Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Ars Technica)   Three coal-fired power plants generating more than 4,000 MW to be shut down by the end of 2018 in the God-forsaken, over-regulated, job-killing hell-hole of....Texas   ( arstechnica.com) divider line
    More: Followup, coal plants, Coal, Fossil fuel, Electricity generation, Energy development, Texas coal plants, Electricity, coal power plants  
•       •       •

4145 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Oct 2017 at 2:08 AM (5 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



77 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2017-10-16 07:52:26 PM  
The beautiful thing about wind power? Don't have to worry about leaking into the water table.
The beautiful thing about solar? Don't have to worry about air emissions.
 
2017-10-16 09:13:17 PM  
Buncha leftwing America hating snowflakes those Texans are.
 
2017-10-17 12:29:09 AM  

rzrwiresunrise: The beautiful thing about wind power? Don't have to worry about leaking into the water table.
The beautiful thing about solar? Don't have to worry about air emissions.


Oh don't worry, they'll cite bird deaths as the reason why both of those sources of energy are evil.
 
2017-10-17 12:50:43 AM  

Anastacya: rzrwiresunrise: The beautiful thing about wind power? Don't have to worry about leaking into the water table.
The beautiful thing about solar? Don't have to worry about air emissions.

Oh don't worry, they'll cite bird deaths as the reason why both of those sources of energy are evil.


Note: I support getting rid of coal and using green energy. Realized my sarcasm may be too subtle there.
 
2017-10-17 02:10:38 AM  
So switching natural gas. That's better than coal, overall.
 
2017-10-17 02:16:47 AM  

Anastacya: rzrwiresunrise: The beautiful thing about wind power? Don't have to worry about leaking into the water table.
The beautiful thing about solar? Don't have to worry about air emissions.

Oh don't worry, they'll cite bird deaths as the reason why both of those sources of energy are evil.


Well, they do kill a lot of raptors.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/wind-farms-that-kill-bald-eagles-​a​re-now-protected-from-prosecution/

But natural gas is so cheap they're practically giving it away.  If energy prices were higher, they'd probably have converted the coal plants to natural gas.  From what I've read, that's a fairly easy process.  Between inexpensive alternatives and the high cost of keeping coal plants from violating emission regulations, it makes sense to just shut them down.
 
2017-10-17 02:16:50 AM  

rzrwiresunrise: The beautiful thing about wind power? Don't have to worry about leaking into the water table.
The beautiful thing about solar? Don't have to worry about air emissions.


So you're saying we have to worry about solar power leaking into the water table?
 
2017-10-17 02:22:17 AM  

OgreMagi: Anastacya: rzrwiresunrise: The beautiful thing about wind power? Don't have to worry about leaking into the water table.
The beautiful thing about solar? Don't have to worry about air emissions.

Oh don't worry, they'll cite bird deaths as the reason why both of those sources of energy are evil.

Well, they do kill a lot of raptors.


interworks.comView Full Size


You bred raptors?
 
2017-10-17 02:23:04 AM  
Decades ago: Frack all the things
Today: Oh shiat
 
2017-10-17 02:24:59 AM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-10-17 02:25:55 AM  

El Trolo: OgreMagi: Anastacya: rzrwiresunrise: The beautiful thing about wind power? Don't have to worry about leaking into the water table.
The beautiful thing about solar? Don't have to worry about air emissions.

Oh don't worry, they'll cite bird deaths as the reason why both of those sources of energy are evil.

Well, they do kill a lot of raptors.

[www.interworks.com image 850x466]

You bred raptors?


They're very good at keeping the neighborhood kids off my lawn.
 
2017-10-17 02:37:05 AM  
It's almost like coal is a century or two past its prime as an energy source.
 
2017-10-17 02:44:03 AM  
Someone suggested digging numerous tunnels from the Pacific Ocean to a very low place in California. Line these tunnels with copper wires. As the water passes through these wired up tunnels, electricity is produced. Use this energy to clean the water. Sale this water and the excess electricity.
 
