<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for ‘Clean coal’ is an oxymoron]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by dkray http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/ Mon, 03 Sep 2007 00:57:53 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/1 Coal and Oil are of the past

Fossil fuel corporations like to rely on the illogic of saying that what is must always be. Coal and oil are and have been the foundations of industrial society for as long as industrial society has existed, true, but that does not suggest that today's world is inevitably tomorrow's as well. Today is the day we move away from coal and oil, tossing off that dusty cloak forever.

I was writing about exactly this thing in more depth the other day on Frog King's weekly message. Don't you think it's time to move on from the past?

http://frogking.com/

]]> Coal and Oil are of the past

Fossil fuel corporations like to rely on the illogic of saying that what is must always be. Coal and oil are and have been the foundations of industrial society for as long as industrial society has existed, true, but that does not suggest that today's world is inevitably tomorrow's as well. Today is the day we move away from coal and oil, tossing off that dusty cloak forever.

I was writing about exactly this thing in more depth the other day on Frog King's weekly message. Don't you think it's time to move on from the past?

http://frogking.com/

]]> Comment #2 by Biodiversivist http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/ Mon, 03 Sep 2007 01:24:02 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/2 A money quote

"...we won't have leverage to encourage other nations to back off coal power until we do."

The Chinese, becuase they can finally afford to do so, are buying cars to be like the cool kids. But if you change what is cool, you will change the behavior of the multitudes emulating coolness. If the cool kids find ways to generate power without CO2 emissions, they will be emulated a thousand fold.

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

]]> A money quote

"...we won't have leverage to encourage other nations to back off coal power until we do."

The Chinese, becuase they can finally afford to do so, are buying cars to be like the cool kids. But if you change what is cool, you will change the behavior of the multitudes emulating coolness. If the cool kids find ways to generate power without CO2 emissions, they will be emulated a thousand fold.

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

]]> Comment #3 by schreinervideo http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/ Mon, 03 Sep 2007 03:32:40 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/3 schreinervideo

I was in China last year. The Chinese are going through what America and England did more than a hundred years ago. The air is terrible, roads are clogged with cars instead of bicycles. The people have been kept down for so long, now that they have some money they're buying cars and other contemporary symbols of affluence- and effluence. The government says it will do something but I don't believe it. Most Chinese don't care. They're so used to bad air and congestion it's just another day in Paradise. To them, rural people are the only ones hurt by desertification, flooding from dams and deforestation, chemical pollution and mining deaths. They'll all find out the hard way- like we did.

http://schreinervideo.blogspot.com

]]> schreinervideo

I was in China last year. The Chinese are going through what America and England did more than a hundred years ago. The air is terrible, roads are clogged with cars instead of bicycles. The people have been kept down for so long, now that they have some money they're buying cars and other contemporary symbols of affluence- and effluence. The government says it will do something but I don't believe it. Most Chinese don't care. They're so used to bad air and congestion it's just another day in Paradise. To them, rural people are the only ones hurt by desertification, flooding from dams and deforestation, chemical pollution and mining deaths. They'll all find out the hard way- like we did.

http://schreinervideo.blogspot.com

]]> Comment #4 by Karen Street http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/ Mon, 03 Sep 2007 06:46:17 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/4 4.5 billion year supply of sunlight, and it's free

I hope that we stop building any new coal power plants without carbon capture and storage, such as are being built today in China, India, Germany, and Minnesota.

Yes sunlight is free, but the collector is expensive. We need to continue subsidizing solar power, both R&D and deployment, not because it's going to be an important part of our energy present, but because it can be an important part of our energy future.

We need considerably more than solar energy if we are to get rid of coal. We need even more low GHG sources of energy, and faster, than the UNFCCC mitigation scenario.

