History, Politics And Current Affairs

Opinions expressed here are personal views of contributors and do not necessarily represent the companies, organizations or governments they work for. Nor do they necessarily represent those of the Board Administration.
It is currently Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:56 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Clean Coal
PostPosted: Fri Dec 29, 2017 9:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 9:02 am
Posts: 16145
Location: Planet Earth, Milky Way, Universe
americanthinker.com Clean Coal Is Surging
By Richard Zuber


Pouring more cold water over prophecies of coal's terminal decline, the International Energy Agency (IEA) recently published its Coal Report 2017, which shows chatter about the fossil fuel's imminent demise as nothing more than wishful thinking. Far from being the spent resource the green lobby would have the public see, coal is making a forceful comeback. While key markets such as China, India, and the United States show stronger than expected demand, the report also predicts a growing need for coal in the developing world – an undeniable game-changer proving coal's resilience in the future.

The main takeaway from the report is that coal consumption in the developing world is set to increase in the future. This will contribute to a global rise in coal use of around 0.5% every 12 months over the next five years. Far from falling off a cliff, the IEA states that levels of coal use will remain stable for at least the next decade. This reversal of coal's fortunes is fueled in no small part by the Trump administration's efforts to revive America's coal industry. The U.S. economy is surging, a fact that has led to higher demand and the opening of new coal mines.


Even if demand has remained robust in major markets, India is especially significant. The country is a major advocate for clean coal technology and a driving force for the "clean coal alliance." This is a logical consequence of the fact that its coal-fired energy generation will increase by nearly 4% every 12 months in the years to come. Citing the fact that coal is the cheapest fuel to drive India's economic development, chief economic adviser to the Indian government Arvind Subramanian repeatedly insisted that coal will remain the country's primary source of energy over the medium term. In doing so, he laid bare a truth routinely denied by the renewables lobby – namely, that pursuing renewables at all costs is not a universally viable choice.

Luckily for New Delhi, it has a powerful supporter on its side. Donald Trump's promise to restore the American coal industry goes hand in hand with the administration's promotion of clean coal technologies abroad, such as carbon capture. During the United Nations Climate Change Conference in November, Trump climate change adviser George David Banks proposed a clean coal alliance designed to appeal to India and Australia, but which is also slated to include other energy-starved countries in Africa and Southeast Asia.

As was to be expected, the pushback from coal-detractors was swift. Twenty countries including Britain, Canada, and New Zealand joined an alliance committed to the phasing out of coal by 2030. This came on the heels of a World Bank decision to stop financing upstream oil and gas from 2019, after having already ceased funding coal power stations in 2010.

However, while grand gestures such as these may score points with hardheaded environmentalists, they merely attest how far removed from reality these actors are. No amount of politically correct grandstanding or capitulation to environmentalist dogma is going to change the fact that using fossil fuels is the only way for poorer countries to lift themselves out of poverty. And as the IEA calculations show, not only is Washington's and New Delhi's push for clean coal technology timely, but it will ultimately extend coal's lifespan even longer. In fact, Trump's plans for a global clean coal alliance have boosted the prospects of the fuel in developing countries, where growing energy demand simply cannot be met by exceedingly expensive renewables.

Anyone who blindly believes in the fallibility of coal should look to the small African country of Malawi for an example of how reliance on renewable energy has failed the local population. For the past two years, large areas of Malawi have been hit with energy blackouts after water levels at the country's two main hydro plants fell to critically low levels during a severe ongoing drought. The country generates 98% of its power needs through water, and this lopsided dependence is now plunging the people into darkness. The power outages last up to several weeks and are making it impossible for the government to provide services such as the most basic health care. The lack of power has resulted in infants perishing in hospital incubators and most recently killed four children after a blackout rendered their ventilator oxygen machines useless.

The Malawi government has consequently taken the only reasonable decision and turned to building a new coal plant. However, instead of being considered a long-term solution to the country's power woes, the move was harshly criticized for its environmental effects. Again, the critics are overlooking the fact that in countries such as Malawi, the tunnel-visioned pursuit of renewables is causing more damage to society and environment than alternative solutions. The development of clean coal technology such as carbon capture will not only alleviate supply problems, but do so independent of weather conditions.

It is madness that children are dying as a result of insufficient energy supplies when there's affordable and abundant coal to put an end to all this. India, Malawi, and many other countries around the globe are perfect examples illustrating the ongoing importance of coal. And with our scientific progress, clean coal technology is a viable path to secure supply while negating environmental impacts. It's time for a clean coal alliance to put common sense back into our approach to global energy policy, instead of focusing on misguided environmental policies that do nothing but cost lives.


