Saigon
Gold Member
Coal used to be the cheapest source for power plants, now it is natural gas.
Thn why do you STILL support the use of COAL?
Jesus wept....
Last edited:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Coal used to be the cheapest source for power plants, now it is natural gas.
I don't like nuke joints, but I'm not ready to rule them out. I would like to see them built in remote locations, though.
You cannot built nuclear power plants in just any remote location. First, you need water to cool the reactor, so the middle of the desert isn't going to work. Secondly, you can't have endless miles of transmission lines carrying that generated electricity. This is because power is proportional to current but line loss is proportional to current squared. Line loss can be quite large over long distances, up to 30% or so. Make those lines too long and you'll end up with nothing more than a static spark by the time it reaches civilization.
True but only with qualifiers that You may not have considered. In Canada we probably have the longest transmission lines. Good example,all the way from the Nelson River system way into the United States which we also supply with power from there."Line loss" is reduced because we don`t use 60 cycle HV AC lines. Instead we transmit our power as HV DC...and then use converter stations. Nuclear power is almost as "portable" as can be when it comes to power plants. They don`t have to be near a river any more, although it`s more convenient if they are.
It does not matter what You want to call these, they all need cooling water an You know what happens if that is not available as was the case in Japan.Iran is building a reactor at Arak, where it already has a heavy-water production plant
But we are way past the early stages where a nuclear power plant has to be near a large body of water or a river
Just one more thing.
These $ "subsidies" that Obama and his no matter what reality is, supporters claim "big oil" is getting...That`s almost the same as if the New York or Philly Mobs would claim that they are "giving" downtown business or construction sites a subsidy if they quit extorting "protection" money from them for a week.
We need a sub thread to this one (Would You support renewable energy no matter what...) and call it "Would You support Obama no matter what reality is"
I hope Romney was wrong when he estimated that 47% of Americans will do so.
Yes of course that is deplorable, but don`t spin that coal mine fire into a coal mining episode. That was not an active coal mine and the under ground coal fire was started when somebody set the Centralia dump on fire which the local authorities failed to extinguish properly. After that it spread through a rock crevice and started the underground coal fire. We have underground fires like that in British Columbia`s forests too after some forest fires and it can take many years before the roots quit smoldering.Just one more thing.
These $ "subsidies" that Obama and his no matter what reality is, supporters claim "big oil" is getting...That`s almost the same as if the New York or Philly Mobs would claim that they are "giving" downtown business or construction sites a subsidy if they quit extorting "protection" money from them for a week.
We need a sub thread to this one (Would You support renewable energy no matter what...) and call it "Would You support Obama no matter what reality is"
I hope Romney was wrong when he estimated that 47% of Americans will do so.
It's one thing to utilize every possible resource, it's something else entirely when the country becomes uninhabitable.
Take the fracking quake in Youngstown. It knocked some homes off their foundations and put massive cracks in some other homes' walls. This can't be fixed - well it can, but at a huge expense. No, the homeowners are going to have to tear down those houses and rebuild.
Ever hear of the Bayou Corne Sinkhole?
http://www.examiner.com/article/new-gas-bubbles-miles-from-bayou-sinkhole-expedite-new-actions
And then there's the going-for-another-100-years coal mine fire in Centralia, PA.
I'm not naive, I know that pulling resources out of the ground is going to be messy, a necessary evil, but if it means wiping out inhabited areas then it isn't viable.
Exclusive: Iran's coal shipping trade booms despite Western heat
Despite the setbacks, industry sources say producers in Ukraine are providing Iran with coking coal, also known as metallurgical coal, and coke - key steel ingredients.
"Iranians used to buy a lot of coking coal from Australia to make their own coke but that has stopped now as the big companies there don't want to do it as they are too exposed," a British-based coal trade source said. "So Iran went to buy coke from Ukraine," he added, referring to the concentrated coal used in blast furnaces.
Coal used to be the cheapest source for power plants, now it is natural gas.
Thn why do you STILL support the use of COAL?
Jesus wept....
Because it is STILL significantly cheaper than renewables other than hydro (which is limited to use based on availability of suitable rivers) and reliable as hell. Some plants are not cost effective to change to natural gas so they will remain coal fired and with proper scrubbers to eliminate the particulates coal is fine.
Thn why do you STILL support the use of COAL?Coal used to be the cheapest source for power plants, now it is natural gas.
Jesus wept....
