Why Is Coal So Dangerous

Disadvantages of Coal
Coal is potentially radioactive. Other than abundant levels of carbon dioxide, coal also produces sufficient levels of outward radiation. ...Hmm Hafta check up on this one.

Coal destroys natural habitats. ...Hafta have a chat to God about this stuff up .

Coal creates high levels of carbon emissions. ...Well yeah it does coz it is made of carbon.

Coal is a non-renewable source of energy. ... Right, once it has gone it is gone forever. So if you don't like let's burn it all and use it to make cheap electricity.

Coal can be Deadly. ...Especially when somebody chucks a lump of it at yer.

Emission of harmful substances by coal......Yeah even if I burn the snags on the barby or when I cook an egg they give dangerous emmissions. Whew.


The trouble with Solar Energy is that you need a bleeding great fusion reactor in the form of a 1.4million km diameter fusion reactor at 123 million km distance sucking up anything and everything that gets within a bulls roar of it. before yer solar panels will work. This fusion reactor kills approx 60,000 people each year from skin cancer, about 20,000 of those are in Australia.

Coal related deaths world wide are approx 36,000 per year

adrian ss wrote:Disadvantages of Coal
Coal is potentially radioactive. Other than abundant levels of carbon dioxide, coal also produces sufficient levels of outward radiation. ...Hmm Hafta check up on this one.

Coal destroys natural habitats. ...Hafta have a chat to God about this stuff up .

Coal creates high levels of carbon emissions. ...Well yeah it does coz it is made of carbon.

Coal is a non-renewable source of energy. ... Right, once it has gone it is gone forever. So if you don't like let's burn it all and use it to make cheap electricity.

Coal can be Deadly. ...Especially when somebody chucks a lump of it at yer.

Emission of harmful substances by coal......Yeah even if I burn the snags on the barby or when I cook an egg they give dangerous emmissions.  Whew.


The trouble with Solar Energy is that you need a bleeding great fusion reactor  in the form of a 1.4million km diameter fusion reactor at 123 million km distance sucking up anything and everything that gets within a bulls roar of it. before yer solar panels will work. This fusion reactor kills approx 60,000 people each year from skin cancer, about 20,000 of those are in Australia.

Coal related deaths world wide are approx 36,000 per year

Burning coal releases some heavy metals including mercury. Coal ash also also contains carcinogenic and toxic heavy metals and depending on the source of the coal radioactive elements. Coal mining destroys prime agricultural land and releases methane a greenhouse gas that is 20x worse than C02! Transport and storage of coal can also release sub 2um particulate coal dust which ready enters the lungs where it essentially stays for life. Continual exposure to high levels of coal dust can result in a fatal disease- black lung.Most sun related skin cancers are preventable. I think the your coal death toll is probably understated because if you look at China their is an epidemic of respiratory disease there including lung cancer due to high levels of smoking and air pollution from industry, cars and coal burning.

In China, 366,000 deaths were attributed to coal in 2013 alone. In India, coal kills about 169,000 people annually.
In the United States, 50,000 coal-related deaths are recorded each year, with air pollution from coal-fired power stations contributing to four of the five leading causes of mortality in the US (heart disease, cancer, stroke and chronic respiratory diseases).
https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/killer-coal-just-how-bad-are-the-health-effects-of-coal/

THE UNPAID HEALTH BILL
How coal power plants make us sick
The main findings
Emissions from coal power plants in Europe contribute significantly to the burden of disease from environmental pollution. The brand-new figures published in this report show that European Union-wide impacts amount to more than 18,200 premature deaths, about 8,500 new cases of chronic bronchitis, and over 4 million lost working days each year. The economic costs of the health impacts from coal combustion in Europe are estimated at up to €42.8 billion per year. Adding emissions from coal power plants in Croatia, Serbia and Turkey, the figures for mortality increase to 23,300 premature deaths, or 250,600 life years lost, while the total costs are up to €54.7 billion annually.
These costs are mainly associated with respiratory and cardiovascular conditions, which are two important groups of leading chronic diseases in Europe. Together, coal power plants in Poland, Romania and Germany are responsible for more than half of the total health impacts. Substantial impacts are further attributed to coal combustion in Bulgaria, Czech Republic, France, Greece, Serbia, Turkey, and the United Kingdom.


