The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The time to move on from coal is now > Comments

The time to move on from coal is now : Comments

By Ben Pearson, published 29/12/2006

Clean coal is a furphy - the equivalent of 'healthy cigarettes'.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. All
In terms of practicalities. 75 per cent of power generation in Australia comes from coal (mainly black coal). The cheap cost of coal-fired electricity has supported power intensive industries which have driven our economy and the quality of life you enjoy. Right or wrong, that's where we are.

A fast fix that you talk about "turn off coal-fire power gen now" is impossible and laughable, the status quo is too entrenched, too structurally fundamental to not play a part in the transition to zero emissions. Like it or not - the transition will not be the economic disaster that would result if we turned off our power stations tomorrow.

-Clean coal etc as you have described above is a short term and transitional technology, but valid
-Nuclear is a zero/close to zero (if you take account of the mining) emissions technology that can supply baseload electricity
-Gas-fired power generation results in carbon dioxide emissions also (albeit less than coal-fired)
-renewable generation - wind/solar/geothermal are years and years away from being technically and economically feasible, and will not for, many many years be substantial enough to provide BASELOAD power

In addition, I can't understand why people can't stomach nuclear yet on the other hand are passionate about reducing greenhouse gas emissions. I can't understand why people are against reducing emissions from coal fired technology as part of a strategy to reduce overall emissions ie something is better than nothing, yet apply the double standard that some renewables are better than nothing.
Posted by broughan, Monday, 1 January 2007 3:17:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Could someone discuss the merits of anthracite and the role it plays in Australia's coal resources.
Posted by Vioetbou, Monday, 1 January 2007 7:40:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Picture this - recently a coal producing NSW town (names aren't important)hosted a tourist industry gathering where one of the theme displays was a pile of large chunks of very black local coal. Tourist gathering over, what do the hosts do with the coal chunks? Deposit it in the garbage bin for local dump collection. Now that may have been a practical solution to an immediate problem or it may have been a real dilemma for someone facing the very real issue of global warming and the very big part of coal in the 21st century's apocalypse. I just don't believe our political institutions are capable of dealing with this issue either. Clean coal is an oxymoron. X-Srata spent just $250 000 perannum on coal sequestration studies in 2004-5. Sure we've upped this to some $350 million in ensuing years through Howard's very late reality check. But my gut feeling is it aint going to go anywhere. Individual carbon ration cards for everyone on the globe over 15 tomorrow - blow your monthly allowance too soon and you're out n the cold til next month buddy. get used to it.
Posted by jup, Monday, 1 January 2007 8:46:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes VK3
There is no silver bullet in this subject.
To stop burning coal, just like that is impossible.

Power stations can be anywhere if the transmission voltage is high enough.
Hence the Bass Straight Mega volt DC line.
I agree that fusion is probably 50 years away.
So we have a choice Nuclear, Coal and try and hide the CO2 underground,
Geothermal and the intermittant renewables.
Its Hobson's choice really.

Nuclear is expensive and takes a lot of time, but it works.
The way you do it is stop export of yellow cake.
Build an enrichment plant and lease not sell the fuel rods.
No new ones unless the used ones returned.
Bury them in Central Australia.

Coal sequestration works, it is being used to increase oil output
from oil wells by pumping it underground into the space the oil came from.

Geothermal; Some systems become unworkable in a very short time
as the rocks get cooled. Seems OK in ZL, err New Zealand.

Intermittants; Full of problems, Solar expensive and shortage of materials.
Windfarms have average of 25% of rated output. So expensive.
Causes instability in grid network.

So, everyone raves on about coal but they have no answers.
They wont have the only viable alternative, so whats their suggestion ?
Posted by Bazz, Tuesday, 2 January 2007 11:16:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
According to plerdus, the four horsemen of the apocalypse are WAR, FAMINE, PESTILENCE and DEATH.

The fourth horseman of the apocalypse is PLAGUE - they all are aspects of death...

But let's not get carried away by the topic of population. Climate change is a global phenomenon (like population growth) and needs a global solution. To have any credibility in urging the rest of the world to move away from coal, Australia needs to set an example.

Australia generates (pun intended) a large part of its national income from coal. If we can show that it is economically feasible to make big cuts in coal extraction that will be much more effective in global politics than blathering on about the fantasy of "new Kyoto"s or how we can't cut production because others will fill the gap.
Posted by mvs, Tuesday, 2 January 2007 3:56:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
hey imagine if they could charge for solar and wind,what a pay off,if only someone could help only way they would listen.
Can someone please tell me what a conflict of interest is so not sure?see so much all the time is it who you are not what you do?
Posted by dickheed, Wednesday, 3 January 2007 2:00:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy