Re: Why Is Coal So Dangerous

GPZhunter Thu Feb 25, 2021 8:56 pm

For all the media attention to renewables, the fact remains they will only produce a limited amount of global energy needs.
Using just Victoria alone, if our entire vehicle fleet were EVs we would need very large scale investment in generating capacity.
It takes around 22kw of electrical energy to re charge and EV daily for 100km use.

Natural gas on the east coast of Australia is in rapid decline and may be unavailable as soon as 2024, just replacing hot water systems, cooking and gas heaters to electric
will create another significant shortfall in generating capacity.

Altona refinery set to close, and from what I heard on radio yesterday Geelong may soon follow? We will be reliant on imported fuel, I suspect petrol will soon be $3.00 per litre, a Carbon tax
will be added after an ALP / Green victory driving up petrol to $3.85.

The government should be building massive Base load power plants now, allow natural gas exploration and get cracking on Nuclear plants.

Minermike Thu Feb 25, 2021 9:29 pm

I can remember when all the power in Winton was generated by diesel . Longreach also had it's own diesel generator , it was close to the main road . It was in an open ended building so you could see it as you drove past .

planetcare Thu Feb 25, 2021 10:28 pm

geof_junk wrote: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]

Thanks for the detailed info. Flow batteries have the potential to be up-scaled to potentially enormous sizes and have advantages over other battery storage systems eg compared to Li-ion. But just think what the impact would be if every building and house with a solar array in Australia had battery storage as well. But battery storage is only one option we will need pumped hydro as well and their are many sites for this have already been identified and of course the ultimate answer in my view is to use xs electrical energy to produce H2 as a fuel for transport and to produce electricity on demand combined with an energy conservation policy that mandates that all buildings must conform to an energy efficiency standard. We cannot continue to build the energy inefficient glass monstrosities that are dominating our cities.

planetcare Thu Feb 25, 2021 10:44 pm

GPZhunter wrote:For all the media attention to renewables, the fact remains they will only produce a limited amount of global energy needs.
Using just Victoria alone, if our entire vehicle fleet were EVs we would need very large scale investment in generating capacity.
It takes around 22kw of electrical energy to re charge and EV daily for 100km use.

Natural gas on the east coast of Australia is in rapid decline and may be unavailable as soon as 2024, just replacing hot water systems, cooking and gas heaters to electric
will create another significant shortfall in generating capacity.

Altona refinery set to close, and from what I heard on radio yesterday Geelong may soon follow? We will be reliant on imported fuel, I suspect petrol will soon be $3.00 per litre, a Carbon tax
will be added after an ALP / Green victory driving up petrol to $3.85.

The government should be building massive Base load power plants now, allow natural gas exploration and get cracking on Nuclear plants.

We will never see nuclear power plants in Australia for many reasons, their high cost, long lead times for construction, high cost of electricity they produce, the problem of storage for geological time frames of spent fuel rods and waste, the hazards posed by transporting and shipping spent fuel rods for reprocessing if that option is chosen and then taking back the high level waste from reprocessing and where to store it.
Neither the private sector or any gov will fund any new base load power plants even gas fired ones because they ultimately they know like any new gas pipelines to supply them they will become stranded assets.
As for the carbon tax many economists agree that it is best way to reduce emissions and encourage R@D and the commercialization of renewable energy.

deutran Thu Feb 25, 2021 11:16 pm

Why is coal so dangerous?.Well when I worked in the coke ovens we used to ship off its by product Tartrazine in train carriages to add as yellow coloring in the kiddies lollies E102.It doesn't take too long to find this in the sweets section of supermarkets.
This is linked to hyperactivity in children,asthma,allergies etc and is banned in some countries.
You could almost guarantee its use in third world countries because its cheap.

planetcare Thu Feb 25, 2021 11:25 pm

ANU finds 22,000 potential pumped hydro sites in Australia
“Lead researcher Professor Andrew Blakers said the short-term off-river pumped hydro energy storage (STORES) sites combined had a potential storage capacity of 67,000 Gigawatt-hours (GWh) - much more than the capacity required for a zero-emissions grid. “
https://www.anu.edu.au/news/all-news/anu-finds-22000-potential-pumped-hydro-sites-in-australia
https://arena.gov.au/assets/2018/10/ANU-STORES-An-Atlas-of-Pumped-Hydro-Energy-Storage-The-Complete-Atlas.pdf

planetcare Thu Feb 25, 2021 11:34 pm

deutran wrote:Why is coal so dangerous?.Well when I worked in the coke ovens we used to ship off its by product Tartrazine in train carriages to add as yellow coloring in the kiddies lollies E102.It doesn't take too long to find this in the sweets section of supermarkets.
This is linked to hyperactivity in children,asthma,allergies etc and is banned in some countries.
You could almost guarantee its use in third world countries because its cheap.