Because it is STILL significantly cheaper than renewables other than hydro (which is limited to use based on availability of suitable rivers) and reliable as hell. Some plants are not cost effective to change to natural gas so they will remain coal fired and with proper scrubbers to eliminate the particulates coal is fine.
Thn why do you STILL support the use of COAL?
Jesus wept....
Because it is STILL significantly cheaper than renewables other than hydro (which is limited to use based on availability of suitable rivers) and reliable as hell. Some plants are not cost effective to change to natural gas so they will remain coal fired and with proper scrubbers to eliminate the particulates coal is fine.
I hope You don`t mind if I add my 2 cents to Your reply to "Saigon"
Currently the spot market prices for NG is about 1/2 the price per 1 million btu`s than for coal BECAUSE of all the shale gas fracking yields.
It`s one thing to be against fracking which made shale gas cheaper than coal...and then just a few pages later ask "Then why do You STILL support coal"....Jesus wept
I`m in no mood to explain how supply and demand sets the spot market price to this guy, are You ?
Only a few years ago Diesel was cheaper than gasoline, then after diesel engines became more popular..Jesus wept because now diesel costs more than gasoline.
The old "Auto-propane" same story...and when enough cars switch over to LNG, then Jesus will weep again.
And if we all go "Chevy Volt" then Jesus will weep again, this time about the Lithium and Copper spot price,...
Another reason why coal costs more than natural gas is because the steel industry can`t do without it and all You can do with shale gas is burn it.
...something the coal and oil haters keep forgetting...
The only way to get a justifiable & fair demand and supply pricing mechanism is to outlaw the (Leerverkauf) = "short sale" swindle.
Then the price at the pump would not skyrocket the same day Iran bullshits about blocking the Strait of Hormuz.
As long as speculators can "buy" oil, crops or other resources, even electricity that has`nt even bee produced yet and that they never intend to accept delivery for Jesus will continue weeping...no matter if i`ts coal, oil or "renewable power".
I had a real good laugh once...I caught one of these parasites with his pants down in my "working vacation" time as a trucker.
When these "futures contracts" mature the holder has to accept delivery unless he can flip it just in time. Some get greedy and hold on too long while the price is still going up. I was running a 160 000 lbs Potash B-train from Saskatchewan to Minnesota and the guy who "owned" my load had no warehouse or silos. He was a speculator on a fancy estate.
I ran my load, full hammer down through the night and got to him before the markets opened where he wanted to flip his contract.
He screwed up some truckers before me like that, that were under way and then had to re-route at a moment`s notice to Idaho or some other state.
I got to him while he was still in bed and wanted to refuse delivery, but I had the Okay from the broker to open all my chutes and dump the entire load right in his driveway...and the Sheriff made sure he signed my bill of lading
Can`t remember any other time where I had that much "Schadenfreude"
Except maybe that time..:
It`s a shitty police photo polaroid I kept as a souvenir
I had a load of engine blocks and was sitting there for 5 minutes waiting for security to open the gate...when this BITCH (a nurse in uniform...but not just any nurse...she was a typical nurse "Ratchet") came moto-crossing over the gravel sidewalk and slammed her pickup under my trailer with such force that all her tires exploded. It never even rocked my cab but I heard the bang because I had my windows open while I had my cup of coffee. I dragged her out and she called me every name under the sun. The cops came and she blew the "breathalyzer" , way over the limit...then the tow truck could not get her pickup out from under my trailer...after he busted his winch the cops asked me if I could just run over her truck and drive into the yard...I flattened that sucker like a Schlitz beer can while she watched me in handcuffs from the back seat of the police cruiser...who said trucking can`t be fun...???
Too bad I forgot my video cam when I got the Okay to dump my potash load...that was a sight, let me tell You !
Because it is STILL significantly cheaper than renewables other than hydro (which is limited to use based on availability of suitable rivers) and reliable as hell. Some plants are not cost effective to change to natural gas so they will remain coal fired and with proper scrubbers to eliminate the particulates coal is fine.
Cost of resources:
Advanced Coal 112.2
Natural Gas 68 - 105
Nuclear 112.7
Onshore Wind 96.8
Hydro 89.9
Cost of electricity by source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So having insisted a couple of pages back that people want the cheapest forms of energy, you then proceed to back the most expensive form of energy known to man.
Coal is CLEARLY more expensive than onshore wind, natural gas, hydro, geothermal and tidal - and yet you either are not smart enough or honest enough to admit that you back it purely and simply for political reasons.