Pouring more cold water over prophecies of coal's terminal decline, the International Energy Agency (IEA) recently published its Coal Report 2017, which shows chatter about the fossil fuel's imminent demise as nothing more than wishful thinking. Far from being the spent resource the green lobby would have the public see, coal is making a forceful comeback. While key markets such as China, India, and the United States show stronger than expected demand, the report also predicts a growing need for coal in the developing world – an undeniable game-changer proving coal's resilience in the future.

The main takeaway from the report is that coal consumption in the developing world is set to increase in the future. This will contribute to a global rise in coal use of around 0.5% every 12 months over the next five years. Far from falling off a cliff, the IEA states that levels of coal use will remain stable for at least the next decade. This reversal of coal's fortunes is fueled in no small part by the Trump administration's efforts to revive America's coal industry. The U.S. economy is surging, a fact that has led to higher demand and the opening of new coal mines.

Even if demand has remained robust in major markets, India is especially significant. The country is a major advocate for clean coal technology and a driving force for the "clean coal alliance." This is a logical consequence of the fact that its coal-fired energy generation will increase by nearly 4% every 12 months in the years to come. Citing the fact that coal is the cheapest fuel to drive India's economic development, chief economic adviser to the Indian government Arvind Subramanian repeatedly insisted that coal will remain the country's primary source of energy over the medium term. In doing so, he laid bare a truth routinely denied by the renewables lobby – namely, that pursuing renewables at all costs is not a universally viable choice.

Luckily for New Delhi, it has a powerful supporter on its side. Donald Trump's promise to restore the American coal industry goes hand in hand with the administration's promotion of clean coal technologies abroad, such as carbon capture. During the United Nations Climate Change Conference in November, Trump climate change adviser George David Banks proposed a clean coal alliance designed to appeal to India and Australia, but which is also slated to include other energy-starved countries in Africa and Southeast Asia.

As was to be expected, the pushback from coal-detractors was swift. Twenty countries including Britain, Canada, and New Zealand joined an alliance committed to the phasing out of coal by 2030. This came on the heels of a World Bank decision to stop financing upstream oil and gas from 2019, after having already ceased funding coal power stations in 2010.

However, while grand gestures such as these may score points with hardheaded environmentalists, they merely attest how far removed from reality these actors are. No amount of politically correct grandstanding or capitulation to environmentalist dogma is going to change the fact that using fossil fuels is the only way for poorer countries to lift themselves out of poverty. And as the IEA calculations show, not only is Washington's and New Delhi's push for clean coal technology timely, but it will ultimately extend coal's lifespan even longer. In fact, Trump's plans for a global clean coal alliance have boosted the prospects of the fuel in developing countries, where growing energy demand simply cannot be met by exceedingly expensive renewables.

Anyone who blindly believes in the fallibility of coal should look to the small African country of Malawi for an example of how reliance on renewable energy has failed the local population. For the past two years, large areas of Malawi have been hit with energy blackouts after water levels at the country's two main hydro plants fell to critically low levels during a severe ongoing drought. The country generates 98% of its power needs through water, and this lopsided dependence is now plunging the people into darkness. The power outages last up to several weeks and are making it impossible for the government to provide services such as the most basic health care. The lack of power has resulted in infants perishing in hospital incubators and most recently killed four children after a blackout rendered their ventilator oxygen machines useless.

The Malawi government has consequently taken the only reasonable decision and turned to building a new coal plant. However, instead of being considered a long-term solution to the country's power woes, the move was harshly criticized for its environmental effects. Again, the critics are overlooking the fact that in countries such as Malawi, the tunnel-visioned pursuit of renewables is causing more damage to society and environment than alternative solutions. The development of clean coal technology such as carbon capture will not only alleviate supply problems, but do so independent of weather conditions.

It is madness that children are dying as a result of insufficient energy supplies when there's affordable and abundant coal to put an end to all this. India, Malawi, and many other countries around the globe are perfect examples illustrating the ongoing importance of coal. And with our scientific progress, clean coal technology is a viable path to secure supply while negating environmental impacts. It's time for a clean coal alliance to put common sense back into our approach to global energy policy, instead of focusing on misguided environmental policies that do nothing but cost lives.

_________________
I am Charlie


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Clean Coal
PostPosted: Fri Dec 29, 2017 11:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:53 pm
Posts: 1651
Location: The People's Republic of Kalifornia
Eric wrote:
Anyone who blindly believes in the fallibility of coal should look to the small African country of Malawi for an example of how reliance on renewable energy has failed the local population. For the past two years, large areas of Malawi have been hit with energy blackouts after water levels at the country's two main hydro plants fell to critically low levels during a severe ongoing drought. The country generates 98% of its power needs through water, and this lopsided dependence is now plunging the people into darkness. The power outages last up to several weeks and are making it impossible for the government to provide services such as the most basic health care. The lack of power has resulted in infants perishing in hospital incubators and most recently killed four children after a blackout rendered their ventilator oxygen machines useless.



