Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Discussions of conventional and alternative energy production technologies.

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Graeme » Sun 16 Mar 2014, 17:59:23

DTE completes conversion of coal-fired power plant to biomass

DTE Energy Services, Inc. (DTEES) (NYSE: DTE) has finished its construction project to convert a shuttered coal-fired power plant at the Port of Stockton to operate on biomass fuel.
The plant, known as Stockton Biomass, began commercial operations on Feb. 21. It is selling its renewable power to PG&E Company to help it meet its renewable energy requirement.
The plant will use about 320,000 tons of woody biomass fuel annually to generate about 45 megawatts of power – enough electricity to meet the needs of 45,000 homes. The fuel primarily is derived from urban wood waste, tree trimmings and agricultural processes.
"We are excited to have this green energy plant operational and appreciate the support we've received from the Port of Stockton, local officials and community leaders to make it a reality," said Steve Sorrentino, Vice President Wholesale Power & Renewables, DTEES. "We recognize the positive economic impact of this facility on the community and look forward to partnering with the city of Stockton for many years to come."
The site, once one of the most polluted in San Joaquin Valley, now is home to one of the cleanest solid-fuel power plants in the country. It is providing 35 high-quality jobs and another 100 indirectly involved with DTE Stockton's fuel supply infrastructure.
The plant began operation in 1989 as a coal-fired power plant and ceased operation in April 2009. DTEES purchased it in June 2010 with plans to convert the plant to biomass. At its peak, the construction project employed about 100 workers. DTEES replaced the boilers and employed the best available control technologies to minimize air emissions.
DTEES, a subsidiary of DTE Energy, is headquartered in Ann Arbor, Mich. It has completed similar biomass conversions in Cassville, Wis. and Bakersfield, Calif. The company also operates biomass power plants in Woodland, Calif. and Mobile, Ala. An official ribbon-cutting for the Stockton plant will be held later this spring.


pennenergy
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Master
Master
 
Posts: 13257
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 03:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Graeme » Fri 21 Mar 2014, 17:39:06

Cleaning Up Climate Change Polluting Is Cheaper and Easier than We Thought

This week another group of esteemed scientists said that climate change poses a dire threat to our communities. New evidence also confirmed that one of the best tools for defusing this threat is within reach. On Thursday NRDC released a report showing that the United States can cut more carbon pollution from power plants at less cost than previously thought.

This latest analysis shows that firm limits on power plant emissions can eliminate up to 700 million tons of carbon pollution per year in 2020. That’s equivalent to taking up to 130 million cars off the road. The U.S. can also save up to $60 billion in avoided climate change and medical costs in 2020. Those are major savings, and they can’t come soon enough.

Power plants kick out 40 percent of the carbon pollution in our country. The U.S. limits mercury, arsenic, and soot from power plants. And yet, amazingly, there are no national limits on how much carbon these plants can dump into our atmosphere. That's not right, and we need to fix it.

In June, the Environmental Protection Agency will propose the first-ever carbon limits on power plants. NRDC’s report shows that strong limits can save money, protect health, and stabilize the climate. We owe it to future generations to rein in this dangerous pollution.


nrdc
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Master
Master
 
Posts: 13257
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 03:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Graeme » Sun 23 Mar 2014, 17:11:30

Planned Coal-Fired Power Plant Retirements Continue to Increase

The need to comply with the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) regulations together with weak electricity demand growth and continued competition from generators fueled by natural gas have recently led several power producers to announce plans to retire coal-fired facilities.

Between 2012 and 2020, about 60 gigawatts of coal-fired capacity is projected to retire in the AEO2014 Reference case, which assumes implementation of the MATS standards, as well as other existing laws and regulations. The recently announced 5.4 gigawatts of retirements reflect particular strategies of coal plant operators and provide a view of some key drivers in coal plant retirement decisions.

