributing the change to “global energy trends”. At the time of the company’s quarterly results Siemens Chief Financial Officer, Ralf Thomas, described the downturn in the fossil fuel turbine sector as a structural shift in the market. (Reuters, Bloomberg)

This is, quite simply, the most encouraging news I have read in months. The simple fact is that civilization is locked into certain energy consumption patterns due to the investment horizon of installed generation facilities. Dropping sales of these kinds of capital equipment does suggest a structural and, likely, irreversible shift in electricity generation and portends very favorable reductions of CO2 emissions that should be clearly evident within 30 years.
Ouch!
Either that or a slowdown in the coal to gas transition. ???


Terry

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2355
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #865 on: October 26, 2017, 06:46:36 PM »

Renewables undermine Siemens: Thousands of jobs are likely to be cut from the Power and Gas division of Siemens, a global engineering and services company, as demand for coal and gas turbines declines due to the rapid growth of renewables. In August, the company reported the Power and Gas division suffered a 41 per cent fall in orders in the three months to the end of June, attributing the change to “global energy trends”. At the time of the company’s quarterly results Siemens Chief Financial Officer, Ralf Thomas, described the downturn in the fossil fuel turbine sector as a structural shift in the market. (Reuters, Bloomberg)



This is, quite simply, the most encouraging news I have read in months. The simple fact is that civilization is locked into certain energy consumption patterns due to the investment horizon of installed generation facilities. Dropping sales of these kinds of capital equipment does suggest a structural and, likely, irreversible shift in electricity generation and portends very favorable reductions of CO2 emissions that should be clearly evident within 30 years.

Well, we don't know if other companies might have grabbed Siemens' gas business which is a possibility, but I suspect not.

Adding gas capacity doesn't bother me if it means that coal plants are closing.  We do not yet have affordable storage, especially affordable long term storage.  Bringing a new gas plant online means that a coal plant can be abandoned.  The gas plant can run when the Sun isn't shining and wind is not blowing. 

As short term storage becomes cheaper we can add more which will allow us to install more wind and solar and not have to curtail output.  More hours when wind and solar supply all our need and hours when our needs come from stored wind and solar.  Every bit of added wind, solar and storage means less gas burned.  And during longer periods when wind and solar are in low supply the storage will allow more efficient use of the gas plants, saving even more fuel. 

Less and less CO2 with each wind, solar, or storage addition.  But the gas plant is there to assure 24/365 grid supply.  We can tolerate a few hours a year of gas plant operation. Even run those few hours using biogas.

Look at it as a transition.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9823
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #866 on: October 26, 2017, 11:08:28 PM »
Furtherance of Reply #861 above....

Sec. Of Energy Rick Perry struggles to defend his federal energy rule before Congress
When asked for evidence and analyses that went into his proposed rule, Perry couldn't offer any.
During a hearing before the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Energy Subcommittee on Thursday, Secretary of Energy Rick Perry tried to defend his decision to propose a new federal rule that would essentially boost revenue for coal and nuclear power plants as “starting a conversation.”

The rule calls for subsidies for power plants that keep at least 90 days worth of fuel stored on site — something the Columbia Center on Global Energy Policy has found would “unarguably increase costs to consumers” by propping up power plants that aren’t economically viable at consumer expense.

Proponents of coal and nuclear energy often argue that these sources are much cheaper than alternatives like wind and solar, though Perry could not definitively say the Department of Energy had conducted any analyses that measured the proposed rule’s potential impact on consumers. ...
https://thinkprogress.org/rick-perry-struggles-to-defend-rule-89aeee3b68c0/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

sidd

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1818
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #867 on: October 26, 2017, 11:33:44 PM »
Perry may lose on this one. At any rate it will be a tough fight for him.

PJM came out against it. FERC isn't too happy either. CAISO is dead against. ERCOT is wishy washy. MISO backs Perry.

sidd

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2353
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #868 on: October 26, 2017, 11:47:38 PM »
Furtherance of Reply #861 above....

Sec. Of Energy Rick Perry struggles to defend his federal energy rule before Congress
When asked for evidence and analyses that went into his proposed rule, Perry couldn't offer any.
During a hearing before the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Energy Subcommittee on Thursday, Secretary of Energy Rick Perry tried to defend his decision to propose a new federal rule that would essentially boost revenue for coal and nuclear power plants as “starting a conversation.”

The rule calls for subsidies for power plants that keep at least 90 days worth of fuel stored on site — something the Columbia Center on Global Energy Policy has found would “unarguably increase costs to consumers” by propping up power plants that aren’t economically viable at consumer expense.

