Future of Coal

Help Support CattleToday:

Don't need no coal here. Lots of hydro. There are a lot of windmills too. Just yesterday the wind blowing up the river was causing waves to break into the face of the John Day dam sending spray back up over the dam. The ultimate for renewable energy. That water (the spray) would have to go back through the turbines again making more electricity.
 
There is a coal fired power plant in Lacygne, Ks that has just gone through a complete renovation to clean the coal it burns. They removed the two older stack and replaced with one larger diameter.

This took a couple of years, and I kept thinking somebody knows more then the news is reporting about coal being too dirty to use. And Oboma saying "no coal".

They haul in about 122 rail cars of coal each day. https://www.kiewit.com/projects/power/aqcs/la-cygne/
 
Logar":tjkm96qf said:
Burning coal and utilizing the right kind of scrubbers in the stacks is essentially producing a clean energy - pictures of stacks emitting white smoke in environazis propaganda papers and magazines are usually those emitting steam on a cold day.

China, India and Pakistan are heavily polluted because of cheap coal and no scrubbers in the stacks.

All forms of coal are viable under the right conditions, however you can be certain that many will disagree. Some scrubbers can remove almost all carcinogenic emissions. In the end those who have the money make the rules.

Several thousand private jets showed up and Davos to decide how those who do not have the cash to get invited to the party will live.

They DO NOT worry about emissions or they would have walked to Davos.

Most third world countries do not have the development and infrastructure to find, produce, transport and then distribute natural gas. America is now one of, if not the largest producers of oil and natural gas - and about time - put the evil Saudis in their place.

While coal may be slowly phased out of American power production, it is being phased in in several countries around the world.

So, you might have a market to ship it to them............

Honestly I do not see coal disappearing in my life time.

We only export 8-10% of the coal mined in the US. The majority of that it used for metal not steam.

It's not done globally but it is done in the US which is the vast majority of the market.
 
Logar":w2lbfxua said:
Burning coal and utilizing the right kind of scrubbers in the stacks is essentially producing a clean energy - pictures of stacks emitting white smoke in environazis propaganda papers and magazines are usually those emitting steam on a cold day.

China, India and Pakistan are heavily polluted because of cheap coal and no scrubbers in the stacks.

All forms of coal are viable under the right conditions, however you can be certain that many will disagree. Some scrubbers can remove almost all carcinogenic emissions. In the end those who have the money make the rules.

Several thousand private jets showed up and Davos to decide how those who do not have the cash to get invited to the party will live.

They DO NOT worry about emissions or they would have walked to Davos.

Most third world countries do not have the development and infrastructure to find, produce, transport and then distribute natural gas. America is now one of, if not the largest producers of oil and natural gas - and about time - put the evil Saudis in their place.

While coal may be slowly phased out of American power production, it is being phased in in several countries around the world.

So, you might have a market to ship it to them............

Honestly I do not see coal disappearing in my life time.

Where does the 140 million tons of coal ash go each year. Should we load it in the empty coal cars going back to the origin of it and bury it in the open pits and cover it.
 
hurleyjd":1k16nbui said:
Logar":1k16nbui said:
Burning coal and utilizing the right kind of scrubbers in the stacks is essentially producing a clean energy - pictures of stacks emitting white smoke in environazis propaganda papers and magazines are usually those emitting steam on a cold day.

China, India and Pakistan are heavily polluted because of cheap coal and no scrubbers in the stacks.

All forms of coal are viable under the right conditions, however you can be certain that many will disagree. Some scrubbers can remove almost all carcinogenic emissions. In the end those who have the money make the rules.

Several thousand private jets showed up and Davos to decide how those who do not have the cash to get invited to the party will live.

They DO NOT worry about emissions or they would have walked to Davos.

Most third world countries do not have the development and infrastructure to find, produce, transport and then distribute natural gas. America is now one of, if not the largest producers of oil and natural gas - and about time - put the evil Saudis in their place.

While coal may be slowly phased out of American power production, it is being phased in in several countries around the world.

So, you might have a market to ship it to them............

Honestly I do not see coal disappearing in my life time.

Where does the 140 million tons of coal ash go each year. Should we load it in the empty coal cars going back to the origin of it and bury it in the open pits and cover it.

Where does the rubber off car tires go ?
It has to be piling up somewhere.
 
At the power plant near here it goes up in the valley behind the plant where no one can see it. But in their defense you can never see or smell s speck of smoke. Just a very very little steam is all I notice. It also burns about 5% wood chips.
From what I can see there is much more environmental issues with mining and trucking of the coal than the burning.
 
kenny thomas":7dh43fge said:
At the power plant near here it goes up in the valley behind the plant where no one can see it. But in their defense you can never see or smell s speck of smoke. Just a very very little steam is all I notice. It also burns about 5% wood chips.
From what I can see there is much more environmental issues with mining and trucking of the coal than the burning.