Tennessee Valley Authority. On November 14, 2013, the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) announced that it was retiring eight coal-fired units with nearly 3,000 megawatts (MW) of generating capacity. Two units at TVA's Paradise Fossil Plant (1,230 MW), Unit 8 at the Widows Creek Fossil Plant (465 MW), and all five units at its Colbert Fossil Plant (1,184 MW) are now slated for retirement. The current retirement plans are an addition to TVA's previously reported retirement plans announced in 2011. TVA officials gave no fixed dates for the planned retirements, but they stated that the units will not operate beyond the MATS implementation date (April 2015).

South Carolina Electric & Gas. South Carolina Electric & Gas (SCEG) announced that it had ceased operations at its Canadys Station generating facility earlier in November. The 295-MW plant's closing is part of SCEG's efforts to reduce emissions and to comply with MATS regulations that are scheduled to take effect in 2015. SCEG originally planned to convert the units to natural gas before retiring them in 2018.

Consumers Energy. Consumers Energy (CE) petitioned the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) to approve a bond issue to cover costs pertaining to the closure, decommissioning, and demolition of three coal-fired power plants. The facilities, Units 4 and 5 of the B.C. Cobb Plant (312 MW), Units 7 and 8 of the J.C. Weadock Plant (310 MW), and Units 1, 2, and 3 of the J.R. Whiting Plant (325 MW), would cease operations by April 2016. CE stated that the units would be shut down because the installation of additional emissions controls necessary to achieve compliance with EPA environmental regulations would be uneconomical. It was announced on December 3, 2013, that MPSC had approved the bond issue.

Energy Capital Partners. New Jersey-based Energy Capital Partners (ECP) filed paperwork with the Independent System Operator of New England (ISONE) to close the Brayton Point generating facility in 2017 after it failed to reach a deal on a new power-purchase agreement. Brayton Point currently has agreements with ISONE through May 30, 2016. ISONE voted to reject the retirement of the coal-fired units on December 19, 2013, after which the company stated it would go forward with plans to retire all units. Three of the four Brayton Point generating units, totaling about 1,084 MW, are coal-fired; the remaining 435 MW of generator capacity are powered by oil or natural gas. ECP had just recently finalized the purchase of the 1,520-MW facility from Dominion Resources in September 2013.

Georgia Power. Georgia Power (GP) announced that it planned to file a request with the Georgia Public Service Commission (GPSC) to decertify Unit 3 at its Mitchell generating facility. If approved by the GPSC, GP plans to retire the 155-MW unit before the end of April 2015. GP had proposed to convert the unit to use biomass, but the conversion was determined not to be cost effective.

Coal-fired electric generator retirements—announcements since November 2013


theenergycollective
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Master
Master
 
Posts: 13257
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 03:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Graeme » Mon 24 Mar 2014, 19:10:15

Coal Industry Stock Outlook - March 2014

Given the mounting environmental pressure, there is definitely a move away from coal as a power source. Per a report from Industrial Info Resources, active coal mining projects in the U.S. have declined by 39% from 2011 levels. Per the report, there were $12.3 billion worth of active coal projects in 2011, which declined to $7.5 billion in 2013.


Per the same EIA report, U.S. coal exports in 2013 touched 118 MMst, 6.1% lower than export levels achieved in 2012. EIA pegs U.S. coal export at 103.3 MMst and 98.9 MMst in 2014 and 2015, respectively. The decline in export is a function of continued economic weakness in Europe and higher production from other coal exporting nations.

Besides Australia and Russia, which has the second largest coal reserve next only to the U.S., the U.S. coal exporters could face competition from Indonesia. Australia is trying to tap demand in the Chinese and Japanese markets, thereby posing a tough competition to U.S. producers.


zacks
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Master
Master
 
Posts: 13257
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 03:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Subjectivist » Tue 25 Mar 2014, 08:36:18

This is the most recent long term graph I could find for America,
http://www.indexmundi.com/energy.aspx?c ... oduct=coal

It shows how coal mining in the US grew quite a bit from 1980 to 2000 and since then has mor or less plateaued. I credit the rapid expansion of natural gas burning electric power plants for this plateau. Even so the EIA project coal will remain at least a third of baseload power for the US through the end of this century. Most of the decline from the current 45% to 33% is going to come from growth in other power sources, not an a decline in coal use. IOW it is projected that just as much coal will be burned in America in 2014 and 2064, no perceptible drop is expected.

