Germany to Close All 84 Coal-fired power plants, rely primarily on Renewable energy

[Crick]

I love the way they make your exhaust pipe smell...<3 <3 <3

 

[Crick]

We keep going in the conservative direction we will commit suicide. The 50-60% reduction in cardon dioxide is the difference between burning coal and natural gas idiot.

Actually, Coal burned and exhaust scrubbing makes it cleaner than NG. But you all ignore that because it doesn't fit your narrative.

As for your BS 50-60% reduction, man is only causing 5% of the total rise in our atmosphere and the rest is from natural sources. There is no way in hell you can reduce it to the levels you suggest without removing man from the earth... and then it would only slow it minimally until our masses degraded..

Correct. Gassified coal plants can be cleaner.
But they're missing the point totally anyway.
Why? Because the minute you take coal off the market gas will skyrocket in price because of supply and demand. It has already happened in Massachusetts. They closed Mount Tom, Salem Harbor and Brayton point. Immediately the Nat gas spot market jumped Fifty percent! Hah! Those big coal furnaces were keeping those bastards Honest. Imagine that. Then of course with the increase in rates they felt bold enough to shut down the steam turbine end of the combined cycle plants because of the expense of maintaining that part of the equipment. Uh-oh....there goes the efficiency!

Jo

Exactly! its about lining their damn pockets... at our expense.. And these fools cant see it..

How is it that you can pretend to discuss an issue without facts?

How is it you can pretend to discuss an issue without facts?

All I have seen from you is your opinion. I on the other hand, worked in industries that use scrubbing technology and have seen first hand their use and impacts. All I see from you is hyperbole an bull shit..

Gas from coal: The future or fantasy?

"But there are two big problems. First, coal gasification actually produces more CO2 than a traditional coal plant; so not only will China be using more coal, it will be doing so at a greater cost to the environment.

As Laszlo Varro, head of gas, coal and power markets at the International Energy Agency (IEA), says: "[Coal gasification] is attractive from an economic and energy security perspective.

"It can be a nice solution to local pollution, but its overall carbon intensity is worse [than coal mining], so it is not attractive at all from a climate change point of view"."

Indeed a study by Duke University in the US suggests synthetic natural gas emits seven times more greenhouse gases than natural gas, and almost twice as much carbon as a coal plant.

The second problem is water use. Coal gasification is one of the more water-intensive forms of energy production, and large areas of China, particularly in the western parts of the country that would host new gasification plants, already suffer from water shortages.

 

[justoffal]

Actually, Coal burned and exhaust scrubbing makes it cleaner than NG. But you all ignore that because it doesn't fit your narrative.

As for your BS 50-60% reduction, man is only causing 5% of the total rise in our atmosphere and the rest is from natural sources. There is no way in hell you can reduce it to the levels you suggest without removing man from the earth... and then it would only slow it minimally until our masses degraded..

Correct. Gassified coal plants can be cleaner.
But they're missing the point totally anyway.
Why? Because the minute you take coal off the market gas will skyrocket in price because of supply and demand. It has already happened in Massachusetts. They closed Mount Tom, Salem Harbor and Brayton point. Immediately the Nat gas spot market jumped Fifty percent! Hah! Those big coal furnaces were keeping those bastards Honest. Imagine that. Then of course with the increase in rates they felt bold enough to shut down the steam turbine end of the combined cycle plants because of the expense of maintaining that part of the equipment. Uh-oh....there goes the efficiency!

Jo

Exactly! its about lining their damn pockets... at our expense.. And these fools cant see it..

How is it that you can pretend to discuss an issue without facts?

How is it you can pretend to discuss an issue without facts?

All I have seen from you is your opinion. I on the other hand, worked in industries that use scrubbing technology and have seen first hand their use and impacts. All I see from you is hyperbole an bull shit..

Gas from coal: The future or fantasy?

"But there are two big problems. First, coal gasification actually produces more CO2 than a traditional coal plant; so not only will China be using more coal, it will be doing so at a greater cost to the environment.

As Laszlo Varro, head of gas, coal and power markets at the International Energy Agency (IEA), says: "[Coal gasification] is attractive from an economic and energy security perspective.

"It can be a nice solution to local pollution, but its overall carbon intensity is worse [than coal mining], so it is not attractive at all from a climate change point of view"."