Depending on where the coal was mined, coal ash typically contains heavy metals including arsenic, lead, mercury, cadmium, chromium and selenium, as well as aluminum, antimony, barium, beryllium, boron, chlorine, cobalt, manganese, molybdenum, nickel, thallium, vanadium, and zinc.If eaten, drunk or inhaled, these toxicants can cause cancer and nervous system impacts such as cognitive deficits, developmental delays and behavioral problems. They can also cause heart damage, lung disease, respiratory distress, kidney disease, reproductive problems, gastrointestinal illness, birth defects, and impaired bone growth in children

What is “leaching”? When coal ash comes into contact with water, its toxic constituents can “leach” or dissolve out of the ash and percolate through water. Coal ash toxics have leached from disposal sites in more than 100 communities, carrying toxic substances into above-ground waterways such as rivers, streams and wetlands, and into underground water supplies or aquifers that supply drinking wells, forcing families to find new drinking supplies. One community has even been designated a Superfund toxic cleanup site, due to coal ash leaching that contaminated the drinking water.
https://www.psr.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/coal-ash-hazardous-to-human-health.pdf

Guest Fri Feb 26, 2021 1:13 pm

You forgot to mention that coal gives off a harmless inert gas that we all need to survive.. scratch

Minermike Fri Feb 26, 2021 1:59 pm

In my view Australia should go for geothermal power . It runs 24/7 non stop . It is new technology and needs a lot of investment . The pollies will not put the money in due to the fear of loosing their well paid jobs . They could do it if they wanted . Somebody needs to talk to Elon Musk or Bill Gates , they might have the vision to see forward .

Geodynamics had the plan that the power would be connected to the grid by high voltage DC transmission lines . Using this there is little power lost . I know of 2 HVDC power lines in Australia , one is from Australia to Tasmania and another on the east coast from Q'land to NSW .

Geodynamics drilled about 4,000 mts. to their surprise they found hot brine water . Which was better for their plans . They would not have to force water down to get the heat . Where they were drilling is a vast area without any geological change . They have tried this in Europe but the ground changes too much .

Geothermal power number one !

planetcare Fri Feb 26, 2021 2:37 pm

butch wrote:You forgot to mention that coal gives off a harmless inert gas that we all need to survive..

Yes the planet needs atmospheric C02 for us to survive, otherwise the earth would be a frozen ice ball. But too much atmospheric C02 will warm the planet to levels not seen for millions of years and threaten ecosystems and food security just to name a few.If we continue to allow C02 levels to rise then we may approach levels that caused the last mass extinction event! Too much C02 is not harmless!!!

granite2 Fri Feb 26, 2021 2:45 pm

The latest in geothermal power technology is hopeful, it is self perpetuating and needs no pumps once started. It needs no fuel and can generate enormous amounts of electricity but whether it is viable I don't know. One can only hope they can be built soon if they are going to be viable.

Coal and gas generators are dying off too fast for anything to take up the slack. RE cannot, I repeat, cannot deliver all the power we require, even the government and REM acknowledge that. When the coal and gas generators collapse through lack of income and all their share holders sell off their shares the coal and gas generators will shut down forever leaving us with a huge shortfall on our power. This is expected as soon as 2025, only three years away.The wind doesn't blow all the time and solar is good for about only 8 hours a day and there are no batteries yet invented that can help.