Proponents of coal and nuclear energy often argue that these sources are much cheaper than alternatives like wind and solar, though Perry could not definitively say the Department of Energy had conducted any analyses that measured the proposed rule’s potential impact on consumers. ...
https://thinkprogress.org/rick-perry-struggles-to-defend-rule-89aeee3b68c0/


Would this be akin to offering a subsidy to auto manufacturers who agreed to purchase and store 90 days worth of steel on their premises? IIRC a few of them were doing so well that they were storing close to 90 days worth of unsold inventory on their lots quite recently.  :)


Perhaps we could reopen the Aliso Canyon storage facility in California, Storing large amounts of coal can also have explosive repercussions.
Remember the Maine!  :P


Terry

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #869 on: October 28, 2017, 11:01:26 PM »
I could see this only if there were a real threat of supply disruption. Aren't we oil and natural gas self sufficient now?

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2353
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #870 on: October 28, 2017, 11:18:15 PM »
I could see this only if there were a real threat of supply disruption. Aren't we oil and natural gas self sufficient exporters now?
Terry  :)

BenB

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 88
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #871 on: October 29, 2017, 09:41:42 AM »
I could see this only if there were a real threat of supply disruption. Aren't we oil and natural gas self sufficient exporters now?
Terry  :)

"We" is the US here, right? In 2016 the US imported around 4.9 million barrels of petroleum per day (net). It will be a bit lower in 2017, but still a big proportion of domestic consumption. Natural gas imports are lower as a proportion of overall supply, but still not insignificant.

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=oil_imports

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #872 on: October 29, 2017, 04:20:51 PM »
I could see this only if there were a real threat of supply disruption. Aren't we oil and natural gas self sufficient exporters now?
Terry  :)

"We" is the US here, right? In 2016 the US imported around 4.9 million barrels of petroleum per day (net). It will be a bit lower in 2017, but still a big proportion of domestic consumption. Natural gas imports are lower as a proportion of overall supply, but still not insignificant.

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=oil_imports

Thanks, nice to know.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2353
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #873 on: October 29, 2017, 08:32:47 PM »
I could see this only if there were a real threat of supply disruption. Aren't we oil and natural gas self sufficient exporters now?
Terry  :)

"We" is the US here, right? In 2016 the US imported around 4.9 million barrels of petroleum per day (net). It will be a bit lower in 2017, but still a big proportion of domestic consumption. Natural gas imports are lower as a proportion of overall supply, but still not insignificant.

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=oil_imports


From your link


The United States is a net exporter of petroleum products, and it also exports some crude oil
Because the United States imports petroleum, it may seem surprising that it also exports petroleum. In 2016, total U.S. petroleum exports averaged about 5.2 MMb/d, which made the United States a net exporter (exports minus imports) of petroleum. The total U.S. petroleum exports includes about 0.5 MMb/d of crude oil, 52% of which went to Canada.[/font]

BenB

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 88
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #874 on: October 29, 2017, 08:47:22 PM »
Terry,

I agree that they haven't presented the information very clearly, but the US is a big net importer of petroleum. It exports 5.2 million barrels, but it imports 10.1 million. Net imports are 4.9 million. All of that information is in the link. In fact, 25% of US petroleum consumption comes from net imports.

So, what does that part you quoted mean? I think they forgot to add a crucial "noncrude" in there. The US is anet exporter of noncrude petroleum products (i.e. everything that isn't crude oil), but it's a much bigger net importer of crude. Hence the overall balance of 4.9 million barrels per day of net imports for all petroleum products - crude and noncrude.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2353
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #875 on: October 29, 2017, 09:20:41 PM »
No problem BenB
 IIRC there is some agreement that allows the US to import oil from Canada, even if Canada needs it domestically, or would prefer to sell it somewhere else, so I considering North American oil as a single entity. I don't recall if Mexico was a party to this pact.


No info on which trade agreement this is a part of, but a few years back every political meeting in Canada seemed to have someone complaining about Canada's loss of sovereignty over this issue.


It's also possible that the Trumpster has unilaterally abrogated whatever treaty had/has linked the two (or three) countries oil distribution systems, it might have been part of NAFTA.


Terry

ghoti

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 622
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #876 on: October 30, 2017, 03:06:15 PM »
IIRC there is some agreement that allows the US to import oil from Canada, even if Canada needs it domestically, or would prefer to sell it somewhere else, so I considering North American oil as a single entity.
I'm almost certain that agreement is NAFTA which the US is threatening to rip up.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2353
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #877 on: October 30, 2017, 04:04:42 PM »
IIRC there is some agreement that allows the US to import oil from Canada, even if Canada needs it domestically, or would prefer to sell it somewhere else, so I considering North American oil as a single entity.
I'm almost certain that agreement is NAFTA which the US is threatening to rip up.
Yes, it could very well be NAFTA.