From the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change: Analysis of existing and planned investment and financial flows relevant to the development of effective and appropriate international response to climate

Solar provides 0.003% of today's energy (not just electricity) -- in 2004 we consumed about 17,400 TWh total. Under the reference scenario, solar can supply 0.1% of our energy needs for 2030; the toal will be about 34,000 TWh -- that's about twice as much energy as we used worldwide today. Under the greenhouse gas mitigation scenario, solar can supply 0.2% of our energy needs in 2030, about 28,000 TWh due to increased efficiency. Much of the solar will be for heating water.

Nuclear power provides 6.4% of our energy today. Under the reference scenario it provides 5.1% (of twice as much energy, so the use of nuclear power expands), under the mitigation scenario, 9.1%.

Under the mitigation scenario, we add considerably less solar energy (not just power) than coal power without carbon capture and storage.


A Musing Environment

Karen Street


]]> 4.5 billion year supply of sunlight, and it's free

I hope that we stop building any new coal power plants without carbon capture and storage, such as are being built today in China, India, Germany, and Minnesota.

Yes sunlight is free, but the collector is expensive. We need to continue subsidizing solar power, both R&D and deployment, not because it's going to be an important part of our energy present, but because it can be an important part of our energy future.

We need considerably more than solar energy if we are to get rid of coal. We need even more low GHG sources of energy, and faster, than the UNFCCC mitigation scenario.

From the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change: Analysis of existing and planned investment and financial flows relevant to the development of effective and appropriate international response to climate

Solar provides 0.003% of today's energy (not just electricity) -- in 2004 we consumed about 17,400 TWh total. Under the reference scenario, solar can supply 0.1% of our energy needs for 2030; the toal will be about 34,000 TWh -- that's about twice as much energy as we used worldwide today. Under the greenhouse gas mitigation scenario, solar can supply 0.2% of our energy needs in 2030, about 28,000 TWh due to increased efficiency. Much of the solar will be for heating water.

Nuclear power provides 6.4% of our energy today. Under the reference scenario it provides 5.1% (of twice as much energy, so the use of nuclear power expands), under the mitigation scenario, 9.1%.

Under the mitigation scenario, we add considerably less solar energy (not just power) than coal power without carbon capture and storage.


A Musing Environment

Karen Street


]]> Comment #5 by drfrances http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/ Mon, 03 Sep 2007 07:06:36 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/5 Thanks

Thanks, Bill, for pointing out that national coal policy needs to insure that coal miners and coal communities are not harmed. I think it's easy to forget miners and mining communities or to dismiss them as backward and unimportant. There are a lot of difficult economic and cultural issues in transforming coal mining communities but those difficulties can and must be overcome.

Frances

]]> Thanks

Thanks, Bill, for pointing out that national coal policy needs to insure that coal miners and coal communities are not harmed. I think it's easy to forget miners and mining communities or to dismiss them as backward and unimportant. There are a lot of difficult economic and cultural issues in transforming coal mining communities but those difficulties can and must be overcome.

Frances

]]> Comment #6 by sunflower http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/ Mon, 03 Sep 2007 07:06:53 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/6 Blue sky the sun?

Yes Karen, solar can not scale quickly and that is the reason I advocate natural gas as a bridge off coal.  Solar can displace gas in the future and is simple for thermal applications.  The scale could be better had solar experienced the same historical support as nuclear.  And the scale will be better once sustained energy-scale capital  is dedicated to fast global deployments of profitable solar systems.  Forecasting the blue sky is pointless, as it was for personal computers and flying cars.

]]> Blue sky the sun?

Yes Karen, solar can not scale quickly and that is the reason I advocate natural gas as a bridge off coal.  Solar can displace gas in the future and is simple for thermal applications.  The scale could be better had solar experienced the same historical support as nuclear.  And the scale will be better once sustained energy-scale capital  is dedicated to fast global deployments of profitable solar systems.  Forecasting the blue sky is pointless, as it was for personal computers and flying cars.

]]> Comment #7 by wildleaf http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/ Mon, 03 Sep 2007 09:25:49 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/7 Coal is a DINOSAUR!

Bill Becker has written a concise and eloquent reduction of clean coal. Let's take coal off the table from now on. Natural gas, as we all know, is an improvement over coal. As we all should also know, natural gas has to go before we are sustainable. Also if we go to natural gas as an in-between then we can have coal rear its ugly head under "clean coal gasification."

