“From a coal perspective, it has been a disaster,” said Andy Blumenfeld, an analyst who tracks the industry at McCloskey by OPIS. “The decline is happening faster than anyone anticipated.”
Yeah, from a virus’ perspective, vaccines suck.
this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2023
185 points (100.0% liked)
Science
13015 readers
35 users here now
Studies, research findings, and interesting tidbits from the ever-expanding scientific world.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Dont worry im sure the govt will give them tons of subsidies to stay open/make sure thier profits dont go too far down
Dont worry im sure the govt will give them tons of subsidies to stay open/make sure thier profits dont go too far down
Trump tried and this did nothing. the US government's policy at this point also could not be more antithetical to the continuation of coal as a power source. the Biden administration is trying to propose a rule ("slash their greenhouse gas pollution 90 percent between 2035 and 2040 — or shut down") that would functionally kill coal and, as of now, probably the ability of even natural gas to operate. (i'm not aware of any technology which can get natural gas to such a non-polluting point, much less coal which produces nearly twice as many emissions.) coal is in extremely terminal decline in the US: the EIA says "nearly a quarter of the operating U.S. coal-fired fleet scheduled to retire by 2029" and that's probably an underestimate. half of existing coal capacity in 2011 is likely to be gone by 2026. i know we like to be cynical about these things collectively, but all available evidence clearly indicates this is not a correct perspective to hold.
I hate that you're probably right
I am ready for this to be the norm. I am saving up for a solar powered generator for weather emergencies. Next, replacing my gas powered tools/equipment. Then, eventually, solar panels on the house.
I have an elderly little folding solar panel, about enough to charge a phone, that I use when the power goes out. It’s a handy little thing, and fun to watch it work.
There are some sexy and much more powerful panels out there that are less expensive than my little one was. Someday I’ll upgrade, since my power lines will remain above ground for the foreseeable future. Storms do a number on them.
Same here. I need something that will power my fridge and freezer and charge my phones when the weather knocks things out.
Decentralized power source. And microgrids are like the Fediverse. I sense a theme afoot in the world. What’s the word for the way after you learn something you seem to see it everywhere? I’ve got that going on right now…
Coal dropped, but looks like natural gass usage jumped. That's only a small difference in carbon output. Nuclear is the way to go until we've got a solid infrastructure that can handle the ups and downs of renewables, grid storage and general upgrades, nation wide.
Nuclear needs a steady supply of water for cooling, which has become rather unreliable these days in many regions.
Ever heard of Molten salt reactors? They're much safer than traditional reactors in many ways
To my understanding they don't use up the water though, it's evaporated back into the cycle after use. Also they can use non potable water like salt water, if memory serves.
Yeah, let’s absolutely get more renewables out there, but I don’t see how we can accommodate base grid loads without something like nuclear (especially when grid storage of renewable energy that isn’t consumed at the time of generation seems like a problem that will take a long time to solve).
The anti-nuclear stuff drives me nuts, and as we’ve seen with Europe and their general move away from nuclear (France being a notable exception) is that you can spin up all the nuclear you want but you’ll need more fossil fuel plants to handle base load regardless.
How hydrogen is transforming these tiny Scottish islands
Scotland’s Orkney Islands produce more clean energy than their inhabitants can use. Their next step? Hydrogen.
Hydrogen is not free of problems: it degrades metal, leaks above a very low level have the potential to negate the environmental benefits, and it's not particularly efficient because of the cost of compression. And Green hydrogen (which is more like a battery than a fuel) risks providing Big Carbon with a new excuse to pollute with their multi-coloured array of non-Green hydrogens (which are filthy fuels, nothing like a battery).
But I'm not at all convinced about nuclear providing better answers than renewables. It takes decades for a new nuclear plant to come online, the same money invested in renewables starts yielding benefits immediately. And the problem of disposing of nuclear waste is not yet solved.
Idk that it's better than renewables, I'd say they're complimentary. And I'm not sure we'd need new big multi-million new ones, newer models can be much smaller, cheaper, and modular. But places like Germany shutting down perfectly functional nuclear plants drives me nuts, just ups the coal and gas usage.
I’m glad to see things are moving in the right direction.
view more: next ›