When you add in all the coal being shipped to China and India for them to burn it looks to me like King Coal is back at the front of the line for as far as the eye can see.
II Chronicles 7:14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
User avatar
Subjectivist
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 4027
Joined: Sat 28 Aug 2010, 06:38:26
Location: Northwest Ohio

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Tue 25 Mar 2014, 09:16:08

Sub - And hence the potential error in using short term trends to predict long term forecast. Coal production has slipped a bit in the last few years. But not just because of the NG switch but also due to a price drop part of which was due to NG switching but also economic slowdown. But what's in store for the future of coal as economic activity picks up and NG prices increase? Over the last 50 years or so coal has had periodically production declines as we’ve just seen recently but that hasn’t stopped production from increasing from around 450 million tons in 1960 to over 1 billion tons by 2009.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10452
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Subjectivist » Tue 25 Mar 2014, 09:45:33

ROCKMAN wrote:Sub - And hence the potential error in using short term trends to predict long term forecast. Coal production has slipped a bit in the last few years. But not just because of the NG switch but also due to a price drop part of which was due to NG switching but also economic slowdown. But what's in store for the future of coal as economic activity picks up and NG prices increase? Over the last 50 years or so coal has had periodically production declines as we’ve just seen recently but that hasn’t stopped production from increasing from around 450 million tons in 1960 to over 1 billion tons by 2009.


Is that the US rate or the world rate? Also do you have a link to your data source, I searched this morning and my earlier post was the best I came up with.
II Chronicles 7:14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
User avatar
Subjectivist
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 4027
Joined: Sat 28 Aug 2010, 06:38:26
Location: Northwest Ohio

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Tue 25 Mar 2014, 12:24:06

Can't find the original on I used but here's some global and US stats. An interesting one back to 1980: http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.o ... till-king/

And another that shows despite short term dips the growth of ff consumption has been relentless: http://www.worldwatch.org/global-fossil ... ion-surges

And here's that long history of increasing US coal production:
http://gregor.us/fossil-fuels/can-the-u ... t-of-coal/
Last edited by Tanada on Tue 25 Mar 2014, 12:33:17, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: fixed broken link
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10452
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Graeme » Wed 26 Mar 2014, 02:30:40

Growth in China’s carbon emissions has halved

Growth in China’s carbon emissions is slowing sharply, under pressure from climate and pollution targets and slower economic expansion, data on coal consumption show.

In China, coal consumption and carbon emissions are very closely correlated because coal is such a dominant part of the country’s energy mix.

As a result, analysis of coal trends provides an insight into the outlook for carbon emissions by the world’s biggest polluter.

The latest data suggest growth in coal consumption has already started to slow dramatically.

China’s coal consumption grew just 2.6% last year, to 3.61 billion tonnes, according to the China National Coal Association in January.

That compared with coal consumption growth of 6.4% in 2012, according to BP data, and a compound average annual growth rate in coal consumption of 8.8% from 2000-2012.

A halving of growth in coal consumption implies a halving in carbon emissions growth.

As the world largest carbon emitter, that is good news for a global response to climate change.



Last updated on 24 March 2014, 12:33 pm

ANALYSIS: new data indicates country’s coal pollution could be on a long-term, downward trajectory

Choking air pollution levels are forcing Chinese authorities to take tougher action against heavy industry (Pic: Mad House Photography)
Choking air pollution levels are forcing Chinese authorities to take tougher action against heavy industry (Pic: Mad House Photography)

By Gerard Wynn

Growth in China’s carbon emissions is slowing sharply, under pressure from climate and pollution targets and slower economic expansion, data on coal consumption show.

In China, coal consumption and carbon emissions are very closely correlated because coal is such a dominant part of the country’s energy mix.