2017-10-17 02:47:00 AM  
I have consigned myself to an awful future, hence:
Tim Wilson- I married a woman that talks like Jerry Reed
Youtube BMPZz_H4t3M
 
2017-10-17 02:51:36 AM  

Point02GPA: Someone suggested digging numerous tunnels from the Pacific Ocean to a very low place in California. Line these tunnels with copper wires. As the water passes through these wired up tunnels, electricity is produced. Use this energy to clean the water. Sale this water and the excess electricity.


Would that be a logistical nightmare? I wonder if cost versus outcome would be too heavy. Then again, it would help with 2 separate issues at once.
 
2017-10-17 02:51:52 AM  
Clinton and Obama....Retrain coal miners because of transition to clean energy
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/hillary-clinton-aid-coal-commun​i​ties-215789
Trump...We will bring coal back.
Market...No we won't.

I wonder whose program would help the miners, environment, and things like global warming.
 
2017-10-17 03:01:38 AM  

Point02GPA: Someone suggested digging numerous tunnels from the Pacific Ocean to a very low place in California. Line these tunnels with copper wires. As the water passes through these wired up tunnels, electricity is produced. Use this energy to clean the water. Sale this water and the excess electricity.


Sale or sail?
 
2017-10-17 03:02:31 AM  

OgreMagi: Anastacya: rzrwiresunrise: The beautiful thing about wind power? Don't have to worry about leaking into the water table.
The beautiful thing about solar? Don't have to worry about air emissions.

Oh don't worry, they'll cite bird deaths as the reason why both of those sources of energy are evil.

Well, they do kill a lot of raptors.



i.pinimg.comView Full Size

I like raptors
 
2017-10-17 03:15:01 AM  

Danger Avoid Death: [img.fark.net image 600x480]


If you are willing to pay extra for electricity, plenty of companies will sell you renewable energy.     Oh, you don't want to go solar and instead continue to buy from the utility because it is cheaper?  Gotcha.  Maybe next time.
 
2017-10-17 03:27:14 AM  

OgreMagi: Anastacya: rzrwiresunrise: The beautiful thing about wind power? Don't have to worry about leaking into the water table.
The beautiful thing about solar? Don't have to worry about air emissions.

Oh don't worry, they'll cite bird deaths as the reason why both of those sources of energy are evil.

Well, they do kill a lot of raptors.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/wi​nd-farms-that-kill-bald-eagles-a​re-now-protected-from-prosecution/

But natural gas is so cheap they're practically giving it away.  If energy prices were higher, they'd probably have converted the coal plants to natural gas.  From what I've read, that's a fairly easy process.  Between inexpensive alternatives and the high cost of keeping coal plants from violating emission regulations, it makes sense to just shut them down.


Switching a conventional powerplant from one fuel to another is mostly a matter of changing how the enormous fireball in the steam generators is fed. It might be easier to convert a coal-burning plant to burning garbage since it's already set up to handle a solid fuel.

That poses it's own environmental problem: emissions are now completely unpredictable (and probably a lot worse).
 
2017-10-17 03:30:22 AM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-10-17 03:30:25 AM  

Dr gLove: Point02GPA: Someone suggested digging numerous tunnels from the Pacific Ocean to a very low place in California. Line these tunnels with copper wires. As the water passes through these wired up tunnels, electricity is produced. Use this energy to clean the water. Sale this water and the excess electricity.

Would that be a logistical nightmare? I wonder if cost versus outcome would be too heavy. Then again, it would help with 2 separate issues at once.


I don't remember if logistics were discussed in the original article. I just mention it for further thoughts...like your's... to add to my understanding of this suggestion.
 
2017-10-17 03:35:00 AM  
an oversupplied renewable generation market,

What on earth is an oversupplied renewable generation market? Renewables are now producing more energy than the USA needs? Guess you can shut down the rest of the non-renewables now in that case.
 
