US Coal Industry is Going out...

[GK4Herd]

https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/8/25/16201218/us-coal-industry-handouts


"The US coal industry is dying — but not with any dignity. As the end approaches, its sense of aggrieved entitlement is increasingly naked, its demands for government handouts increasingly frantic. As dread builds, shame has left the building.

The story of coal’s decline has been told many times now (see this postfor more), but at root, it’s not complicated: The industry’s product is outmoded.

Natural gas and wind power are cheaper than coal power in most places, and solar power is heading the same direction. What’s more, wind and solar (variable renewable energy, or VRE) and natural gas complement each other. VRE is completely clean but variable. Natural gas is moderately clean but flexible. Variable and flexible work well together; they are the basis for the modern grid. (Whether we can find equally flexible but entirely clean alternatives to natural gas in the coming decades is the most pressing issue facing the grid.)

Giant, slow, inflexible, dirty coal plants simply don’t fit in that picture. Coal still represents 30 percent of the US electricity mix, but as natural gas and renewables grow and the grid evolves toward a flexible, distributed model, its role will inevitably shrink."

 

[ohio herd]

https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/8/25/16201218/us-coal-industry-handouts


"The US coal industry is dying — but not with any dignity. As the end approaches, its sense of aggrieved entitlement is increasingly naked, its demands for government handouts increasingly frantic. As dread builds, shame has left the building.

The story of coal’s decline has been told many times now (see this postfor more), but at root, it’s not complicated: The industry’s product is outmoded.

Natural gas and wind power are cheaper than coal power in most places, and solar power is heading the same direction. What’s more, wind and solar (variable renewable energy, or VRE) and natural gas complement each other. VRE is completely clean but variable. Natural gas is moderately clean but flexible. Variable and flexible work well together; they are the basis for the modern grid. (Whether we can find equally flexible but entirely clean alternatives to natural gas in the coming decades is the most pressing issue facing the grid.)

Giant, slow, inflexible, dirty coal plants simply don’t fit in that picture. Coal still represents 30 percent of the US electricity mix, but as natural gas and renewables grow and the grid evolves toward a flexible, distributed model, its role will inevitably shrink."

I agree that natural gas and maybe Solar but not wind. Here is an article. Unless this info is all wrong it looks like a bad idea to me.What do you think?

http://www.newsweek.com/whats-true-cost-wind-power-321480

 

[GK4Herd]

I agree that natural gas and maybe Solar but not wind. Here is an article. Unless this info is all wrong it looks like a bad idea to me.What do you think?

http://www.newsweek.com/whats-true-cost-wind-power-321480

I know that clean energy...specifically hydro and wind...are the fastest growing segment of the energy market in both the US and the world. I also know that it will improve in efficiency as technology gets better. And unlike coal, the cost of production comes down once the infrastructure is up and running and paid for.

But you bring a good point. Subsidy should be considered in the cost. But if we consider it in the cost of renewables we also must consider the subsidy of the coal industry as well. A quick glance shows it's massive. And this article is literally about Justice asking for even more subsidy under the guise of national security.

If a person is conservative and believes the market should determine these things, then they should be happy, because it is.

 

[herdfan429]

Nuclear is the way to go

 

[GK4Herd]

Nuclear is the way to go

This article hits on it a little. The combination of TMI, Chernobyl, and what happened in Japan has driven the cost up with safety concerns.

 

[big_country90]

A left wing columnist declaring ( more like hoping and wishing) the death of the coal industry. I'm shocked.

 

[ohio herd]

I know that clean energy...specifically hydro and wind...are the fastest growing segment of the energy market in both the US and the world. I also know that it will improve in efficiency as technology gets better. And unlike coal, the cost of production comes down once the infrastructure is up and running and paid for.

But you bring a good point. Subsidy should be considered in the cost. But if we consider it in the cost of renewables we also must consider the subsidy of the coal industry as well. A quick glance shows it's massive. And this article is literally about Justice asking for even more subsidy under the guise of national security.

If a person is conservative and believes the market should determine these things, then they should be happy, because it is.

good points. Disclaimer: I am a fan of clean coal.I Like the discussion we are having.There’s a role for solar, wind, hydro, nuclear, and geothermal and IMO coal. I am worried about how much space would need to be allocated to make this work. I will link an article about this. It says it would take the state of RI to be filled with wind turbines to power the US.To me that is a problem, what say you? Personally I am in favor of the US developing as many sources of energy as possible. To be honest, I am much more worried about the power grid than I am energy sources. I suppose one could argue that if every home was solar powered and off the grid that would no longer be a concern.

http://www.businessinsider.com/wind-turbines-to-power-earth-2016-9

 

[herdfan429]

This article hits on it a little. The combination of TMI, Chernobyl, and what happened in Japan has driven the cost up with safety concerns.

Nuclear is making strides in smaller reactors that can't meltdown. If the renewable energy people were serious they would be pushing nuclear harder than ever.

And on a related note it's a damn shame that it takes over a decade billions of dollars and millions of man hours to get a nuclear reactor approved.

 

[i am herdman]

I would not put all my eggs in on basket. Plus, wind meets challenges as well. Nobody wants to see them when they go to the beach.

In addition, from a national security standpoint we will always want coal. Just in case.

 

[extragreen]

In addition, from a national security standpoint we will always want coal. Just in case.

Short term, I agree. Don't know about always.

 

[i am herdman]

Short term, I agree. Don't know about always.

Hey, you and I agree on something at least at a 50% level. What is next? Peace on the Gaza Strip?