As a result, analysis of coal trends provides an insight into the outlook for carbon emissions by the world’s biggest polluter.

The latest data suggest growth in coal consumption has already started to slow dramatically.

China’s coal consumption grew just 2.6% last year, to 3.61 billion tonnes, according to the China National Coal Association in January.

That compared with coal consumption growth of 6.4% in 2012, according to BP data, and a compound average annual growth rate in coal consumption of 8.8% from 2000-2012.

A halving of growth in coal consumption implies a halving in carbon emissions growth.

As the world largest carbon emitter, that is good news for a global response to climate change.

There are two pauses for optimism.

First, while it is good news that carbon emissions growth is slowing, it is another matter for China to halt growth and start to cut emissions. Second, even as China does pull back, other emerging economies and notably India are likely to take its place.

Trend

China’s coal consumption has surged in the last decade, in step with the country’s economic growth (see Figure 1).

The mutual dependence with GDP growth helps explain why it has been for China to wean off coal, even as the damage from air pollution on human health has been documented.

Coal is important as a cheap, indigenous energy resource. While coal consumption growth is now slowing, it will remain the bedrock of the country’s energy economy.

China coal_466

There are twin pressures on China’s coal consumption: the threat of global climate change, and increasingly public criticism of the nation’s air quality.

Regarding climate change, China five years ago set an intensity target to cut carbon emissions per unit of GDP by 40-45% by 2020 compared with 2005.

In 2005, China’s carbon intensity was just over 1 kilogramme of CO2 per $ of GDP, according to World Bank GDP data.

Of course, China sets lots of targets under successive five-year plans, and misses lots of them. But the carbon intensity may be different, as an international pledge made by previous Premier Wen Jiabao, at a United Nations climate conference in 2009.

Most recently, the country has drifted off the target (see Figure 2). To get back on track, China will have to cut carbon emissions more urgently.


Image

Regarding air quality, cutting pollution is now an urgent policy priority tied to maintaining social order.

Indicating how seriously authorities are taking the issue, this January China announced a new plan to cut coal’s share of energy use to 65% in 2014, down from 65.7% in 2013 and 67% in 2012, in a bid to improve air quality in major cities.

That represents an acceleration of previous plans, which envisioned coal coming down to 65% of total energy consumption by 2015.

What it means for coal consumption depends on economic growth.

“With total energy consumption growth targeted at 3.2%, coal consumption would rise by just 1.6% this year (2014),” said Bank of America Merrill Lynch in a research note last Thursday.

“But if GDP growth holds up above 7% (which is our assumption), coal demand growth of about 3% is more likely.”

That would still be more than a halving of annual growth compared with 2012.

Outlook

Both emerging data for coal consumption and the emissions and pollution targets suggest that China’s coal consumption has turned a corner and is on a long-term, downward trajectory.


rtcc
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Master
Master
 
Posts: 13257
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 03:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Tanada » Wed 26 Mar 2014, 06:16:09

The observation that China is "only" burning 3,610,000,000 tons of coal as of 2013 is hardly something we should be celebrating.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 13825
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Wed 26 Mar 2014, 09:25:44

And one should pay attention to what is actually said and not what one hopes they mean: “Indicating how seriously authorities are taking the issue, this January China announced a new plan to cut coal’s share of energy use…” Which doesn’t necessarily mean China will be burning less coal to make electricity but that other sources of electricity production will be contributing even more. The facts are rather clear: from http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.o ... e-its-use/

In 2000 the US and China were consuming about the same amount of coal. Since then US consumption has declined a bit but is still rather flat. China has steadily increased from about 1.6 billion st to 3.6 billion st…increasing 225% with now indication of that growth rate decreasing. IMHO the best news that can be had is that China’s new and expanding coal-burning plants are more efficient and less producing. But there’s still an ever increasing number of those plants.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10452
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Synapsid » Wed 26 Mar 2014, 15:29:07

Keep an eye on India. China's increase in rate of coal consumption is declining (good news) and the IEA expects it to be 2.6% in 2018. China uses five times as much coal as India.