Significant evidence exists on how long-term exposure to these air pollutants affects the lungs and the heart. They include chronic respiratory diseases, such as chronic bronchitis, emphysema and lung cancer, and cardiovascular diseases, such as myocardial infarctions, congestive heart failure, ischemic heart disease and heart arrhythmias. Acute effects include respiratory symptoms, such as chest tightness and coughing, as well as exacerbated asthma attacks. Children, older people and patients with an underlying condition are more susceptible to these effects. Recent research suggests that air pollution may also result in low birth weight and pre-term delivery as a result of maternal exposure during pregnancy.
Other hazardous substances emitted from the smokestacks of coal power plants are heavy metals, such as mercury, and persistent organic pollutants (POPs), such as dioxins and polycyclic aromatic chemicals (PAHs). These can either be breathed in or taken up indirectly via food and water. Special concern arises from the large mercury emissions from coal power plants as mercury can impair the cognitive development of children and cause irreversible damage to vital organs of the foetus. Coal power plants are the most important source of mercury in Europe, and the EU is addressing technical options to reduce these emissions within the framework of a new UN treaty.
http://www.env-health.org/IMG/pdf/heal_report_the_unpaid_health_bill_how_coal_power_plants_make_us_sick_final.pdf

Hey mods, can we just ban these 2 idiots so they can stop baiting each other on this forum please. It's a Gold Detecting and Prospecting Forum.

Cheers

Doug

rockhunter62 wrote:Hey mods, can we just ban these 2 idiots so they can stop baiting each other on this forum please. It's a Gold Detecting and Prospecting Forum.

Cheers

Doug

I note that their are dozens of off topic posts in the general discussion board that appear to be unrelated to gold detecting and prospecting.So would you ban anyone that posts any content or topic unrelated to Gold Detecting and Prospecting?

Don't read any Off Topics and start putting up a few gold related posts yourself.

Change the General Discussions section to read "General Discussions Any Topic" Or "General Discussions (Gold Topics Only)

The use of the word BAN and IDIOT has appeared to have inflamed this "off topic" thread and made it spiral out of control,ie throwing a spanner in the works.
I for one enjoy reading off topic subjects as long as they remain civil and respectful,I learn from these threads,if I'm in doubt I will research it myself.
Nearly every forum has peaks and troughs in it's life time,and a "off topic thread" keeps us MEMBERS connected in the quiet times or when it's belting down rain or I can't get out.
If it's upsetting one way of protecting ones self is to not read the "off topic" subjects.
As stated before planetcare has not breached any rules on this forum,it's only when members become antagonistic that problems occur.
I very much doubt that Adrian and Planetcare are idiots the word I would use is; passionate in their fields of interest.


cheers   moredeep

I agree with you on that, Moredeep.

Though sometimes I think Adrian rolls a dummy grenade through the door just to provoke some reaction. But that’s OK too.

Back in the 50s before coal was banned for domestic use i loved the smell of all the coal burning in fireplaces around the town or sitting near the open window of the steam train going to school. I'm not dead yet. Let it burn..

He doesn't just roll a grenade through the door just to provoke some reaction Pebbles, provocation is in his nature, he were born with it.

Kon.

Way back in 2007 I went to NZ for a holiday in February, got an invite to go prospecting with three locals on the South Island, I met them in Westport.
On my approach to the town I could smell coal burning and assumed there was a coal fired power Station nearby? It was a little cool for Summer, on
arrival at the home of the claim owner I asked about it? he said we, the locals burn coal in our homes for heating, was $10.00 per 6 X 4 trailer load at
many of the nearby coal mines.

A few days later I took the Train from Christchurch to Greymouth, nearly every 20 minutes we passed a coal train travelling in the opposite direction.
I asked the passengers on the train about it? They told me NZ has a vast coal export Industry for coaking coal used in steel making. I had to laugh
discretely to myself when they started ear bashing me about how bad Australia is for coal exports and carbon emissions.

They tried telling me the coaking coal is good, ( no carbon emissions ), yet thermal coal is bad ( very high carbon emissions ).
The mainstream media has a lot to answer for in regard to influencing peoples decisions and knowledge on facts by slight distortions
or miss truths.

I work in power station operation since I was 18 years old till I retired. There is a solution find a power source cheaper than coal and eliminate inefficient use of fuel in automotive activities, industry and home heating. I see this being done in lighting (not counting manufacture of them). Were money is involved a solution will be found.

Quote; "Where money is involved a solution will be found" "Halleluiah. Would the world have come up with a vaccine for COVID-19 within a year, if money were not made available in abundance?