AOW
2017-10-17 03:35:35 AM  
The beauty is that market forces, not government regulation, is killing the coal industry, if they wanna cry about the closures they will have to blame the market itself, not the evil govmit...
 
2017-10-17 03:37:13 AM  

Smoked: Point02GPA: Someone suggested digging numerous tunnels from the Pacific Ocean to a very low place in California. Line these tunnels with copper wires. As the water passes through these wired up tunnels, electricity is produced. Use this energy to clean the water. Sale this water and the excess electricity.

Sale or sail?


Both for the profits and maybe even sale/sail the chemicals and minerals extracted from the water.

1. Excess electricity.
2. Clean usable water.
3. Boating and other recreation activities.
4. Chemicals.
5. Minerals.
 
2017-10-17 03:43:25 AM  
wholesale prices for electricity have plummeted to $25 per megawatt-hour from a high of $49.3 per megawatt-hour in November 2014

Man, you guys must get cheap electricity. $50US/MWH is called Tuesday here.
 
2017-10-17 03:46:14 AM  

AOW: The beauty is that market forces, not government regulation, is killing the coal industry, if they wanna cry about the closures they will have to blame the market itself, not the evil govmit...


Nowhere in the article do they blame the government for the closures.
 
2017-10-17 03:51:40 AM  
If you don't like pollution from the coal plants, it's a simple fix. Place them at the edge of the map. Half that pollution then no longer effects you. Place it in the corner of the map, and then you're only dealing with a quarter of the pollution. And then you can just put a landfill or something in the pollution zone that no one wants to live next to anyway.
 
AOW
2017-10-17 04:01:02 AM  

leevis: AOW: The beauty is that market forces, not government regulation, is killing the coal industry, if they wanna cry about the closures they will have to blame the market itself, not the evil govmit...

Nowhere in the article do they blame the government for the closures.


Didn't say it did, was referring to the Trumpite cheer brigades
 
2017-10-17 04:01:36 AM  
So, these companies are shutting down the plants, because they're not as profitable as they were, or they're using this as a bargaining chip to get some more free money from the government.

Nothing to do with them being "green", just profits, as usual.
 
2017-10-17 04:24:05 AM  
Kouta:
Switching a conventional powerplant from one fuel to another is mostly a matter of changing how the enormous fireball in the steam generators is fed. It might be easier to convert a coal-burning plant to burning garbage since it's already set up to handle a solid fuel.

That poses it's own environmental problem: emissions are now completely unpredictable (and probably a lot worse).


Until the death of the sugarcane industry in Hawaii, the cane mill had its own power plant.  This plant could switch, practically at will, between coal and biomass.  (in particular, the spent sugarcane stalks known as bagasse).

BUT.  They still always kept a large bunker of coal on hand, and their production was tiny compared to the oil fueled plants nearby.

Energy density.  It's a biatch.

On the other hand.  There is one dedicated municipal-garbage-to-energy plant in the state.  They are making money hand over fist, from what I hear.

Fuel:
--Coal fired?  You gotta pay to have it brought in.  Municipal garbage?  You GET PAID to accept it.  Just undercut the tip fees at the landfill and watch the trucks roll in.

Emissions:
--Coal fired?  You know clean coal is a myth, right?  You still will need smokestack precipitation out the wizzwazz, mercury and heavy metals contamination in the clinkers, and so forth.  Municipal garbage:  Sure.  It's there.  It was gonna be just buried in the landfill, though, so at least now the ashes can be sampled, monitored, and controlled at a fraction of the volume.

Bonus round!
--Chop up your municipal garbage into pieces small enough to burn quickly.  Now run a big electromagnet over that feedstock.  Watch tons of recycleable metals be lifted out-- nuts and bolts from furniture and toys, nails from construction debris, guts of small appliances.  Sell that by the ton to the scrapyard!
 
2017-10-17 04:34:49 AM  

Badgers: So, these companies are shutting down the plants, because they're not as profitable as they were, or they're using this as a bargaining chip to get some more free money from the government.