The IEA figure for increase in India's coal use for 2018 is 4.9%. That rate is likely to increase. I think this is not good news, particularly since the same trend holds for Thailand, Vietnam (which was a coal exporter until about last year but is now importing), Indonesia, Japan and South Korea. Lots of people in those countries, 1.2 billion in India alone and another quarter of a billion in Indonesia.
Synapsid
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 780
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 20:21:50

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Wed 26 Mar 2014, 16:46:13

I'll ignore the short term trend and just stick with the 10 year cycle. The world has been consistently increasing coal consumption for decades. Even the US, land of the formerly cheap oil and perpetually cheap NG, coal consumption has steadily increased for 50 YEARS. And now with oil having become much more expensive and NG increasing in value (especially international LNG) we should expect the global consumption of coal to decrease? Why...just because it will destroy the ecology of the planet? Get serious. LOL.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10452
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Graeme » Wed 26 Mar 2014, 19:43:43

Global coal demand growth slows slightly, IEA says in latest 5-year outlook

Coal demand will grow at an average rate of 2.3% per year through 2018, the new book reports, compared with the 2012 report’s forecast of 2.6% for the five years through 2017 and the actual growth rate of 3.4% per year between 2007 and 2012.

Chinese policies are already affecting the global coal market, Medium-Term Coal Market Report 2013 finds. While China will account for nearly 60% of new global demand over the next five years, government efforts to encourage energy efficiency and diversify electricity generation will dent that growth, slowing the global increase in demand.

Despite its moderated demand forecast, the report does not project peak coal in China within the next five years, and the nation’s consumption and production will remain comparable to that of the rest of the world combined. Moreover, the report notes that China has approved a number of coal conversion projects to produce liquid fuels and synthetic natural gas – developments that bear watching as they could significantly reduce the country’s demand for other fossil fuels.

“During the next five years, coal gasification will contribute more to China’s gas supply than shale gas,” said IEA Director of Energy Markets and Security Keisuke Sadamori. “While there are many uncertainties about this technology, the potential scale of projects in China involving coal to produce synthetic natural gas and synthetic liquids is enormous. If this were to become reality it would mark not just an important development in coal markets but would also imply
revisions to gas and oil forecasts.”

For the rest of Asia, coal demand is forecast to stay buoyant over the next five years. India and countries in Southeast Asia are increasing consumption, and India will rival China as the top importer in the next five years, the report says.


iea

However, coal demand is expected to decline from 2020 onwards
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Master
Master
 
Posts: 13257
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 03:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Wed 26 Mar 2014, 20:02:18

"However, coal demand is expected to decline from 2020 onwards". IOW coal consumption is expected to increase for the next 6 years. I'm good with that. And in 2020 we'll see what the projection for future coal consumption is at that time. We should have a much more reliable projection then.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10452
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Graeme » Sat 29 Mar 2014, 17:38:12

2014 May Be Coal's Last Dance

The stock market is as dynamic as the world it efficiently models. Each market dances with the other within limited degrees of separation. If prices for natural gas go up, the demand for coal goes up, and companies that transport coal will benefit. Indeed, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration coal receipts are up at power plants and barges that suffered last year may be in for an increase in earnings this year, especially those that can transport liquid petrochemicals such as liquefied natural gas.

On Monday, the Obama administration authorized additional LNG exports from a proposed Oregon terminal. Many think the timing of the approval is highly political and connected to the Ukraine crisis. Either way, there's much evidence to show that in the long term, demand for LNG is growing while the demand for coal is slowing.

But in the short term coal may have one last burst of "energy." The EIA also published a report showing a drop in the number of "days of burn," which is used as a gauge for both inventory levels and, to a large extent, anticipated consumption of coal. That metric fell below 60 days for the first time since 2011, which is a sign that coal consumption could increase this quarter.