No question about that. Coal Fly Ash (CFA) has been studied and disputed but thus far the only conclusive findings relates to breathing it. Inhalation of any particulate including agricultural particulates can result in respiratory disease. Furthermore, CFA has commercial value.

Edited to add: Coal Fired Power plant emissions became a concern not as much because of the release of carcinogens, but because of the Sulfur compounds.
 
hurleyjd":wlq5fvsn said:
Logar":wlq5fvsn said:
Burning coal and utilizing the right kind of scrubbers in the stacks is essentially producing a clean energy - pictures of stacks emitting white smoke in environazis propaganda papers and magazines are usually those emitting steam on a cold day.

China, India and Pakistan are heavily polluted because of cheap coal and no scrubbers in the stacks.

All forms of coal are viable under the right conditions, however you can be certain that many will disagree. Some scrubbers can remove almost all carcinogenic emissions. In the end those who have the money make the rules.

Several thousand private jets showed up and Davos to decide how those who do not have the cash to get invited to the party will live.

They DO NOT worry about emissions or they would have walked to Davos.

Most third world countries do not have the development and infrastructure to find, produce, transport and then distribute natural gas. America is now one of, if not the largest producers of oil and natural gas - and about time - put the evil Saudis in their place.

While coal may be slowly phased out of American power production, it is being phased in in several countries around the world.

So, you might have a market to ship it to them............

Honestly I do not see coal disappearing in my life time.

Where does the 140 million tons of coal ash go each year. Should we load it in the empty coal cars going back to the origin of it and bury it in the open pits and cover it.

The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA) requires the overburden to be placed in the mined area and graded to Approximate Original Contour (AOC). It would be extremely costly to rail CFA back to the mine.
 
Quick story about those two power plants.

About 2004 or 2005, I was supposed to teach apprentice boilermakers, basic chemistry. One week before I started they had an accident and high pressure steam killed two people. Blew out all of the doors and windows in the building we were going to use for our class. I called them back and told them to find somebody else. Power plants are not for me.
 
True Grit Farms":3gqx8tkg said:
Private property rights getting trampled through government bs at its finest.

There are no private property rights that's an illusion.
You don't even own the property you rent it. Don't believe that stop paying your property tax.
That is why tax should be a sales tax.
 
Davemk":20v82ugs said:
Quick story about those two power plants.

About 2004 or 2005, I was supposed to teach apprentice boilermakers, basic chemistry. One week before I started they had an accident and high pressure steam killed two people. Blew out all of the doors and windows in the building we were going to use for our class. I called them back and told them to find somebody else. Power plants are not for me.


I went to many more fatalities in refineries from boilers and steam than hydrocarbons. Attitude it's just water has got a lot of people killed. When your dealing with something that's expands 1200 times it's original volume that is a lot of energy.
 
If the activity conducted on private property impacts persons outside the property line, then the rights of the person impacted has to be protected. Coal mining is an excellent example. Prior to surface mine regulation, early mining in Eastern Kentucky consisted of pushing the overburden over the side of the mountain. Property owners downslope of the mining lost their homes to landslides. I have personally witnessed it during my time living in Hazard. I saw the home of an old widow woman pushed 3 feet off the foundation and she was still living in it. The mining company didn't so much as visit to see if she was safe.
 
Caustic Burno":znorumnr said:
Bestoutwest":znorumnr said:
Caustic Burno":znorumnr said:
Hydro electric is still the cheapest and cleanest reliable electric generation.

What do you think about tidal energy?


Varies too much depending on moon phase.
There are places that currents are more consistent. The Gulf Stream from just south of Key West on up to offshore of Miami would be a prime place. 2 to 6 knt current always running northward is a mighty, unstoppable force. I've wondered why it hasn't been considered. Or maybe it has.
 
zirlottkim":248bg144 said:
Caustic Burno":248bg144 said:
Bestoutwest":248bg144 said:
What do you think about tidal energy?


Varies too much depending on moon phase.
There are places that currents are more consistent. The Gulf Stream from just south of Key West on up to offshore of Miami would be a prime place. 2 to 6 knt current always running northward is a mighty, unstoppable force. I've wondered why it hasn't been considered. Or maybe it has.

Surely there is some way to put turbines in the Mississippi that would not interfere with barge traffic and produce electricity all the way from the great lakes to the gulf.
 
hurleyjd":252c43c2 said:
zirlottkim":252c43c2 said:
Caustic Burno":252c43c2 said:
Varies too much depending on moon phase.
There are places that currents are more consistent. The Gulf Stream from just south of Key West on up to offshore of Miami would be a prime place. 2 to 6 knt current always running northward is a mighty, unstoppable force. I've wondered why it hasn't been considered. Or maybe it has.

Surely there is some way to put turbines in the Mississippi that would not interfere with barge traffic and produce electricity all the way from the great lakes to the gulf.

Have to have the elevation drop to turn the generator or the current will just go around.
It is just science the principle of fluid dynamics.
 

Latest posts

Top