Image copyrightALAMY
Image captionThe US has experimented with coal gasification in recent years
Indeed a study by Duke University in the US suggests synthetic natural gas emits seven times more greenhouse gases than natural gas, and almost twice as much carbon as a coal plant.

The second problem is water use. Coal gasification is one of the more water-intensive forms of energy production, and large areas of China, particularly in the western parts of the country that would host new gasification plants, already suffer from water shortages.

It produces more CO2 because it produces more power. Not only is the gas burned as a primary source of heat for the furnace
Fly ash is recycled through a re-burner extracting every last BTU available from that particular fuel. There is a 5% parasitic power drain on the system. But there is also as much as a 15% gain in energy dispersed.

Of course coal has other elements in it natural gas does not. It also tends to burn hotter thereby increasing the nox and Sox.

I'll not be sad to see coal go away but not before it has to and right now the idea that it has to because it is so much worse than the alternatives is not exactly an accurate estimation.

Inevitably in every market where coal disappears natural gas prices Spike. Remember it's not the fuel you're selling to the public...the master commodity is the megawatt.

Jo

 

[Crick]

Coal does need to go away as quickly as possible. Gasification is NOT a good strategy if your aim is to reduce GHG emissions.

 

[justoffal]

Coal does need to go away. As quickly as possible. Gasification is NOT a good strategy if one is attempting to reduce GHG emissions.

Admittedly it does not reduce CO2.

Jo

 

[justoffal]

Actually, Coal burned and exhaust scrubbing makes it cleaner than NG. But you all ignore that because it doesn't fit your narrative.

As for your BS 50-60% reduction, man is only causing 5% of the total rise in our atmosphere and the rest is from natural sources. There is no way in hell you can reduce it to the levels you suggest without removing man from the earth... and then it would only slow it minimally until our masses degraded..

Correct. Gassified coal plants can be cleaner.
But they're missing the point totally anyway.
Why? Because the minute you take coal off the market gas will skyrocket in price because of supply and demand. It has already happened in Massachusetts. They closed Mount Tom, Salem Harbor and Brayton point. Immediately the Nat gas spot market jumped Fifty percent! Hah! Those big coal furnaces were keeping those bastards Honest. Imagine that. Then of course with the increase in rates they felt bold enough to shut down the steam turbine end of the combined cycle plants because of the expense of maintaining that part of the equipment. Uh-oh....there goes the efficiency!

Jo

Exactly! its about lining their damn pockets... at our expense.. And these fools cant see it..

How is it that you can pretend to discuss an issue without facts?

How is it you can pretend to discuss an issue without facts?

All I have seen from you is your opinion. I on the other hand, worked in industries that use scrubbing technology and have seen first hand their use and impacts. All I see from you is hyperbole an bull shit..

Gas from coal: The future or fantasy?

"But there are two big problems. First, coal gasification actually produces more CO2 than a traditional coal plant; so not only will China be using more coal, it will be doing so at a greater cost to the environment.

As Laszlo Varro, head of gas, coal and power markets at the International Energy Agency (IEA), says: "[Coal gasification] is attractive from an economic and energy security perspective.

"It can be a nice solution to local pollution, but its overall carbon intensity is worse [than coal mining], so it is not attractive at all from a climate change point of view"."

Indeed a study by Duke University in the US suggests synthetic natural gas emits seven times more greenhouse gases than natural gas, and almost twice as much carbon as a coal plant.

The second problem is water use. Coal gasification is one of the more water-intensive forms of energy production, and large areas of China, particularly in the western parts of the country that would host new gasification plants, already suffer from water shortages.

China has not been a good Steward of their water resources.

Jo

 

[otto105]

Why is it that conservatives love to old technolgy and view points.


Additionally, anti-climate change websites claim that there isn't AGM happening and coal is clean according to the PR campaign paid for by the old energy industries.

Why is it that liberals love damaging the economy, and wasting trillions, for a negligible, at best, benefit?

Nobody has any idea what the hell that your posting about.

Of course you have no idea, stupid liberal.

Did your reponse come directly from Big Oil or shrinking market coal?

Yeah, who needs oil anyway? I fuel my car with unicorn farts.

Kid, fat drunk and stupid is no way to go thru life...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Why is it that liberals love damaging the economy, and wasting trillions, for a negligible, at best, benefit?

Nobody has any idea what the hell that your posting about.

Of course you have no idea, stupid liberal.

Did your reponse come directly from Big Oil or shrinking market coal?