Nothing to do with them being "green", just profits, as usual.


Profit is all that matters to corporations, period. They are inherently amoral; if they do something good, it's simply because they figure they can make more money than the alternative.

That's why government regulations need to exist, and need to have teeth. The penalties for farking up the environment, cutting corners, and screwing workers, consumers and small businesses need to make those acts less profitable.
 
2017-10-17 04:36:36 AM  

Point02GPA: Someone suggested digging numerous tunnels from the Pacific Ocean to a very low place in California. Line these tunnels with copper wires. As the water passes through these wired up tunnels, electricity is produced. Use this energy to clean the water. Sale this water and the excess electricity.


What makes you think that water passing through wired tunnels generates electricity?  You could use regular hydroelectric turbines instead, but those are usually designed for use with fresh water.  Interesting fact: even ignoring desalination, a system like this wouldn't produce quite enough electricity to pump all of the water back up to sea level, so your "very low place" will become a "very underwater place", under a new inland sea.  I think you're probably better off desalinating the water at sea level with surplus renewable electricity.
 
2017-10-17 04:36:42 AM  
If you like the trend away from fossil fuel and towards renewable, you can help out and save a bunch of money along the way by installing a home solar system if you live in a sunny region. It's especially nice if you live in a region hot enough that you need air conditioning at home. The AC draws the most power when it's sunny and hot outside, which is exactly when the solar panels also produce the most power.

You can help reduce greenhouse gas and toxic emissions from fossil fuels, save money, and tell Trump what you think of his reactionary energy strategy through action rather than words.
 
2017-10-17 05:09:41 AM  
In other news Japan is planning to build at least 45 new coal plants in the near future because nukes is scary.

I think solar and wind have their place, as well as the newish tidal systems but to pretend those options don't require a ton of mining and industrial waste is counter productive.   They also can't provide baseload and won't be able to for a long time if ever.
 
2017-10-17 05:18:32 AM  

drjekel_mrhyde: Decades ago: Frack all the things
Today: Oh shiat


Isn't natural gas cheap because of fracking?  Fracking is not involved in coal mining...
 
2017-10-17 05:37:12 AM  

indifference_engine: Point02GPA: Someone suggested digging numerous tunnels from the Pacific Ocean to a very low place in California. Line these tunnels with copper wires. As the water passes through these wired up tunnels, electricity is produced. Use this energy to clean the water. Sale this water and the excess electricity.

What makes you think that water passing through wired tunnels generates electricity?  You could use regular hydroelectric turbines instead, but those are usually designed for use with fresh water.  Interesting fact: even ignoring desalination, a system like this wouldn't produce quite enough electricity to pump all of the water back up to sea level, so your "very low place" will become a "very underwater place", under a new inland sea.  I think you're probably better off desalinating the water at sea level with surplus renewable electricity.


Thanks for you thoughtful/helpful input to my understanding.
 
2017-10-17 05:44:38 AM  

dyhchong: an oversupplied renewable generation market,

What on earth is an oversupplied renewable generation market? Renewables are now producing more energy than the USA needs? Guess you can shut down the rest of the non-renewables now in that case.


Problem is that renewables are generally localized and it becomes a transmission problem.
 
2017-10-17 06:13:40 AM  

rzrwiresunrise: The beautiful thing about wind power? Don't have to worry about leaking into the water table.


Yes but people still find a way to whine about them. e.g. that they kill birds. Never mind that all the infrastructure required to operate and fuel a coal / oil / gas plant kills MANY more birds and fish.
 
2017-10-17 06:34:01 AM  

dyhchong: an oversupplied renewable generation market,

What on earth is an oversupplied renewable generation market? Renewables are now producing more energy than the USA needs? Guess you can shut down the rest of the non-renewables now in that case.


More than what Texas needs, apparently, which why they are shutting down non-renewables.
 
2017-10-17 06:35:29 AM  

leevis: AOW: The beauty is that market forces, not government regulation, is killing the coal industry, if they wanna cry about the closures they will have to blame the market itself, not the evil govmit...