Slapping 300% tariffs on a trading partners products doesn't do much to strengthen trade relations. Canada didn't turn to tariffs against General Motors when the US bailed that company out.
Perhaps scraping NAFTA could be a step forward?  - modified 11-2 to fix typo
Terry
« Last Edit: November 02, 2017, 08:55:25 AM by TerryM »

sidd

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1818
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #878 on: November 02, 2017, 07:42:31 AM »
Another one bites the dust:

"Armstrong Energy is the first coal company to succumb to bankruptcy since Trump was elected nearly a year ago ... "

http://money.cnn.com/2017/11/01/investing/coal-bankruptcy-kentucky-trump-armstrong/index.html

sidd

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9823
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #879 on: November 04, 2017, 01:59:02 AM »
The Launch Of Europe Beyond Coal
That’s why today, Europe Beyond Coal is launching as a joint effort urging 28 European countries to dramatically accelerate their transition away from coal and toward clean, renewable energy. With the Netherlands, United Kingdom, Finland, France, Italy and Portugal committing to closing their remaining coal plants in the coming decade, Europe Beyond Coal is committed to making this transition to a healthier world as swift as possible.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-launch-of-europe-beyond-coal_us_59fb375ce4b09887ad6f3e17
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9823
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #880 on: November 04, 2017, 09:40:40 PM »
U.S.:  Coal Will Not Bring Appalachia Back to Life, But Tech and Government Jobs Could
https://www.ecowatch.com/coal-jobs-technology-2492852723.html
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #881 on: November 05, 2017, 12:08:23 AM »
The Launch Of Europe Beyond Coal
That’s why today, Europe Beyond Coal is launching as a joint effort urging 28 European countries to dramatically accelerate their transition away from coal and toward clean, renewable energy. With the Netherlands, United Kingdom, Finland, France, Italy and Portugal committing to closing their remaining coal plants in the coming decade, Europe Beyond Coal is committed to making this transition to a healthier world as swift as possible.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-launch-of-europe-beyond-coal_us_59fb375ce4b09887ad6f3e17

Does not surprise me that most are in the former communist block.

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #882 on: November 05, 2017, 12:10:06 AM »
We have got to get this guy out of the White House.

http://crooksandliars.com/2017/11/trump-wants-you-bail-out-big-coal

werther

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 710
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #883 on: November 05, 2017, 12:35:53 AM »
He's not in very different company. Our centre-right government saw into the numbers and concluded that their transition-plans had a definite climate-bonus. Consider that the last government had goals that wouldn't even realize a half of the Paris agreements commitments. This government will get to that half-way commitment. Hurray! Most of their plans are mere illusions.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9823
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #884 on: November 06, 2017, 10:04:32 PM »
“The water itself may be worth more than the coal to the Navajo Nation.”

Navajos See Opportunity in Coal Plant Closure
“It tied us to those jobs and didn’t allow us to diversify.”
Unless someone buys the Navajo Generating Station (NGS), it will go offline in 2019. The Arizona plant is struggling to compete with smaller, more nimble natural gas-fired generators, wind farms and solar arrays. Coal is simply too costly to compete. ...
https://nexusmedianews.com/navajos-see-opportunity-in-coal-plant-closure-b50c407b7636
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2355
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #885 on: November 09, 2017, 12:30:36 PM »
An interesting look at coal's future.



A very large downturn in plants under construction and plants to be built.  Construction starts are down 62%.

Both Germany and the US have a number of coal plants lined up to be closed. 

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #886 on: November 09, 2017, 05:58:34 PM »
This table tells you all you need to know about the future of coal generated electricity in the U.S.

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #887 on: November 09, 2017, 06:12:20 PM »
Great data rich snapshot of U.S. coal industry.

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Existing_U.S._Coal_Plants#Age_comparison_of_coal_plants

The list of plant retirements and conversions (both completed and announced) is quite large.

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #888 on: November 09, 2017, 06:32:51 PM »
Pulled some of those tables into a spreadsheet.

Current U.S. coal generating capacity is 335,839 MW. The industry has closed, converted or announced closures for plants with an aggregate capacity of 75,107 MW. This means that 18.3% of capacity has been closed, converted or planned for closure.

The calculation is not exact due to some of the plants being announced but not yet closed. The error introduced into my simple calculation would result in a higher percent having been retired, converted or announced to be closed.

One thing I know for certain. Businesses do not shut down plants if they are profitable. This fairly rapid rate of closures suggests an industry that is rapidly becoming noncompetitive.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2355
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #889 on: November 09, 2017, 09:32:48 PM »
Some of the closing has been over the cost of improvements needed to meet pollution standards.