Kon

geof_junk wrote: There is a solution find a power source cheaper than coal and eliminate inefficient use of fuel in automotive activities, industry and home heating. I see this being done in lighting (not counting manufacture of them)

Solar and wind generated electricity is cheaper than electricity produced from coal. This is why no one in the private sector in Australia or governments will finance any new coal fired power stations.

Kon61gold wrote:Quote; "Where money is involved a solution will be found" "Halleluiah. Would the world have come up with a vaccine for COVID-19 within a year, if money were not made available in abundance?

Kon

Money was not the only reason that covid vaccines were developed so quickly.The main reasons were new technology and the cooperation and sharing of knowledge by many scientists as a matter of urgency.

Yes it is only when mans a**e is on fire the impossible suddenly becomes possible. If  money were not put into these so called corporations housing scientist & their research, would scientists themselves have put the funds together to buy/use/ or progress any further by the use of this new technology? Or would they all be gathered together around King Arthurs table, scratching their heads?
Solar & wind generated electricity might be cheaper to manufacture & run than electricity produced from coal, but if what happened in Texas & Europe is now going to be yearly event, don't you think the world needs more reliable sources of power than just wind turbines or solar panels?

Kon.

https://www.uchicagomedicine.org/forefront/coronavirus-disease-covid-19/developing-covid19-vaccines-quickly

planetcare, do you see those little vials on that production line in the video, did the scientists themselves pay to make such technology, or were they paid for by investors & the mega rich corporations?
If an exorbitant amount of money were not put in by private corporations/enterprise/governments (well over 30 Billion dollars by the few countries we know of) in a race for a vaccine, it all would but come to a standstill (less for the hand full few mega rich of course)  A war itself is not won without money, for everything used up, takes money to replenish, or you end up losing the war.

Kon.

Kon61gold wrote:
Solar & wind generated electricity might be cheaper to manufacture & run than electricity produced from coal, but if what happened in Texas & Europe is now going to be yearly event, don't you think the world needs more reliable sources of power than just wind turbines or solar panels?  

Kon.

The  solution is  being able to store any XS electrical energy generated from solar and wind in pumped hydro, home batteries  and to move towards a hydrogen based economy with the H2 generated by electrolysis and stored as liq H2 or liq NH3 (which is easy to transport and can be easily converted back to H2 by passing over a catalyst developed by the Csiro and then used in a fuel cell or burned directly to produce electricity)
Their are potentially other sources of renewable energy like "hot rocks"  and wave motion generators and solar thermal. No one renewable technology will  be suitable for all locations or situations, it will be a combination of technologies.Critical to this will be a major upgrade of the electricity network to reduce energy losses and be able to rapidly switch in  the appropriate  renewable energy source at peak demand. This needs to be combined with a national energy conservation policy  to reduce the energy consumption for heating and cooling of homes and business. Another option for mainland Australia  is to get  more hydro power from Tas but this would require another under sea cable which would be very expensive.

Kon61gold wrote:planetcare, do you see those little vials on that production line in the video, did the scientists themselves pay to make such technology, or were they paid for by investors & the mega rich corporations?
Kon.

Of course  the scientist did not pay to make the technology they developed/discovered it  from their  own research efforts funded largely by grants(eg the Oxford vaccine )and the private sector through JV's with the pharmaceutical industry. Yes investors have put dollars in but so have Governments more so than probably any other time in vaccine development.Scientists developed /discovered through their research the new  vaccine technologies but to get these to the industrial scale and to  test them requires the technical and financial resources of the pharmaceutical industry no different to development of  drugs!

What about geo thermal energy ? A number of deep wells were sunk in northern S.A. The gov. also put millions in but it all died out . Nobody wanted to put more money in and it all faded away . I had shares in the company .

Did I read that it costs more energy to build a wind turbine than what it will ever produce ?

Minermike wrote: 

   Did I read that it costs more energy to   build a wind turbine   than what it will  ever produce ?

https://fullfact.org/online/wind-turbines-energy/

Renewable energy boom could force coal power to close early, says new report
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-24/coal-energy-closures-forced-by-renewable-boom/13186438

Minermike wrote:What about geo thermal energy ?    A number of deep  wells were sunk   in northern  S.A.    The gov. also put millions  in  but it all died out  .  Nobody wanted to put  more  money in and it all faded away . I had shares in the company .  