Nowhere in the article do they blame the government for the closures.


That's exactly what AOW said.
 
2017-10-17 06:41:32 AM  

drxym: rzrwiresunrise: The beautiful thing about wind power? Don't have to worry about leaking into the water table.

Yes but people still find a way to whine about them. e.g. that they kill birds. Never mind that all the infrastructure required to operate and fuel a coal / oil / gas plant kills MANY more birds and fish.


I fully support clean and renewable energy, but wind is not the way to go from what I've seen thus far. Wind farms are extremely expensive to maintain due to the massive repair/replacement costs and the relatively short life of wind turbines due to wear and weathering. We have some decent sized ones back home in WV in the Potomac Highlands around Mt. Storm and the sheer number of defunct wind turbines there is insane.  Not talking about turbines that are locked down due to lower demand on the grid, but actual broken (and often burnt) turbines. The companies that build and operate these kinds of wind farms are in it for the energy subsidies. Once the repair bills start eating into the subsidies, they just up and abandon them and run off of the remaining stock. Once the remaining stock gets worn to the point that it's not generating much in the way of power anymore, they sell it off part and parcel to another energy company which is looking to expand its renewable portfolio for pennies on the dollar and walk away. Meanwhile, the new owners simply let everything continue to deteriorate as the repair and replacement costs are again too high. If you want to talk infrastructure and logistics, wind turbines are a huge biatch to do anything with once they get installed. Maintenance roads are often unpaved. The best place to stick these things is on top of a mountain, so have fun hauling replacement blades or other parts to the site, and the cost of labor to conduct repairs due to the very nature of the work is extremely prohibitive.

My personal belief is that a mix of tidal, solar, next-gen nuclear (thorium fuel cycle, molten salt, etc) and highly-regulated and scrubbed natural gas and yes, even some coal plants will be what powers this country for the next couple of centuries unless we see some amazing breakthrough in fusion.
 
2017-10-17 06:51:29 AM  

wood0366: dyhchong: an oversupplied renewable generation market,

What on earth is an oversupplied renewable generation market? Renewables are now producing more energy than the USA needs? Guess you can shut down the rest of the non-renewables now in that case.

Problem is that renewables are generally localized and it becomes a transmission problem.


There is no transmission problem.

Joe's solar roof supplies an extra 500wh more than he's using at the time.  It goes out and is measured, goes to Sue's meter next door or so and means 500wh less that has to be supplied by the main lines. Joe gets a discount of 500w based on the wholesale value of what on outgoing meter, Sue pays power company the retail charge for the electricity she uses including that from Joe.

Mr. Wind Farmer pays for his own transmission line costs.
 
2017-10-17 07:13:29 AM  

tallen702: Wind farms are extremely expensive to maintain due to the massive repair/replacement costs and the relatively short life of wind turbines due to wear and weathering. We have some decent sized ones back home in WV in the Potomac Highlands around Mt. Storm and the sheer number of defunct wind turbines there is insane. Not talking about turbines that are locked down due to lower demand on the grid, but actual broken (and often burnt) turbines. The companies that build and operate these kinds of wind farms are in it for the energy subsidies. Once the repair bills start eating into the subsidies, they just up and abandon them and run off of the remaining stock.

Sounds more like the subsidies are badly regulated, and as a taxpayer you're being essentially defrauded by an energy provider buying cheap shiat to scam the subsidy.  That's bad implementation, not necessarily evidence the underlying idea is bad.

Fix the damn subsidy and the problem will go away.
 
2017-10-17 07:35:47 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: So switching natural gas. That's better than coal, overall.


Until your boy Donnie dumps billions in subsidies into coal, because reasons...

/probably shouldn't have voted for a moron
 
2017-10-17 07:38:31 AM  
dragonchild:
Sounds more like the subsidies are badly regulated, and as a taxpayer you're being essentially defrauded by an energy provider buying cheap shiat to scam the subsidy.  That's bad implementation, not necessarily evidence the underlying idea is bad.