Indeed, coal consumption by utility companies is up, despite environmental campaigns, due to an increase in the price of natural gas prices. And as inventory levels start to catch up with demand, coal is regaining market share from natural gas. Additionally, high inventories of coal were drawn down by utility companies in 2012/2013 and new coal purchases were generally lower than average throughout 2013. The end result is low inventory coming into 2014 and an increase in demand, even if the demand will only be short term in nature. This is further illustrated by the graph below, which shows an increase in the percent of coal purchased on the spot market.


fool
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Master
Master
 
Posts: 13257
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 03:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Tanada » Sun 30 Mar 2014, 07:47:14

Then, just last Friday, the Obama Administration gave a big boost to CCS when the EPA published its CCS final rule. This rule is sweet for CCS fans. The EPA says the “rule provides a clear pathway for using carbon capture and sequestration technologies.” The key is that this rule excludes CO2 streams that are sent into underground injection wells for sequestration from the EPA’s onerous hazardous waste regulations under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. This rule is, in essence, a get-out-of-jail-free card for CCS with respect to hazardous waste regulation. The EPA put it this way:

EPA is taking this action because the Agency believes that the management of these CO2 streams, when meeting certain conditions, does not present a substantial risk to human health or the environment, and therefore additional regulation pursuant to RCRA’s hazardous waste regulations is unnecessary. EPA expects that this amendment will substantially reduce the uncertainty associated with identifying these CO2 streams under RCRA subtitle C, and will also facilitate the deployment of [CCS] by providing additional regulatory certainty.

All of this comes with the backdrop of the EPA’s already unveiled regulations for emissions from new power plants and its anticipated release this summer of the draft rules for existing power plants. Many decry these EPA rules as a “war on coal.” They fail to recognize that it’s not regulation that has stalled the rush to build any new coal plants in the United States, it’s economics—namely, the low price of natural gas. As for existing coal power plants, it is expected that the EPA rule will undergo intense public and stakeholder participation across the board and that local state governments will be left with much flexibility to implement what works best for them.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelkran ... bamas-epa/

It sounds to me as if all you have to do to get approval for massive new coal power infrastructure is to promise to sequester more carbon than natural gas emits. That standard makes 'clean coal' cleaner than Natural Gas. The way it stands under normal combustion Methane which is CH4 comes out ahead of coal which is CH-CH-CH in long chains meaning you need two oxygen molecules to burn Methane yielding (1)CO2+(2)H2O in coal combustion you need three O2 molecules yielding (1)O+(2)CO2+(1)H2O to get about the same amount of energy released. This is why Coal burning is twice as CO2 intensive as Methane and half as water vapor intensive as Methane. By claiming that they are going to sequester more than 50% of their CO2 emissions the new coal plants will have a better rate than Methane, in theory. The price differential for coal is so large that they can use a lot of energy on sequestration and still have a more profitable power plant than they would have burning Methane.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 13825
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Sun 30 Mar 2014, 12:20:39

T - Not only that but the gov't will also let the tax payers help pay for it. A $400 million CO2 pipeline is currently being built from a power plant in Ft Bend County, Texas to the West Ranch Field 80 miles away. The short story on the W.A. Parish power plant:

"Now, this power behemoth, the biggest power plant in Texas and second biggest fossil fuel-burning plant in the nation, is planning to build one of the country’s more innovative pollution control projects. It will use some of its pollution to pump oil out of the ground. Plant owner NRG said it will begin construction next year of its “carbon capture” system. The system will be installed on one of the plant’s four coal-burning power generation units (four other units burn natural gas). “This will be the first commercial-scale carbon capture on a power plant in the United States,” said Jeff Baudier, CEO of Petra Nova, NRG’s wholly-owned carbon capture business. Here’s how it’s suppose to work: the W.A. Parish plant burns some 36,000 tons of coal a day, producing tons of carbon dioxide, a major greenhouse gas linked to climate change." The rest at: http://stateimpact.npr.org/texas/2012/0 ... -pump-oil/

The CO2, from the SECOND LARGEST SOURCE OF GHG IN THE US, will be sequestered there. The tax payers will pay $200 million of the cost. Half of the plant's capacity comes from coal and their other half from NG. With the new rules they can sub the now cheaper coal for the increasingly costlier NG. This should allow Texas to easily retain the title of the LARGEST COAL CONSUMING STATE IN THE US. And if we were our own country (which we are in the minds of many Texans) we would rank 11th in the world.