 

Geothermal Energy
Electricity Generation in Australia:
Recent Developments and Future Potential
Executive Summary
A recent Australia-wide census by the Australian Geothermal Association (AGA) showed that geothermal energy is already making a useful contribution to the Australian energy mix; direct-use geothermal is a successful and growing industry. Geothermally generated electricity can also play a role in Australia’s energy transition, but to achieve progress it is critical that government policy acknowledges and supports this potential.
The Australian geothermal industry experienced a sustained surge in activity from 2000 -2013 focussed on developing innovative technologies with huge potential. Although these efforts were not commercially successful, more conventional approaches to generating electricity with geothermal energy remain viable. For example, a new geothermal electricity power plant was recently commissioned in Winton, Queensland. The 310 kW plant is currently the only operating project in Australia, although a similar geothermal power plant in Birdsville, Queensland provided over 20 years of reliable service until it was decommissioned recently. These two successful projects demonstrate that lingering perceptions that geothermally generated electricity is not possible in Australia are inaccurate.
https://0f7740a0-ff70-4bb8-9bda-923c19113c61.filesusr.com/ugd/75fc4e_cb45515bc7444756adfde8ea5c6a3206.pdf

I know Winton , Q'land well . Spent a lot of time opal mining in that area . Water comes out of the ground too hot to drink . I did not know of the thermal generator , will have a look .


The company in S.A. was Geodynamics . I think the federal gov. put in $60 million , not sure. They had a very big drilling rig .

Minermike wrote:I know  Winton , Q'land well .  Spent a lot  of time opal mining  in that area .   Water comes out of the ground too hot to drink .   I did not know of the thermal  generator ,  will have a look .


The company in S.A.   was Geodynamics  .   I think the  federal gov.  put in    $60  million , not sure.   They had a very big  drilling rig .  

https://www.thinkgeoenergy.com/310-kw-winton-geothermal-power-plant-in-queensland-australia-starts-operation/

Thanks for the link .

https://arena.gov.au/news/first-grid-scale-flow-battery-to-be-built-in-south-australia/
https://www.tdworld.com/renewables/article/21150273/worlds-largest-solarpowered-vanadium-flow-battery-coming-to-south-australia

The challenges with energy storage is the energy lost in conversion to and back form the source, the size it has to replace and the transmission cost.
Loy Yang lignite mine in Victoria has 2 Station "A" & "B" they base load generating stations, with 6 units of 500MW total 3000MW for every hour for 24hours.
The $20.3 million project will co-locate a 2 MW / 8 MWh vanadium flow battery with a 6 MW solar PV array link planetcare post is 2 MW for 4 Hours and needs a 6 MW solar array. Winton geothermal power plant is less the a 1/3 of a MW. I believe it a good choice due the cost of transmission lines and losses because of it remote location. For many years Mallacoota had a diesel generator supplied system due to the cost of building a transmission line to such a remote location. Back about 1970 I was involved in turning on the first transmission of power on the first 500 KV line to Melbourne 100 miles away. There was several 220 KV in service at the time. When the line went in service about 250 MVAR were generated due to the capacitor effect of the line. The Victorian power reduction was about 90 MW due to line losses being reduced. Every conversion losses exist in all stored energy system. Most Renewable Systems are tiny compared to the GRID.

Conversion process Conversion type Energy efficiency
Electricity generation
Gas turbine
Thermal to electrical up to 40%
Gas turbine plus steam turbine (combined cycle)
Thermal to electrical up to 62.22%[8]

Water turbine
Gravitational to electrical up to 90% (practically achieved)
Wind turbine
Kinetic to electrical up to 59% (theoretical limit)
Solar cell
Radiative to electrical 6–40% (technology-dependent, 15-20% most often, 85–90% theoretical limit)
Fuel cell
Chemical to electrical up to 85%
World Electricity generation 2008[clarification needed]
Gross output 39% Net output 33%[9]

Electricity storage
Lithium-ion battery
Chemical to electrical/reversible 80–90% [10]

Nickel-metal hydride battery
Chemical to electrical/reversible 66% [11]

Lead-acid battery
Chemical to electrical/reversible 50–95% [12]

Engine/motor
Combustion engine
Chemical to kinetic 10–50%[13]

Electric motor
Electrical to kinetic 70–99.99% (> 200 W); 50–90% (10–200 W); 30–60% (< 10 W)
Turbofan
Chemical to kinetic 20-40%[14]