 

[sistersville]

Today Im bent over at Wal mart unable to catch my breath with the manager offering me assistance. Id freakin crawl first. Coal sucks. Im suffering today. Have to carry this little squeeze bottle around to help me. It tastes bad. Think i will stop in the milk and get me a few hits if whip cream,,wink wink. Im disappointed the scientists were not smart enough to use coal. Dems will outlaw fracking so are we really getting cheaper gas. I know it was hard on alot of college grads watching miners making more money with far better benefits but rest its over

 

[Bankerreturns]

Vox, seriously? Any article that claims solar and wind are cheaper than coal is not worth reading.

Here's the "levelized" cost data for about every conventional and alternative source. Now note that this is from a alternative leaning site. What they base this on would include building the facility from scratch. Since the coal plants are already in place, you can deduct the capital costs from the equation, since O&M is separated out.

http://energyinnovation.org/2015/02/07/levelized-cost-of-energy/

 

[GK4Herd]

Vox, seriously? Any article that claims solar and wind are cheaper than coal is not worth reading.

Here's the "levelized" cost data for about every conventional and alternative source. Now note that this is from a alternative leaning site. What they base this on would include building the facility from scratch. Since the coal plants are already in place, you can deduct the capital costs from the equation, since O&M is separated out.

http://energyinnovation.org/2015/02/07/levelized-cost-of-energy/

Did you even read the article? It specifically said that solar wasn't there yet. It talked about gas, hydro, and wind. As far as cost is concerned, of course their infrastructure cost. But once it's in place and paid for there is no comparison. At that point it becomes about the cost of extraction which is far less in renewables than coal. And as far as the source? I could be here till tomorrow linking articles that talk about coal going the way of the dinosaur (pun intended).

I see you didn't mention subsidies. I don't really blame you. You had to create a strawman (solar) in order to have a credible shot at the argument, while you fail to mention the overwhelming subsidy difference between fossil fuels and renewables. I'll help. It's ten times more worldwide...

The truth of the matter is renewables aren't quite there yet. But they're improving. There still needs to be backups during periods of low energy outputs and nuclear or fossil fuels would work just fine until the technology reaches the point it is all that is needed. There's a reason they're the fastest growing segment of the energy market worldwide.

But the hard truth of the matter is fossil fuels are finite. They aren't forever. At some point we need to find an alternative. Why not now? Christ...look at the price of coal from a human level. Sisters can't walk through a store because he can't breathe and he's still a fairly young man. Do we factor that into the equation? Or is it alright because it creates good paying jobs for those who have no other choices?

 

[i am herdman]

Let's see, nuclear is basically dead other than current reactors. Coal is dead.

Somebody better get busy with the windmills which I have heard are going to die as well. And, that came from someone who makes a living building them. Nobody wants them in their backyard and they don't want to see them when they go to the beach or on top of the mountains.

When is the last time a major dam was built in the US. Hello, hydro?

Solar Panels? That seems hot right now. But could just be another fad and how do you power a nation like the US from solar panels.

Turn out the lights the party is over.

 

[19MU88]

https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/8/25/16201218/us-coal-industry-handouts


"The US coal industry is dying — but not with any dignity. As the end approaches, its sense of aggrieved entitlement is increasingly naked, its demands for government handouts increasingly frantic. As dread builds, shame has left the building.

The story of coal’s decline has been told many times now (see this postfor more), but at root, it’s not complicated: The industry’s product is outmoded.

Natural gas and wind power are cheaper than coal power in most places, and solar power is heading the same direction. What’s more, wind and solar (variable renewable energy, or VRE) and natural gas complement each other. VRE is completely clean but variable. Natural gas is moderately clean but flexible. Variable and flexible work well together; they are the basis for the modern grid. (Whether we can find equally flexible but entirely clean alternatives to natural gas in the coming decades is the most pressing issue facing the grid.)

Giant, slow, inflexible, dirty coal plants simply don’t fit in that picture. Coal still represents 30 percent of the US electricity mix, but as natural gas and renewables grow and the grid evolves toward a flexible, distributed model, its role will inevitably shrink."

Did you even read the article? It specifically said that solar wasn't there yet. It talked about gas, hydro, and wind. As far as cost is concerned, of course their infrastructure cost. But once it's in place and paid for there is no comparison. At that point it becomes about the cost of extraction which is far less in renewables than coal. And as far as the source? I could be here till tomorrow linking articles that talk about coal going the way of the dinosaur (pun intended).

I see you didn't mention subsidies. I don't really blame you. You had to create a strawman (solar) in order to have a credible shot at the argument, while you fail to mention the overwhelming subsidy difference between fossil fuels and renewables. I'll help. It's ten times more worldwide...

The truth of the matter is renewables aren't quite there yet. But they're improving. There still needs to be backups during periods of low energy outputs and nuclear or fossil fuels would work just fine until the technology reaches the point it is all that is needed. There's a reason they're the fastest growing segment of the energy market worldwide.

But the hard truth of the matter is fossil fuels are finite. They aren't forever. At some point we need to find an alternative. Why not now? Christ...look at the price of coal from a human level. Sisters can't walk through a store because he can't breathe and he's still a fairly young man. Do we factor that into the equation? Or is it alright because it creates good paying jobs for those who have no other choices?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesc...make-renewable-energy-so-costly/#1c63373e128c

 

[GK4Herd]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesc...make-renewable-energy-so-costly/#1c63373e128c

Also from Forbes...


https://www.forbes.com/sites/ucener...ion-fossil-fuel-subsidy-youve-never-heard-of/

 

[raleighherdfan]

this debate reinforces why "free" markets don't really exist anymore. Anyone suggesting that this is "capitalism" in it's truest form is either ignorant or lying.

Over regulation and crony capitalism (both centered around larger more intrusive govts) distorts markets and limits competitive landscapes and increased (profitable) innovation.

 

[sistersville]

Still can sell coal over seas. Number one worst sin was the green jobs given to those flakes in california over the most skilled and hardest working men in america,,coal miners.