This is why Geothermal could be the lifesaver we are looking for. The, "I Hate The Word Nuclear because it scares the pants off me" mob have prevented us from ever having the safest, cleanest new Nuclear technology which will soon take the world by storm, Small Modular reactors (SMR's)

Geothermal is simplicity itself in theory. You drill down into the earth's crust to where temperature are high enough to create super dry steam, Then drill horizontely for a few klm to connect to another vertical hole. Line the holes with an impermiable lining and fill full of water. Cold water sinks, gets heated and turned to steam, rises to the surface and turns the generators. Once started the entire process just keeps going. Unlike the older versions of geothermal generation this process can be installed anywhere the earth's crust is reasonable stable and does not require a rare kind of granite.

Once again we find that, in theory there is a far better and more reliable way to generate power without resorting to old, outdated technologies such as wind, which has been around as long as electricity, and aging solar which only works for less than half a day.

planetcare Fri Feb 26, 2021 3:08 pm

granite2 wrote:

"I Hate The Word Nuclear because it scares the pants off me" mob have prevented us from ever having the safest, cleanest new Nuclear technology which will soon take the world by storm, Small Modular reactors (SMR's)

Unproven technology that is 10-15 years away from commercialization if ever!!

planetcare Fri Feb 26, 2021 3:12 pm

granite2 wrote:

Once started the entire process just keeps going. Unlike the older versions of geothermal generation this process can be installed anywhere the earth's crust is reasonable stable and does not require a rare kind of granite.

Not true! eg not suitable if you have fractured bedrock or the region is subject to things like earthquakes or the geothermal gradient is small.

granite2 Fri Feb 26, 2021 3:24 pm

PC, how can you know that? There are many companies in many countries working very hard on bringing us clean, safe nuclear. It is NEW technology, not the old outdated rubbish you keep posting about.

For many decades we have seen ships and subs using what are essentially small reactors. These nuclear plants have hundreds, sometimes thousands of people working within very close proximity to them and they have never had a problem.

To say that an SMR cost tens of billions to build is rubbish. Once the factory is up and running it will be the cost per unit will be lowered to a reasonable level. Some designs don't need water for cooling, some can take old used rods from old nuclear power plants and use them until there is very little radiation left. From the time a unit has begun to be built in a factory it could be in place, commissioned and producing power and income for investors within a year. But all this is moot as we both know the rabid anti nuclear mob who are the ones pushing RE for all their worth because of the incredible subsidies have won the day.

I know you hate nuclear but please post details relevant to modern nuclear not rubbish that is outdated.

I just hope something like Geothermal comes along to replace a good part of RE for as I said, we both know RE as we know it cannot do the job by itself.

granite2 Fri Feb 26, 2021 3:26 pm

planetcare wrote:
granite2 wrote:

Once started the entire process just keeps going. Unlike the older versions of geothermal generation this process can be installed anywhere the earth's crust is reasonable stable and does not require a rare kind of granite.

Not true! eg not suitable if you have fractured bedrock or the region is subject to things like earthquakes or the geothermal gradient is small.

If you READ my post and can Assimilate what I wrote you will see I said, REASONABLY stable. Can't you READ???

planetcare Fri Feb 26, 2021 3:33 pm

granite2 wrote:
planetcare wrote:
granite2 wrote:

Once started the entire process just keeps going. Unlike the older versions of geothermal generation this process can be installed anywhere the earth's crust is reasonable stable and does not require a rare kind of granite.

Not true! eg not suitable if you have fractured bedrock or the region is subject to things like earthquakes or the geothermal gradient is small.

If you READ my post and can Assimilate what I wrote you will see I said, REASONABLY stable. Can't you READ???

REASONABLY stable is only one of the factors, the composition and properties of soil and rock can affect heat transfer rates and therefore need to be taken into consideration for designing geothermal systems.

planetcare Fri Feb 26, 2021 3:38 pm

granite2 wrote:

To say that an SMR cost tens of billions to build is rubbish.

The projected costs just keep blowing out and the cost of the electricity they produce will never compete with solar or wind! SMR's are just an unproven pipe dream!

Guest Fri Feb 26, 2021 3:41 pm

planetcare wrote:
butch wrote:You forgot to mention that coal gives off a harmless inert gas that we all need to survive..

Yes the planet needs atmospheric C02 for us to survive, otherwise the earth would be a frozen ice ball. But too much atmospheric C02 will warm the planet to levels not seen for millions of years and threaten ecosystems and food security just to name a few.If we continue to allow C02 levels to rise then we may approach levels that caused the last mass extinction event! Too much C02 is not harmless!!!

You really do believe everything you read.
You can have my flat beer & coca cola.. santa

planetcare Fri Feb 26, 2021 3:43 pm

granite2 wrote:
. Some designs don't need water for cooling, some can take old used rods from old nuclear power plants and use them until there is very little radiation left.

Can you provide some links from independent (ie not the companies pushing SMR's) nuclear experts to validate the above?

Minermike Fri Feb 26, 2021 3:46 pm

Nuclear reactors will never happen in Australia , too , too many greenies . Earth quakes are to few and far between to upset any geo thermal power production in Australia . Power 24 / 7 ....

planetcare Fri Feb 26, 2021 3:51 pm

butch wrote:
planetcare wrote:
butch wrote:You forgot to mention that coal gives off a harmless inert gas that we all need to survive..

Yes the planet needs atmospheric C02 for us to survive, otherwise the earth would be a frozen ice ball. But too much atmospheric C02 will warm the planet to levels not seen for millions of years and threaten ecosystems and food security just to name a few.If we continue to allow C02 levels to rise then we may approach levels that caused the last mass extinction event! Too much C02 is not harmless!!!

You really do believe everything you read.
You can have my flat beer & coca cola..

I believe what climate scientists and others publish in the best peer reviewed journals, I understand and accept the long established physics that underpins global warming and the massive amount of evidence that supports AGW! We know the many past extinction events were caused by a massive rise in atmospheric C02 levels.
https://theconversation.com/another-link-between-co2-and-mass-extinctions-of-species-12906
https://eos.org/articles/how-modern-emissions-compare-to-ancient-extinction-level-events

Minermike Fri Feb 26, 2021 3:56 pm

Geodynamics drilled a number of very deep geothermal wells , costing many millions of dollars . They were drilling in very stable ground . I have never heard of any earthquakes in S.A.

planetcare Fri Feb 26, 2021 4:01 pm

Minermike wrote:Geodynamics drilled a number of very deep geothermal wells , costing many millions of dollars . They were drilling in very stable ground . I have never heard of any earthquakes in S.A.

Very true!But as i have i said tectonic stability is only one of the factors that will determine if the site and its basement geology is suitable for a geothermal well.

Minermike Fri Feb 26, 2021 4:07 pm

Nuclear will never ever happen in Australia . Mark my words . Solar or wind will never ever be 24 / 7 .

Minermike Fri Feb 26, 2021 4:11 pm

Battery s will never be able to to store the base load as other people have stated .

GPZhunter Fri Feb 26, 2021 4:40 pm

Agree Australia will never build Nuclear Power Plants, especially with the NIMBY attitude and Left Leaning ruling governments.

Also agree with the comment on large scale Battery storage not been able to store large amounts of energy.

planetcare Fri Feb 26, 2021 4:43 pm

Minermike wrote:Battery s will never be able to to store the base load as other people have stated .

But pumped hydro can! New battery technology will also help.The chinese are building the World’s largest battery: 200MW/800MWh vanadium flow battery at Dalians
The battery’s purpose is to provide power during peak hours of demand, to enhance grid stability and deliver juice during black-start conditions in case of emergency. The system is expected to peak-shave about 8% of Dalian’s expected load.

Minermike Fri Feb 26, 2021 6:25 pm

I like pumped hydro but it is very expensive to set up . I am watching Kidston with interest , I built pumps for it when it was a gold mine . I worked for Warman pumps for many years in Sydney .

granite2 Fri Feb 26, 2021 7:17 pm

PC I guess you also believed all those peer reviewed scientists who said we were heading into a new ice age, were going to run out of oil by the 80s, and the millennium bug would destroy our economy, that the GBR would by the year 2010 be dead and that the Arctic would be ice free by 2010 etc???

granite2 Fri Feb 26, 2021 7:22 pm

planetcare wrote:
granite2 wrote:
. Some designs don't need water for cooling, some can take old used rods from old nuclear power plants and use them until there is very little radiation left.

Can you provide some links from independent (ie not the companies pushing SMR's) nuclear experts to validate the above?

I can if you can provide information from a source that is not anti nuclear.