Once again the POTUS has proved to be one of the biggest supporters of the fossil fuel industry we've seen in the White House in a very long time. Not only will the project allow more coal consumption but we'll get some more oil out of the ground in the bargain. LOL.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10452
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Graeme » Sun 30 Mar 2014, 16:00:33

And this from the front page:

The Losing Economics of Investing in Aging Coal Plants: Part 1

Across the United States, economics are increasingly favoring investment in renewable energy at the expense of dirty coal energy. As the price of solar dips below coal and even natural gas in some instances, the domestic demand for coal wanes and a growing number of companies are eager to get out of their investments in aging coal plants that cost more than they’re worth to upgrade and, in a growing number of instances, just to keep running.

As the nation’s coal power plants age, they become more expensive to maintain. The costs associated with making long-term investments in an aging coal plant, including replacing breaking parts and upgrades like scrubbers and other pollution controls, often exceeds the economic viability of coal in the long-term. Meanwhile, the natural gas prices remain low, ample wind and solar energy provides cost-effective alternatives, and energy efficiency, always the lowest-cost resource, reduces demand. Further public health protections and the first federal standards limiting carbon pollution from power plants—a key driver of climate change—are also on the horizon, all making dirty coal a shaky investment proposition.



Looking ahead, nearly a quarter of the nation’s coal fleet could be retired by end of the decade. Of 536 coal-fired plants in U.S., 84 have already announced retirement and Bloomberg New Energy Finance estimates that 146 units more may retire by 2020. Coal’s contribution to the U.S. energy supply also is falling. Coal accounted for 39 percent of total U.S. electricity generation last year, down from about 50 percent from 2003-2008 and a rebound from a record low 37 percent in 2012.


theenergycollective
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Master
Master
 
Posts: 13257
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 03:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: THE Coal Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Graeme » Mon 31 Mar 2014, 18:11:28

Beijing stops issuing permits for coal production

The Chinese government has stopped issuing permits for coal production and operations, considered a positive measure for the sector as coals firms are now allowed to operate freely without having to pay for other licensed coal companies.

Some experts said that having to obtain a permit for coal production and operations of a business were obstacles in the way of the development of the sector.

In addition, they suggested that the government cancel the qualification of companies that held the rights to operate the railway but were earning a profit by charging higher fees from other railway users. Thus, limited railway resources could effectively serve coal-related firms.

According to the Chinese-language Securities Daily, coal companies and other relevant firms have been complaining about insufficient railway network capacity, which has led to high fees charged by railway operators. The fee governs the money that subsidiaries of China Railway Corporation charge from coal companies. These subsidiaries have the right to operate the railway and charge a high fee from companies which need to use the railway but do not possess such a right.

Some rail sections are operated by two different subsidiaries, which doubles the amount coal firms have to pay the fee to both subsidiaries. A coal firm sometimes has to pay up to 50 yuan to 60 yuan (US$8-$9.60) for each ton of coal shipped by train.

The owner of one of such subsidiaries earned 4.8 million yuan (US$772,600) in half a month from charging the rail use fee, according to a person working in the coal industry in Ordos.

In addition, the fee might be raised if coal is sold at better prices in the market. In 2006 and 2008, the fee had touched 120 yuan (US$19.30) per ton of coal.

However, a majority of coal companies reported a deficit or are on the verge of incurring losses because they still have to pay five to 10 yuan (US$0.80-$1.60) a fee for every ton of coal shipped despite the falling coal prices.


wantchinatimes
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Master
Master
 
Posts: 13257
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 03:00:00
Location: New Zealand

PreviousNext

Return to Energy Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests