America needs every scours of energy available to provided constant power to
Americans. This also requires that pipelines are allowed to be build.
Everyone realizes that we couldn't instantly shut down all coal fired power
plants, but many people recognize the environmental effects of coal burning, and
the heavily subsidized externalities of its use.Every time we build
a net zero house, install a solar array, erect a wind turbine, or convert a coal
fired plant to natural gas we are heading in the right direction!It's a shame we've allowed the special interests to turn the
environment in a partisan political issue, and the use of straw man arguments
are not contributing to the discussion!
What in Tucket - you have some misinformation in that post. For example, It
doesn't cost $50 to charge a Tesla. Not even a small fraction of that
number. The average electric car costs about 3.6 cents a mile in
electrical cost. $50 would be enough electricity to drive 1,388.88 miles. The
reality is it cost about $7.20 to fully charge a Tesla given you've drained
the batteries and driven about 240 miles. A leaf full charge is much less than
that... something like $3.24. But yes, there are some cool other
technologies out there on the horizon. Time will tell.Coal on the
other hand... even in China... say a year over year decrease in usage. They are
still the worlds largest user/polluter... and south Asia (india) keeps adding
capacity. There are still markets out there for Utah coal... it just will not
be in the US for much longer.
One word: Batteries.The vision for the 21st century is increasing
use of renewables with battery storage. Tesla's solar and Powerwall
battery systems are the model that most analysts see as the immediate future.
In fact, as electric vehicle batteries are retired, those batteries are actually
still quite useful for energy storage for buildings, and I've heard
entrepreneurs are already using outmoded EV batteries for that very purpose.As more renewables are added to the grid, natural gas is THE ideal
partner because of its flexibility in being rampped up and down as needed with
renewables' variablity. Baseload power can be problematic as it cannot be
easily increased or decreased at will, and so you have situations where too much
electricity is on the system (e.g., renewables are pouring power onto the grid,
but coal and nuclear can't be throttled back to accommodate all that
marginal-cost free power), as in Texas occasionally, and you get negative power
prices because the power can't be consumed quickly enough and the excess
power has to be dumped on the open market that may not need it either.Batteries and other energy storage systems are the solution.
Loose the power plants, you loose the western power grid. Solar and w8nd have
there place but as of now they are not the may character. Or and by the way, the
skies in Emery County are brilliant blue today. (Sic)Lose the power
plants. Wind. May character? Oh, and by the way...the answer to your
question? Natural gas.
I get it that all who have opined so far do not like coal, which is fine. But
what is your solution? Do you have one that really would work if coal ceased
tomorrow? I didn’t think so.Do you realize what the consequences
would be if both the Huntington and Hunter power plants went down? I’m
waiting for an answer. Well I’ll tell you, you would cease to power in
your existence unless you have a generator. No power, no food, no charging
electric cars, do riding electric trains, no furnaces working, Loose the
power plants, you loose the western power grid. Solar and w8nd have there place
but as of now they are not the may character. Or and by the way, the skies in
Emery County are brilliant blue today.
I guess the Chinese did not get the message that coal is dead. They build a
coal power plant each week. One article said 30% of the pollution over LA is
from China. Coal is still the least expensive and putting us dependent on wind
and solar won't cut it. Coal plants should be required to scrub out
nitrogen and sulfur emissions and particulates of course. As for
electric cars those that feel hydrogen is the fuel of the future say hold on.
The hydrogen system being developed by an Israeli company and Electriq-Global of
Australia seems to have a hydrogen on demand system that does not require a big
steel tank such as natural gas cars require. They claim that the
car will have a range of over 600 miles vs Tesla as above, take 5 minutes to
refuel, and cost $25 a tank full vs $50 for a charge. This system
of course is not power generation, but could be a game changer for vehicles. The
emission is H20.
If you google this chap's name, the one who wrote it, you get a result
"Terry Jarrett, author at Breitbart" among others. He's written a
host of pro coal, anti environmental articles. It's not that
he's not entitled to do so. What I ask, is why do these articles get so
much traction here in this publication?
It sure was nice of the desnews to print this advertisement for coal. Question: Did you get paid for it or was this one pro bono?I
particularly like how the industry shills like to pretend coal employment is so
important. Never mind that the entire industry employs fewer people than
Arby's. All while ignoring the huge environmental costs which the industry
doesnt pay at all. And guess who trump has in charge of the EPA? A
coal lobbyist. So much for 'draining the swamp'.
"A hefty spate of regulations over the past decade saw coal plants close in
record numbers."Yeah? The last 2 years regulations have been
rolled back, even to allow continued contamination of rivers, streams and lakes.
You know what closed some coal plants? The huge Chinese market that is moving
past coal. They no longer want our coal and are working to clean up their air.
Now, with tariffs, that market is closed for good. People are dying from coal
pollution, especially in areas like the Wasatch front. Many coal miner jobs have
been lost to automation. I can understand why the author wants to protect coal,
but it's for money, not for the benefit of the public. Coal is being phased
out, but it's a slow process, just like the horse and carriage. If I were
working in a dying industry, I'd be spending nights on retraining.
Some folks don't get it coal is dead. The idea of burning coal
is primitive with what we now have available and what is coming.We
aren't going back to whale oil either, these are energies and ideas from
our past now.No amount of trump turning over our EPA to coal shills
and harming the environment with mercury will bring it back.We may
have to wait for grandpa to pass before America as a nation can start to catch
up with the rest of the world with clean energy. After all we
started it...and then Reagan happened, and the rest of the world kept improving
while America caved to the hydrocarbon lobbyists.
While reading this I was wondering what coal company this guy worked for. I
wasn't disappointed in my skepticism when I got to the end of the
advertisement.But, he's selling that "clean coal," not
the old fashioned stuff that contributes heavily to global warming and air
pollution.As we return to the golden days of yesteryear, maybe we
should advocate for better buggy whips, spats, and hand cranked washing
machines. They too were good in their day.