User Tag List

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 345678 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 116

Thread: Coal jobs on the comeback since 2016

  1. #76
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    18,303
    Thanks
    1,338
    Thanked 4,348 Times in 3,267 Posts

    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    hydrogen fuel cell development would spur: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_gasification

    which would increase demand for coal



    same thing with any unforeseen factors that make fracking less attractive, economically



    barbie's right though - we're prolly not gonna see a return to the coal fired steam locomotive

  2. #77
    Over 5000 post club ClimateSanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    5,627
    Thanks
    4,110
    Thanked 1,892 Times in 1,433 Posts

    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    678589
    Even if more gas-fired electricity capacity is in the works, if global LNG demand and U.S. manufacturing growth happen to converge, they could result in an increase in U.S. coal-fired generation, according to FBR Capital Marketsí coal analyst Lucas Pipes.

    https://www.oilandgas360.com/coal-co...s-must-happen/


    Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app

  3. #78
    Over 5000 post club ClimateSanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    5,627
    Thanks
    4,110
    Thanked 1,892 Times in 1,433 Posts

    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    678589
    Coal gasification can help revive the industry. People just want coal to die on here in my estimation.

    https://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/hy...l-gasification

    Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app

  4. #79
    Over 5000 post club The Barbarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    5,714
    Thanks
    57
    Thanked 713 Times in 489 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    204551
    Quote Originally Posted by ClimateSanity View Post
    Even if more gas-fired electricity capacity is in the works, if global LNG demand and U.S. manufacturing growth happen to converge, they could result in an increase in U.S. coal-fired generation, according to FBR Capital Marketsí coal analyst Lucas Pipes.

    https://www.oilandgas360.com/coal-co...s-must-happen/
    From your source:


    Notice the projection for Appalachian coal to decrease. So even the most optimistic projections don't see an increase in coal production in Appalachia. Those miners are being sold a fantasy.
    Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

    Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to The Barbarian For Your Post:

    Arthur Brain (April 21st, 2017),Rusha (April 21st, 2017)

  6. #80
    Over 5000 post club The Barbarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    5,714
    Thanks
    57
    Thanked 713 Times in 489 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    204551
    Quote Originally Posted by ClimateSanity View Post
    Coal gasification can help revive the industry. People just want coal to die on here in my estimation.
    That's the one wild card out there. If clean coal energy becomes a reality, look for lots of mining going on. But making it feasible is not the same thing as making it economical. We should all hope that it comes true, but it could be a long time in coming.
    Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

    Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to The Barbarian For Your Post:

    Arthur Brain (April 21st, 2017),Rusha (April 21st, 2017)

  8. #81
    Over 5000 post club ClimateSanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    5,627
    Thanks
    4,110
    Thanked 1,892 Times in 1,433 Posts

    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    678589
    Quote Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
    From your source:


    Notice the projection for Appalachian coal to decrease. So even the most optimistic projections don't see an increase in coal production in Appalachia. Those miners are being sold a fantasy.
    So coal production decreases and yet there is an increase in coal fired production?

    That doesn't compute.

  9. #82
    Over 5000 post club ClimateSanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    5,627
    Thanks
    4,110
    Thanked 1,892 Times in 1,433 Posts

    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    678589
    Quote Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
    That's the one wild card out there. If clean coal energy becomes a reality, look for lots of mining going on. But making it feasible is not the same thing as making it economical. We should all hope that it comes true, but it could be a long time in coming.
    There is still more power generated per dollar in clean coal than in wind power when subsidies are considered.

  10. #83
    Silver Member kmoney's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    A farm
    Posts
    10,305
    Thanks
    1,166
    Thanked 2,366 Times in 1,254 Posts

    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    1146698

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b018a9ce5ae357

    Britain Is About To Go A Full Day Without Coal For The First Time Since 1882

    WASHINGTON ― In 1952, Londonís coal-fired factories and power plants spewed out so much pollution, a dense, acrid smog settled over the British capital, killing as many as 4,000 people.

    Sixty-five years later, the United Kingdom is poised to complete its first full day without burning any coal to generate electricity, according to National Grid, the utility that operates the British power grid. The last coal-fired plant stopped running at 11 p.m. local time the day before, making Friday the countryís first day without coal since 1882.



