Comments on: Why Can’t We Build Coal Plants, Too? http://www.jeffrubinssmallerworld.com/2010/02/03/why-can%e2%80%99t-we-build-coal-plants-too/ Sat, 04 Sep 2010 10:56:33 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8 hourly 1 By: sergedd http://www.jeffrubinssmallerworld.com/2010/02/03/why-can%e2%80%99t-we-build-coal-plants-too/comment-page-1/#comment-394 sergedd Sat, 06 Feb 2010 00:13:23 +0000 http://www.jeffrubinssmallerworld.com/?p=281#comment-394 the emissions are different. There is some CO2 released during the mining and processing of ore and some Tritium released into environment. It's still much better than coal and the end products are locallized as opposed to global CO2. I see more future in smaller Hyperon reactors, but for the investment, I'd rather go wind/solar and efficiency wedges first. I don't know how France does it. Both Canada and US had Nuclear go very expensive, hence no new plants. the emissions are different. There is some CO2 released during the mining and processing of ore and some Tritium released into environment. It's still much better than coal and the end products are locallized as opposed to global CO2. I see more future in smaller Hyperon reactors, but for the investment, I'd rather go wind/solar and efficiency wedges first. I don't know how France does it. Both Canada and US had Nuclear go very expensive, hence no new plants.

]]> By: sergedd http://www.jeffrubinssmallerworld.com/2010/02/03/why-can%e2%80%99t-we-build-coal-plants-too/comment-page-1/#comment-393 sergedd Sat, 06 Feb 2010 00:06:50 +0000 http://www.jeffrubinssmallerworld.com/?p=281#comment-393 Great work Jeff, enjoyed your book several times over too. Gary Holden, CEO Enmax gave us a presentation confirming decommisioning 100 Coal plants in the US and how his corp is moving to more gas co-gen plants. With electricity trading every 5 minutes, the coal plants are more expensive than wind , so the coal plants are left with unwanted power (when the wind blows). It will get even less economical when the total cost of coal is accounted for through CO2 capture or carbon tax. Electricty grid and trading is an interesting topic. Solar is not far away. <br><br>I follow the climate thing too (I was a climatologist and meteorologist for a while). The trend is real, but even if one does not beleive it, what gives us the right to use our air as a dumping ground? Interestingly, Alberta has a $15/ton levy on large emitrers, so there may be light at the end of the tunnel.<br>Serge Great work Jeff, enjoyed your book several times over too. Gary Holden, CEO Enmax gave us a presentation confirming decommisioning 100 Coal plants in the US and how his corp is moving to more gas co-gen plants. With electricity trading every 5 minutes, the coal plants are more expensive than wind , so the coal plants are left with unwanted power (when the wind blows). It will get even less economical when the total cost of coal is accounted for through CO2 capture or carbon tax. Electricty grid and trading is an interesting topic. Solar is not far away.

I follow the climate thing too (I was a climatologist and meteorologist for a while). The trend is real, but even if one does not beleive it, what gives us the right to use our air as a dumping ground? Interestingly, Alberta has a $15/ton levy on large emitrers, so there may be light at the end of the tunnel.
Serge

]]> By: sergedd http://www.jeffrubinssmallerworld.com/2010/02/03/why-can%e2%80%99t-we-build-coal-plants-too/comment-page-1/#comment-121 sergedd Fri, 05 Feb 2010 22:13:23 +0000 http://www.jeffrubinssmallerworld.com/?p=281#comment-121 the emissions are different. There is some CO2 released during the mining and processing of ore and some Tritium released into environment. It's still much better than coal and the end products are locallized as opposed to global CO2. I see more future in smaller Hyperon reactors, but for the investment, I'd rather go wind/solar and efficiency wedges first. I don't know how France does it. Both Canada and US had Nuclear go very expensive, hence no new plants. the emissions are different. There is some CO2 released during the mining and processing of ore and some Tritium released into environment. It's still much better than coal and the end products are locallized as opposed to global CO2. I see more future in smaller Hyperon reactors, but for the investment, I'd rather go wind/solar and efficiency wedges first. I don't know how France does it. Both Canada and US had Nuclear go very expensive, hence no new plants.

]]> By: sergedd http://www.jeffrubinssmallerworld.com/2010/02/03/why-can%e2%80%99t-we-build-coal-plants-too/comment-page-1/#comment-120 sergedd Fri, 05 Feb 2010 22:06:50 +0000 http://www.jeffrubinssmallerworld.com/?p=281#comment-120 Great work Jeff, enjoyed your book several times over too. Gary Holden, CEO Enmax gave us a presentation confirming decommisioning 100 Coal plants in the US and how his corp is moving to more gas co-gen plants. With electricity trading every 5 minutes, the coal plants are more expensive than wind , so the coal plants are left with unwanted power (when the wind blows). It will get even less economical when the total cost of coal is accounted for through CO2 capture or carbon tax. Electricty grid and trading is an interesting topic. Solar is not far away. <br><br>I follow the climate thing too (I was a climatologist and meteorologist for a while). The trend is real, but even if one does not beleive it, what gives us the right to use our air as a dumping ground? Interestingly, Alberta has a $15/ton levy on large emitrers, so there may be light at the end of the tunnel.<br>Serge Great work Jeff, enjoyed your book several times over too. Gary Holden, CEO Enmax gave us a presentation confirming decommisioning 100 Coal plants in the US and how his corp is moving to more gas co-gen plants. With electricity trading every 5 minutes, the coal plants are more expensive than wind , so the coal plants are left with unwanted power (when the wind blows). It will get even less economical when the total cost of coal is accounted for through CO2 capture or carbon tax. Electricty grid and trading is an interesting topic. Solar is not far away.

I follow the climate thing too (I was a climatologist and meteorologist for a while). The trend is real, but even if one does not beleive it, what gives us the right to use our air as a dumping ground? Interestingly, Alberta has a $15/ton levy on large emitrers, so there may be light at the end of the tunnel.
Serge

]]> By: marcovth http://www.jeffrubinssmallerworld.com/2010/02/03/why-can%e2%80%99t-we-build-coal-plants-too/comment-page-1/#comment-119 marcovth Thu, 04 Feb 2010 15:01:01 +0000 http://www.jeffrubinssmallerworld.com/?p=281#comment-119 Of course, it costs billions and billions to store the waste and to dismantle old reactors.<br><br>If you include that in the electricity price, coal will likely be cheaper.<br><br>I think NASA's (the space agency) first mission should be to figure out how to drill 10km+ holes in an economical way to make geothermal energy feasible anywhere in the world.<br><br>Potter drilling is working hard on it, but NASA should team up with them.<br><br>Eventually, geothermal will be the only, cheapest, and reliable, way to replace oil for cars and coal/nuclear for electricity. At 10 km+ it's available anywhere in the world where you have water to generate steam through these holes. Of course, it costs billions and billions to store the waste and to dismantle old reactors.

If you include that in the electricity price, coal will likely be cheaper.

I think NASA's (the space agency) first mission should be to figure out how to drill 10km+ holes in an economical way to make geothermal energy feasible anywhere in the world.

Potter drilling is working hard on it, but NASA should team up with them.

Eventually, geothermal will be the only, cheapest, and reliable, way to replace oil for cars and coal/nuclear for electricity. At 10 km+ it's available anywhere in the world where you have water to generate steam through these holes.

]]>