We have to think about what an in-between should look like or if we should have one at all. It is easy for an in-between to become the status quo, so it way not be worth advocating for it. Plus if we have an in-between does that mean infrastructure for 50 years of the in-between? Arguably our climate can't take that.

The Black Car Project

]]> Coal is a DINOSAUR!

Bill Becker has written a concise and eloquent reduction of clean coal. Let's take coal off the table from now on. Natural gas, as we all know, is an improvement over coal. As we all should also know, natural gas has to go before we are sustainable. Also if we go to natural gas as an in-between then we can have coal rear its ugly head under "clean coal gasification."

We have to think about what an in-between should look like or if we should have one at all. It is easy for an in-between to become the status quo, so it way not be worth advocating for it. Plus if we have an in-between does that mean infrastructure for 50 years of the in-between? Arguably our climate can't take that.

The Black Car Project

]]> Comment #8 by trock http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/ Mon, 03 Sep 2007 15:07:21 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/8 natural gas is to valuable

natural gas is already 18 percent of our electricity production.   I think it should be used to heat our homes and process heat for manufactoring.    We should go directly to wind power now for electricity.   use wind power to make power and natural gas for heat, or combined heat and power where possible.

]]> natural gas is to valuable

natural gas is already 18 percent of our electricity production.   I think it should be used to heat our homes and process heat for manufactoring.    We should go directly to wind power now for electricity.   use wind power to make power and natural gas for heat, or combined heat and power where possible.

]]> Comment #9 by justlou http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/ Mon, 03 Sep 2007 21:41:16 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/9 2030

by 2030 "twice as much energy as we used worldwide today"  

This is the Cheneyite vision of the energy future -- attempting to match supply with a projected growth curve.  

Why not couple peak oil with peak coal?  And shoot for using half as much total energy in 2030 as we use today?  Not "I'll take two" but I'll take a half.  To equal out, this will mean for some settling for a quarter or less.  The wealthy have the greatest means of shooting for less and measuring economics and wealth as if the earth really matters.  

]]> 2030

by 2030 "twice as much energy as we used worldwide today"  

This is the Cheneyite vision of the energy future -- attempting to match supply with a projected growth curve.  

Why not couple peak oil with peak coal?  And shoot for using half as much total energy in 2030 as we use today?  Not "I'll take two" but I'll take a half.  To equal out, this will mean for some settling for a quarter or less.  The wealthy have the greatest means of shooting for less and measuring economics and wealth as if the earth really matters.  

]]> Comment #10 by Karen Street http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/ Tue, 04 Sep 2007 01:18:34 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/10 2030?

Why not ... shoot for using half as much total energy in 2030 as we use today?  Not "I'll take two" but I'll take a half.  To equal out, this will mean for some settling for a quarter or less.  The wealthy have the greatest means of shooting for less and measuring economics and wealth as if the earth really matters.  

I don't fly, almost never get into a car, and don't use much electricity, etc. I also teach living with less --- looking at what I do now, and the emotions and spiritual issues that this raises. Next session September 16 in Berkeley, e-mail if you want to attend and I'll give details.

But....I heard a lecture many years ago on biofuels, and the question, why don't you focus on reducing demand rather than supplying cleaner fuel? The professor answered that no one in policy believes that bus ridership will double in the next decade, and if it did, it would make such a tiny blip in the upward exponential of car use. If there were an actual reduction in expected demand, policy plans could change, but so far, demand is rising faster than the highest estimates, in part due to the third world, in part due to we who are (too?) rich.

Coal and Oil are of the past

Only if there are real alternatives. And solar will not be a real alternative in the next few decades. We should definitely invest in both R&D and deployment, but it won't be enough. No one energy source, or several energy sources, will be enough. We can only hope that the low-GHG sources together with whatever behavior change we can achieve by structural changes (making parking difficult) and voluntary choices will be enough to prevent catastrophic change. But nothing we can do can prevent the Ganges for going dry part of the year within a generation -- if it's going to happen within a generation, we can't make changes fast enough to alter the result.

[S]olar can not scale quickly and that is the reason I advocate natural gas as a bridge off coal.

Natural gas is a fossil fuel. If coal were not so incredibly bad, natural gas would be considered awful -- GHG emitting, polluting, etc. It is clean natural gas only in comparison to coal.

A Musing Environment

Karen Street

]]> 2030?

Why not ... shoot for using half as much total energy in 2030 as we use today?  Not "I'll take two" but I'll take a half.  To equal out, this will mean for some settling for a quarter or less.  The wealthy have the greatest means of shooting for less and measuring economics and wealth as if the earth really matters.  

I don't fly, almost never get into a car, and don't use much electricity, etc. I also teach living with less --- looking at what I do now, and the emotions and spiritual issues that this raises. Next session September 16 in Berkeley, e-mail if you want to attend and I'll give details.

But....I heard a lecture many years ago on biofuels, and the question, why don't you focus on reducing demand rather than supplying cleaner fuel? The professor answered that no one in policy believes that bus ridership will double in the next decade, and if it did, it would make such a tiny blip in the upward exponential of car use. If there were an actual reduction in expected demand, policy plans could change, but so far, demand is rising faster than the highest estimates, in part due to the third world, in part due to we who are (too?) rich.

Coal and Oil are of the past

Only if there are real alternatives. And solar will not be a real alternative in the next few decades. We should definitely invest in both R&D and deployment, but it won't be enough. No one energy source, or several energy sources, will be enough. We can only hope that the low-GHG sources together with whatever behavior change we can achieve by structural changes (making parking difficult) and voluntary choices will be enough to prevent catastrophic change. But nothing we can do can prevent the Ganges for going dry part of the year within a generation -- if it's going to happen within a generation, we can't make changes fast enough to alter the result.

[S]olar can not scale quickly and that is the reason I advocate natural gas as a bridge off coal.

Natural gas is a fossil fuel. If coal were not so incredibly bad, natural gas would be considered awful -- GHG emitting, polluting, etc. It is clean natural gas only in comparison to coal.

A Musing Environment

Karen Street

]]> Comment #11 by ac5p http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/ Tue, 04 Sep 2007 02:00:37 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/11 electricity supply and demand

In the US there is already not enough production to meet projected demand even a few years out.  Carbon-free electricity generation has not been approved and rolled out in a meaningful way in the US.  Until there is less demand or the roll out of carbon free plants: the existing coal plants, mountaintop removal mining, funded lobby etc will continue.  They will continue to fight new equipment on existing plants because the cost makes those plants less profitable and lets face it, people panic when the lights go out so it gives the plants (and coal lobbyists) more leverage.

]]> electricity supply and demand

In the US there is already not enough production to meet projected demand even a few years out.  Carbon-free electricity generation has not been approved and rolled out in a meaningful way in the US.  Until there is less demand or the roll out of carbon free plants: the existing coal plants, mountaintop removal mining, funded lobby etc will continue.  They will continue to fight new equipment on existing plants because the cost makes those plants less profitable and lets face it, people panic when the lights go out so it gives the plants (and coal lobbyists) more leverage.

]]> Comment #12 by justlou http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/ Tue, 04 Sep 2007 02:38:33 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/the-future-of-coal/12 Don't Concede the Growth Curve

If we concede the growth curve of total energy usage is going to continue on the upward slope we will be compromising the entire way up.  If we decide we have reached the peak of fossil fuel usage right now then the only way is to force adaptation to a downward slope.  We need to focus the mind before we are forced to focus the stomach.  

]]> Don't Concede the Growth Curve

If we concede the growth curve of total energy usage is going to continue on the upward slope we will be compromising the entire way up.  If we decide we have reached the peak of fossil fuel usage right now then the only way is to force adaptation to a downward slope.  We need to focus the mind before we are forced to focus the stomach.  

]]>