Fix the damn subsidy and the problem will go away.


Not really. The reason there are subsidies is that the cost of wind turbines is so high. Add in the repair costs and opportunity cost losses due to downtime from broken equipment and they're simply too expensive to put up. Hence the need for subsidies to convince people to put them up in a supply and demand economy. It's much cheaper and easier to use gas-fired or coal-fired plants due to the fact that repairs can be made in a matter of days, not months, and the repair costs are significantly less per MWh due to the repair location and use of conventional equipment.

Currently, natural gas is the cheapest and most effective form of generating electrical power here in the US. Coal is a close second while solar is in a distant third. Wind and Nuclear are outliers and Hydro just needs to be abolished (it's incredibly dirty.) Tidal power has a lot of promise, and it's been very successful in S. Korea, but I don't know of any real proposals here in the US to harness it.
 
2017-10-17 07:50:25 AM  

wood0366: dyhchong: an oversupplied renewable generation market,

What on earth is an oversupplied renewable generation market? Renewables are now producing more energy than the USA needs? Guess you can shut down the rest of the non-renewables now in that case.

Problem is that renewables are generally localized and it becomes a transmission problem.


Lol...now tell the class how much power we lose through long-range transmission from NON-renewable sources.
 
2017-10-17 07:54:17 AM  

tallen702: Currently, natural gas is the cheapest and most effective form of generating electrical power here in the US. Coal is a close second while solar is in a distant third. Wind and Nuclear are outliers and Hydro just needs to be abolished (it's incredibly dirty.) Tidal power has a lot of promise, and it's been very successful in S. Korea, but I don't know of any real proposals here in the US to harness it.


Per several studies, the most recent being December of 2016, wind is by far the cheapest.
 
2017-10-17 08:04:23 AM  

Zafler: tallen702: Currently, natural gas is the cheapest and most effective form of generating electrical power here in the US. Coal is a close second while solar is in a distant third. Wind and Nuclear are outliers and Hydro just needs to be abolished (it's incredibly dirty.) Tidal power has a lot of promise, and it's been very successful in S. Korea, but I don't know of any real proposals here in the US to harness it.

Per several studies, the most recent being December of 2016, wind is by far the cheapest.


And rooftop solar is cheaper than it looks because while it is more expensive to produce energy with rooftop solar, there is no distribution costs, which is about 45% of the cost of electricity.

Or you could go community solar, which produces more and costs less than rooftop solar as centralization improves maintenance (and panel performance) and installation is cheaper.

A town can do a lot with rooftop solar + a community wind turbine + a few batteries.  Alternately you can go community wind turbine + community solar + home batteries.  Both work.
 
2017-10-17 08:20:17 AM  

tallen702: I fully support clean and renewable energy, but wind is not the way to go from what I've seen thus far. Wind farms are extremely expensive to maintain due to the massive repair/replacement costs and the relatively short life of wind turbines due to wear and weathering. We have some decent sized ones back home in WV in the Potomac Highlands around Mt. Storm and the sheer number of defunct wind turbines there is insane.


Wind isn't a magic wand, but nobody is anticipating using one source of power to supply demand. It'll be a blend of sources - nuclear, wind, solar, possibly even a few fossil generators for peak demand. And over the macro system, the supply / demand envelope is going to be predictable. In time we'll even see places with sunshine / wind selling their power to where the demand is, across timezones even.

Cost of wind energy used to be high now it's more than competitive. Unsubsidized cost per mwh is actually less than fossil fuels and falling. This is particularly so in newer farms such as offshore farms that use larger turbines which generate more power and need less servicing than having several smaller ones.

I have no idea what circumstances are of your local windfarm. Some turbines might be offline for maintenance or maybe they are broken. That's a cost the operator has to bear. I assume they will factor in lifespan, servicing, wear and tear into their operation or they'll go out of business.
 
Displayed 50 of 77 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report