The main takeaway is don't have your power grid dependent (98%) dependent on one type of power generation. Regardless if it is Coal, Nuclear, Hydro, Gas etc.

This posting was timely. There was a recent article in the WSJ about the dominance of Gas power for new construction.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/power-plants-bloom-even-as-electricity-prices-wilt-1514457002

From a price-point Gas beats Coal because of the lower price of Natural Gas. Not sure if the author of this article has a specific agenda but Coal plants are not being built in the US because it has come down to economics.

Quote:
Though electricity demand remains stagnant overall, the closing of aging coal plants across the U.S. has left some regions in need of new generating capacity. The PJM grid sits at the top of the list. Nearly 9.3 gigawatts of coal-fired electric generation have been retired in the past three years on the grid, while 8.7 gigawatts of gas-fired capacity have been added in that period. An additional 12.5 gigawatts of gas-fired generation is currently under construction and expected online through 2020.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Clean Coal
PostPosted: Sat Dec 30, 2017 6:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 10:51 am
Posts: 2072
Location: Georgia
brovane wrote:
The main takeaway is don't have your power grid dependent (98%) dependent on one type of power generation. Regardless if it is Coal, Nuclear, Hydro, Gas etc.

This...

I will say that personally I'm not a fan of using combustible fuels for primary power generation. Backup or supplementary is one thing, but IMHO the hydrocarbon fuels are too valuable to use for ordinary electrical generation. Save them for use in portable/vehicle applications, or use them as feedstock for durable goods etc.

Getting from where we are now, to there, is not simple however.

_________________
To do much in this life, you must learn much.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Clean Coal
PostPosted: Sat Dec 30, 2017 2:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 2:48 am
Posts: 2580
Coal is not much use for the tricky energy consumers (jet aircraft being the trickiest). You can Fischer Tropsch or whatever to get methane, at which point we come to my second point. Nat gas is too valuable to use in stationary power stations. We should be reserving it for use in the tricky applications, and burning coal or atoms for despatchable power. I'd have thought the power industry now has enough info to create a good model of the required balance between wind, solar, hydro, batteries, nukes, gas, and coal, and non-despatchables (ie wind/solar), baseload, quick responders and spinning reserve. Unfortunately implementing a rational strategy based on that analysis is heavily complicated by the CO2 furphy, which is where nat gas kills coal. As an engineer I tend to be a bit of a socialist about infrastructure, I don't think the efficiency of red blooded capitalism in reality are any more satisfactory than the inefficiencies of government owned infrastructure. In Oz I don't see that privatizing the electric generation/distribution side of things has resulted in any real gains apart from silver coins into State Treasuries, which they promptly waste on silliness anyway.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Clean Coal
PostPosted: Sat Dec 30, 2017 3:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:45 am
Posts: 5153
Location: EGUD
Spinning reserve is essentially obsolete nowadays - batteries can provide frequency-response services faster and more cheaply than a thermal plant ever could. In air quality terms natural gas is also vastly cleaner than coal - even coal plant with every abatement system known to man fitted. It's also a lot cheaper than coal - which is why the US is still rapidly replacing coal plants with wind and gas even under Trump.

_________________
War is less costly than servitude. In the end, the choice is always between Verdun and Dachau. - Jean Dutourd


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Clean Coal
PostPosted: Sat Dec 30, 2017 4:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:53 pm
Posts: 1651
Location: The People's Republic of Kalifornia
WarshipAdmin wrote:
Nat gas is too valuable to use in stationary power stations. We should be reserving it for use in the tricky applications, and burning coal or atoms for despatchable power.


What should Nat Gas be used for? Because of Shale Oil in the US, there is a lot of surplus Nat gas on the market. Some power plants are able to buy Nat Gas straight from the producers at around $1 per MMBTU by locating a power station near a Shale Oil feed. At those prices it isn't hard to see why Natural Gas is used to produce base load power.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Clean Coal
PostPosted: Sat Dec 30, 2017 10:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 2:48 am
Posts: 2580
I agree coal needs a lot of cleaning up, but nat gas is a finite resource and should be used where it is hard to replace - aircraft and long distance road haulage for example. I'm talking about long term planning, not short term price driven decisions.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Clean Coal
PostPosted: Sun Dec 31, 2017 9:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:53 pm
Posts: 1651
Location: The People's Republic of Kalifornia
WarshipAdmin wrote:
I agree coal needs a lot of cleaning up, but nat gas is a finite resource and should be used where it is hard to replace - aircraft and long distance road haulage for example. I'm talking about long term planning, not short term price driven decisions.


All fossil fuels are a finite resource.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group