Yeah, who needs oil anyway? I fuel my car with unicorn farts.

Kid, fat drunk and stupid is no way to go thru life...

Your posts are killing the planet...….why do you hate the planet?

 

[otto105]

Nobody has any idea what the hell that your posting about.

Of course you have no idea, stupid liberal.

Did your reponse come directly from Big Oil or shrinking market coal?

Yeah, who needs oil anyway? I fuel my car with unicorn farts.

Kid, fat drunk and stupid is no way to go thru life...

Your posts are killing the planet...….why do you hate the planet?

Again, can you point to the natural occurance which is leading to higher CO2 ppm?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Of course you have no idea, stupid liberal.

Did your reponse come directly from Big Oil or shrinking market coal?

Yeah, who needs oil anyway? I fuel my car with unicorn farts.

Kid, fat drunk and stupid is no way to go thru life...

Your posts are killing the planet...….why do you hate the planet?

Again, can you point to the natural occurance which is leading to higher CO2 ppm?

Why would I, planet killer?

 

[skookerasbil]

Excellent!!!
Because more expensive power is better.

Natural gas and renewables are a less expensive alternative douchebag.

Oy.....a myth s0n.....well documented in here. Have to do your research.

 

[jc456]

The bull shit is strong with this one....

IF you attained that level, we would all have to stop using ALL oil based products and stop burning everything.. And we still would not attain the desired levels you want.

You are telling us the world must commit suicide to please you fucking idiots..

We keep going in the conservative direction we will commit suicide. The 50-60% reduction in cardon dioxide is the difference between burning coal and natural gas idiot.

Actually, Coal burned and exhaust scrubbing makes it cleaner than NG. But you all ignore that because it doesn't fit your narrative.

As for your BS 50-60% reduction, man is only causing 5% of the total rise in our atmosphere and the rest is from natural sources. There is no way in hell you can reduce it to the levels you suggest without removing man from the earth... and then it would only slow it minimally until our masses degraded..

Correct. Gassified coal plants can be cleaner.
But they're missing the point totally anyway.
Why? Because the minute you take coal off the market gas will skyrocket in price because of supply and demand. It has already happened in Massachusetts. They closed Mount Tom, Salem Harbor and Brayton point. Immediately the Nat gas spot market jumped Fifty percent! Hah! Those big coal furnaces were keeping those bastards Honest. Imagine that. Then of course with the increase in rates they felt bold enough to shut down the steam turbine end of the combined cycle plants because of the expense of maintaining that part of the equipment. Uh-oh....there goes the efficiency!

Jo

Exactly! its about lining their damn pockets... at our expense.. And these fools cant see it..

How is it that you can pretend to discuss an issue without facts?

are you looking into a mirror with that question?

 

[jc456]

I love the way they make your exhaust pipe smell...<3 <3 <3

why do you smell your exhaust pipe?

 

[jc456]

Coal does need to go away as quickly as possible. Gasification is NOT a good strategy if your aim is to reduce GHG emissions.

who said that was a goal? The goal is efficient energy for our peoples. why are you for a destruction of poor people? that seems to imply bigotry on your part. hmmmmmm

still looking for your empirical evidence kid!!!

 

[Dekster]

Burning trees instead of coal will surely work out for the planet

 

[otto105]

We keep going in the conservative direction we will commit suicide. The 50-60% reduction in cardon dioxide is the difference between burning coal and natural gas idiot.

Actually, Coal burned and exhaust scrubbing makes it cleaner than NG. But you all ignore that because it doesn't fit your narrative.

As for your BS 50-60% reduction, man is only causing 5% of the total rise in our atmosphere and the rest is from natural sources. There is no way in hell you can reduce it to the levels you suggest without removing man from the earth... and then it would only slow it minimally until our masses degraded..

Correct. Gassified coal plants can be cleaner.
But they're missing the point totally anyway.
Why? Because the minute you take coal off the market gas will skyrocket in price because of supply and demand. It has already happened in Massachusetts. They closed Mount Tom, Salem Harbor and Brayton point. Immediately the Nat gas spot market jumped Fifty percent! Hah! Those big coal furnaces were keeping those bastards Honest. Imagine that. Then of course with the increase in rates they felt bold enough to shut down the steam turbine end of the combined cycle plants because of the expense of maintaining that part of the equipment. Uh-oh....there goes the efficiency!

Jo

Exactly! its about lining their damn pockets... at our expense.. And these fools cant see it..