Really - I just can not imagine weaker logic.
Because it is STILL significantly cheaper than renewables other than hydro (which is limited to use based on availability of suitable rivers) and reliable as hell. Some plants are not cost effective to change to natural gas so they will remain coal fired and with proper scrubbers to eliminate the particulates coal is fine.
Cost of resources:
Advanced Coal 112.2
Natural Gas 68 - 105
Nuclear 112.7
Onshore Wind 96.8
Hydro 89.9
Cost of electricity by source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So having insisted a couple of pages back that people want the cheapest forms of energy, you then proceed to back the most expensive form of energy known to man.
Coal is CLEARLY more expensive than onshore wind, natural gas, hydro, geothermal and tidal - and yet you either are not smart enough or honest enough to admit that you back it purely and simply for political reasons.
Really - I just can not imagine weaker logic.
No matter how many times you LIE about the numbers, these are the REAL numbers nimrod. Gosh but you're a dimwit.
Nuclear 23.98
Fossil Steam 35.76
Hydroelectric 9.15
Gas Turbine and Small Scale 48.74
Cost of resources:
Advanced Coal 112.2
Natural Gas 68 - 105
Nuclear 112.7
Onshore Wind 96.8
Hydro 89.9
Cost of electricity by source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So having insisted a couple of pages back that people want the cheapest forms of energy, you then proceed to back the most expensive form of energy known to man.
Coal is CLEARLY more expensive than onshore wind, natural gas, hydro, geothermal and tidal - and yet you either are not smart enough or honest enough to admit that you back it purely and simply for political reasons.
Really - I just can not imagine weaker logic.
No matter how many times you LIE about the numbers, these are the REAL numbers nimrod. Gosh but you're a dimwit.
Nuclear 23.98
Fossil Steam 35.76
Hydroelectric 9.15
Gas Turbine and Small Scale 48.74
Stay calm, Westwall. Those numbers change every three or four months. We need to get power speculation out of Wall Street.
Because it is STILL significantly cheaper than renewables other than hydro (which is limited to use based on availability of suitable rivers) and reliable as hell. Some plants are not cost effective to change to natural gas so they will remain coal fired and with proper scrubbers to eliminate the particulates coal is fine.
Cost of resources:
Advanced Coal 112.2
Natural Gas 68 - 105
Nuclear 112.7
Onshore Wind 96.8
Hydro 89.9
Cost of electricity by source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So having insisted a couple of pages back that people want the cheapest forms of energy, you then proceed to back the most expensive form of energy known to man.
Coal is CLEARLY more expensive than onshore wind, natural gas, hydro, geothermal and tidal - and yet you either are not smart enough or honest enough to admit that you back it purely and simply for political reasons.
Really - I just can not imagine weaker logic.
No matter how many times you LIE about the numbers, these are the REAL numbers nimrod. Gosh but you're a dimwit.
Nuclear 23.98
Fossil Steam 35.76
Hydroelectric 9.15
Gas Turbine and Small Scale 48.74
Polarbear -
Prices for raw materials will always be in flu for so many reasons - the prospect of war in the Middle East sends oil through the roof, a major country closing a coal plant could drop the price of coal elsewhere.
But good governments will always look to the future, and consider also issues like what people want, how many jobs are created and the impact on climate change and local pollution etc etc.
Price is the biggest issue, but it is not the only issue which contributes to good energy policy. Energy must be clean, sustainable, and not attract too intense local opposition as to become a political liability.
In most countries this may mean the single largest source is nuclear for the next 20 - 50 years or so, followed by natural gas, tidal, wind and solar, depending on what fits local conditions.
I've never understood people trying to find a one-size-fits-all solution to energy - what makes sense in Texas likely will not make sense in Minnesota.
Not every body owns their own house and can install solar or wind turbines, but even apartment dwellers could reduce the load on the main power grid and save a lot of money if they would educate themselves a bit more and make sure they balance their loads better. It`s not as simple as You think it is that just because it says on a windmill or solar array name plate X MegaWatts, that that means REAL POWER.A software bug known as a race condition existed in General Electric Energy's Unix-based XA/21 energy management system. Once triggered, the bug stalled FirstEnergy's control room alarm system for over an hour. System operators were unaware of the malfunction; the failure deprived them of both audio and visual alerts for important changes in system state.[14][15] After the alarm system failure, unprocessed events queued up and the primary server failed within 30 minutes. Then all applications (including the stalled alarm system) were automatically transferred to the backup server, which itself failed at 14:54. The server failures slowed the screen refresh rate of the operators' computer consoles from 13 seconds to 59 seconds per screen. The lack of alarms led operators to dismiss a call from American Electric Power about the tripping and reclosure of a 345 kV shared line in northeast Ohio. Technical support informed control room personnel of the alarm system failure at 15:42.[16]
"Schneetreiben" is the German word for blizzard...Bei uns schneit es.