Which is another way to say "unaffordable".

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9823
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #890 on: November 11, 2017, 05:01:37 PM »
Rio Tinto!

One of the World's Biggest Miners Is About to Go Coal-Free
Just five years ago it would have been almost unthinkable that one of the world’s biggest mining companies would not dig any coal. It’s now likely to become a reality.

Rio Tinto Group, the world’s second-largest miner, has been steadily backtracking from coal to focus on better assets. It’s now looking for buyers for its remaining coal mines in Australia, and a sale will mark a complete exit from the fuel.
...
Yet Rio’s decision is more to do with its coal mines not being able to compete with its other assets, rather than pressure from climate-change or divestment campaigns. Chief Executive Officer Jean-Sebastien Jacques has argued that even a mining firm as big as his only has so much managerial talent and money, and must focus those on more productive assets. It has also been able to sell coal mines for what it sees as good prices, allowing more cash to be returned to shareholders.
...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-10/one-of-the-world-s-biggest-miners-is-about-to-go-coal-free
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 793
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #891 on: November 14, 2017, 03:40:44 PM »
I could not find the transcript of the official US submission to COP23 on "clean coal" etc. Anybody got the data?

But I did find :-
https://energy.gov/fe/science-innovation/office-clean-coal-and-carbon-managementDOE's Fossil

Office of Clean Coal and Carbon Management
[/b][/size]
Energy R&D advances transformative science and innovative technologies that enable the reliable, efficient, affordable, and environmentally sound use of fossil fuels. Fossil energy sources constitute over 80% of the country’s total energy use, and are important to the nation’s security, economic prosperity, and growth.

and this:-
https://energy.gov/fe/about-us/our-budget
https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/05/f34/DOEFY2018BudgetFactSheet.pdf


and they have not got around to dumping ;-
https://energy.gov/science-innovation/clean-energy  - all about solar, wind etc etc etc.






"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"

wili

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2074
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #892 on: November 16, 2017, 10:14:51 PM »
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/nov/16/political-watershed-as-19-countries-pledge-to-phase-out-coal

“‘Political watershed’ as 19 countries pledge to phase out coal

New alliance launched at Bonn climate talks hopes to signal the end of the dirtiest fossil fuel that kills 800,000 people a year with air pollution”
"A force de chercher de bonnes raisons, on en trouve; on les dit; et après on y tient, non pas tant parce qu'elles sont bonnes que pour ne pas se démentir." Choderlos de Laclos "You struggle to come up with some valid reasons, then cling to them, not because they're good, but just to not back down."

numerobis

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 381
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #893 on: November 16, 2017, 10:44:42 PM »
Notably missing Merkel, who's trying to keep coal as a trading card in talks with the greens.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9823
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #894 on: November 25, 2017, 04:35:02 PM »
Sweden:  A Power Plant Is Burning unusable H&M Clothes Instead of Coal
- Trash burning utility uses discarded clothes as fuel
- Plant’s last coal delivery arrived on Tuesday by boat
https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2017-11-24/burning-h-m-rags-is-new-black-as-swedish-plant-ditches-coal
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9823
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #895 on: November 26, 2017, 02:16:27 PM »
The last closures may be the hardest, politically.

As the lobbying gets louder, coal power stations may not go quietly
Energy companies in Italy and Spain have faced unexpected local opposition to their own plans to shut polluting plants
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/nov/25/coal-power-stations-may-not-go-quietly-lobbying-louder
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

numerobis

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 381
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #896 on: November 26, 2017, 06:32:09 PM »
Are H&M clothes, or wood chips, cleaner burning than coal?

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2355
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #897 on: November 26, 2017, 07:59:50 PM »
The last closures may be the hardest, politically.

As the lobbying gets louder, coal power stations may not go quietly
Energy companies in Italy and Spain have faced unexpected local opposition to their own plans to shut polluting plants
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/nov/25/coal-power-stations-may-not-go-quietly-lobbying-louder

The answer here might be to mothball the plants for a few years.  Keep them functional, just don't bring them online.  If they sit there a few years without being needed then people will have no argument for spending more money on them. 

The money spent to mothball might easily be covered by the health benefits from cleaner air.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2355
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #898 on: November 26, 2017, 08:00:59 PM »
Are H&M clothes, or wood chips, cleaner burning than coal?

The CO2 emitted would be from carbon already above ground.  Not from carbon extracted from underground and added to our problem.

numerobis

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 381
    • View Profile
Re: Coal
« Reply #899 on: November 27, 2017, 02:00:12 PM »
Sure, but the CO2 isn’t what’s killing 800,000 people a year.