How is it that you can pretend to discuss an issue without facts?

are you looking into a mirror with that question?

Yes, what do you have to discuss?

 

[jc456]

QUOTE="otto105, post: 21712223, member: 66286"]QUOTE="jc456, post: 21709947, member: 46512"]

Actually, Coal burned and exhaust scrubbing makes it cleaner than NG. But you all ignore that because it doesn't fit your narrative.

As for your BS 50-60% reduction, man is only causing 5% of the total rise in our atmosphere and the rest is from natural sources. There is no way in hell you can reduce it to the levels you suggest without removing man from the earth... and then it would only slow it minimally until our masses degraded..

Correct. Gassified coal plants can be cleaner.
But they're missing the point totally anyway.
Why? Because the minute you take coal off the market gas will skyrocket in price because of supply and demand. It has already happened in Massachusetts. They closed Mount Tom, Salem Harbor and Brayton point. Immediately the Nat gas spot market jumped Fifty percent! Hah! Those big coal furnaces were keeping those bastards Honest. Imagine that. Then of course with the increase in rates they felt bold enough to shut down the steam turbine end of the combined cycle plants because of the expense of maintaining that part of the equipment. Uh-oh....there goes the efficiency!

Jo

Exactly! its about lining their damn pockets... at our expense.. And these fools cant see it..

How is it that you can pretend to discuss an issue without facts?

are you looking into a mirror with that question?[/QUOTE]

Yes, what do you have to discuss?[/QUOTE]

 

[Likkmee]

Good idea. Implementation ? Without extreme corruption ?
Vamos a ver ?

 

[otto105]

QUOTE="otto105, post: 21712223, member: 66286"]QUOTE="jc456, post: 21709947, member: 46512"]

Actually, Coal burned and exhaust scrubbing makes it cleaner than NG. But you all ignore that because it doesn't fit your narrative.

As for your BS 50-60% reduction, man is only causing 5% of the total rise in our atmosphere and the rest is from natural sources. There is no way in hell you can reduce it to the levels you suggest without removing man from the earth... and then it would only slow it minimally until our masses degraded..

Correct. Gassified coal plants can be cleaner.
But they're missing the point totally anyway.
Why? Because the minute you take coal off the market gas will skyrocket in price because of supply and demand. It has already happened in Massachusetts. They closed Mount Tom, Salem Harbor and Brayton point. Immediately the Nat gas spot market jumped Fifty percent! Hah! Those big coal furnaces were keeping those bastards Honest. Imagine that. Then of course with the increase in rates they felt bold enough to shut down the steam turbine end of the combined cycle plants because of the expense of maintaining that part of the equipment. Uh-oh....there goes the efficiency!

Jo

Exactly! its about lining their damn pockets... at our expense.. And these fools cant see it..

How is it that you can pretend to discuss an issue without facts?

are you looking into a mirror with that question?

Yes, what do you have to discuss?[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]

So, nothing.

 

[jc456]

QUOTE="otto105, post: 21712223, member: 66286"]QUOTE="jc456, post: 21709947, member: 46512"]

Actually, Coal burned and exhaust scrubbing makes it cleaner than NG. But you all ignore that because it doesn't fit your narrative.

As for your BS 50-60% reduction, man is only causing 5% of the total rise in our atmosphere and the rest is from natural sources. There is no way in hell you can reduce it to the levels you suggest without removing man from the earth... and then it would only slow it minimally until our masses degraded..

Correct. Gassified coal plants can be cleaner.
But they're missing the point totally anyway.
Why? Because the minute you take coal off the market gas will skyrocket in price because of supply and demand. It has already happened in Massachusetts. They closed Mount Tom, Salem Harbor and Brayton point. Immediately the Nat gas spot market jumped Fifty percent! Hah! Those big coal furnaces were keeping those bastards Honest. Imagine that. Then of course with the increase in rates they felt bold enough to shut down the steam turbine end of the combined cycle plants because of the expense of maintaining that part of the equipment. Uh-oh....there goes the efficiency!

Jo

Exactly! its about lining their damn pockets... at our expense.. And these fools cant see it..

How is it that you can pretend to discuss an issue without facts?

are you looking into a mirror with that question?

Yes, what do you have to discuss?

[/QUOTE]

So, nothing.[/QUOTE]
I don't argue nothing. so yeah nothing. you haven't a clue about the entire thread. you fool.