Ja, Du hörst richtig - heute erstes Schneetreiben -
und alle Leute spielen verrückt.
Cost of resources:
Advanced Coal 112.2
Natural Gas 68 - 105
Nuclear 112.7
Onshore Wind 96.8
Hydro 89.9
Cost of electricity by source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So having insisted a couple of pages back that people want the cheapest forms of energy, you then proceed to back the most expensive form of energy known to man.
Coal is CLEARLY more expensive than onshore wind, natural gas, hydro, geothermal and tidal - and yet you either are not smart enough or honest enough to admit that you back it purely and simply for political reasons.
Really - I just can not imagine weaker logic.
No matter how many times you LIE about the numbers, these are the REAL numbers nimrod. Gosh but you're a dimwit.
Nuclear 23.98
Fossil Steam 35.76
Hydroelectric 9.15
Gas Turbine and Small Scale 48.74
Stay calm, Westwall. Those numbers change every three or four months. We need to get power speculation out of Wall Street.
No matter how many times you LIE about the numbers, these are the REAL numbers nimrod. Gosh but you're a dimwit.
Nuclear 23.98
Fossil Steam 35.76
Hydroelectric 9.15
Gas Turbine and Small Scale 48.74
Stay calm, Westwall. Those numbers change every three or four months. We need to get power speculation out of Wall Street.
EXACTLY...This time You nailed it (again). Westwall is a pretty level headed guy, but sometimes in the other threads guys like "Saigon" etc have been pretty generous with their insults.
I`m still up, because my wife still isn`t home and the roads are icy..so I`m a bit too worried to sleep. But I found a souvenir from that trip where I dumped that load of potash on the front lawn of one of these wall street speculators who makes his $$$ ripping off the farmers and greenhouse operators who need "plant food". I was so eager to get to him to force delivery on him that I broke a few laws on the way. On one of the back-roads I got nailed by a state trooper...he wanted to know if I`m crazy and why I was driving like that...he had the ticket already made out...but :
Stamped it "warning" instead of the huge fine he could have made it for me. That was after I told him why I was ramrodding this load of potash..
He said his dad is a trucker and that him and his dad hate wall street fat cats...then wished me good luck..I blacked out his name so he won`t get into trouble if a zealot reads in this forum...I`m Okay with my name and that was a Yukon Driver`s license, so I`m not worried about "identity theft"
The "insecure load" that was not the main load just a propane tiger torch on my deck, we use it when our chutes under the trailers freeze up from the blowing snow. It was swinging out the sides a little bit when I ran through a curve...nothing too serious.
But You see "Grandma"...You are certainly not the only one who hates wall street fat cats !!!
He followed me for about 5 minutes, staying way back so he told me after he had me "pulled over"...except that I did not pull over far enough onto the shoulder. I did not want to because I was sure it was too soft. With a heavy rig it happens once in a while that the shoulder caves in. The "no lights" that happens easier than You think in cold weather and through tight turns...the coiled connector cable to the trailer gets stiff , then the coils does not flex and the cable gradually works its way out of the plug...not uncommon after lots of tight turns in cold weather.You are quite the threat to the general public.. How can you simultaneously "impede the flow of traffic", be speeding, UNBELTED AND run a Stop Sign???
I'll give you a break on the "unsecured load", but having LIGHTS OUT??? C'mon man.. The rig says "Stop me and write a ticket"...
The power factor observation is quite interesting. Used to be that big inductive motors and machinery was the biggest problem. But NOW --- modern electronics uses "switching power supplies" for everything and their load factor needs to be corrected. Never approaches FULLY corrected tho and if you multiply the "grid loss" by 10Mill Iphone chargers -- it's starts to add up.. ALSO -- Incandescent bulbs had a P.F. of a perfect ONE. They consumed exactly their rating. Both CFL and LED bulbs have built in FULL power supplies that screw the PF to anywhere between .80 and .90. So NOW almost EVERYTHING in the house contributes something to losses at the meter.