  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to kmoney For Your Post:

    rexlunae (April 24th, 2017),Rusha (April 21st, 2017)

  12. #84
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    18,303
    Thanks
    1,338
    Thanked 4,348 Times in 3,267 Posts

    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    coal has been largely supplanted by natural gas, a cleaner-burning fossil fuel extracted through hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. The controversial technique ― which ruptures bedrock with highly pressured, sand- and chemical-laced water deep underground, freeing the gas beneath ― has been met with fierce protests in the U.K. Public support for fracking fell to 37.3 percent last year, down from 58 percent in 2013, according to a YouGov poll for the University of Nottingham, which was released in October 2016.

    Fracking sites usually leak methane, a greenhouse gas 40 times as potent as carbon dioxide, and the toxic chemicals used in the drilling process have been found in groundwater.




    dopey brits

  13. #85
    Over 5000 post club The Barbarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    5,714
    Thanks
    57
    Thanked 713 Times in 489 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    204551
    Quote Originally Posted by ClimateSanity View Post
    There is still more power generated per dollar in clean coal than in wind power when subsidies are considered.
    Seems unlikely. Iowa, for example, has about 28% of its electricity from wind power, and Iowans have the 2nd cheapest electricity in the nation. Even without factoring in the costs of pollution, it seems like a pretty good deal.

    Surprisingly, fossil fuel subsidies are much larger than for wind:

    A 2016 study estimated that global fossil fuel subsidies were $5.3 trillion in 2015, which represents 6.5% of global GDP.[3] The study found that "China was the biggest subsidizer in 2013 ($1.8 trillion), followed by the United States ($0.6 trillion), and Russia, the European Union, and India (each with about $0.3 trillion)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidies
    Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

    Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to The Barbarian For Your Post:

    Rusha (April 21st, 2017)

  15. #86
    Over 5000 post club The Barbarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    5,714
    Thanks
    57
    Thanked 713 Times in 489 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    204551
    Fracking sites usually leak methane, a greenhouse gas 40 times as potent as carbon dioxide, and the toxic chemicals used in the drilling process have been found in groundwater.
    Actually, natural gas is methane. And you're right that fracking has some environmental issues. But Trump really doesn't care; he just wants more natural gas.

    The bottom line is, that hurts jobs for coal miners.
    Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

    Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to The Barbarian For Your Post:

    Rusha (April 24th, 2017)

  17. #87
    Over 5000 post club The Barbarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    5,714
    Thanks
    57
    Thanked 713 Times in 489 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    204551
    Quote Originally Posted by ClimateSanity View Post
    So coal production decreases and yet there is an increase in coal fired production?
    No. Coal production is projected to be flat, if environmental regulations are scrapped. And notice that the same projection is for coal consumption.

    That doesn't compute.
    I don't see how it could be otherwise. Why mine it, if no one was going to use it?
    Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

    Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

  18. #88
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    18,303
    Thanks
    1,338
    Thanked 4,348 Times in 3,267 Posts

    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
    Actually, natural gas is methane.
    well, no


    Natural gas is a naturally occurring hydrocarbon gas mixture consisting primarily of methane, but commonly including varying amounts of other higher alkanes, and sometimes a small percentage of carbon dioxide, nitrogen, hydrogen sulfide, or helium.[2]




    natural gas extraction is the primary source of helium

  19. #89
    Over 5000 post club The Barbarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    5,714
    Thanks
    57
    Thanked 713 Times in 489 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    204551
    Barbarian points out:
    Actually, natural gas is methane.

    Quote Originally Posted by ok doser View Post
    well, no
    Actually, natural gas is about 75% methane. There was a good reason you shouldn't have slept through chemistry class.

    But none of that really has much to do with the grim picture for coal, absent some breakthrough in clean coal usage.
    Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

    Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to The Barbarian For Your Post:

    Rusha (April 21st, 2017)

  21. #90
    Over 4000 post club rexlunae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The high desert
    Posts
    4,997
    Thanks
    972
    Thanked 2,079 Times in 1,332 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    789779
    Quote Originally Posted by ClimateSanity View Post
    There is still more power generated per dollar in clean coal than in wind power when subsidies are considered.
    That can't possibly be true. There is no such thing as clean coal.
    Global warming denialists are like gravity denialists piloting a helicopter, determined to prove a point. We may not have time to actually persuade them of their mistake.

  22. The Following User Says Thank You to rexlunae For Your Post:

    Rusha (April 24th, 2017)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us