The future of coal

[tarabell]

An interdisciplinary MIT faculty group examined the role of coal in a world where constraints on carbon dioxide emissions are adopted to mitigate global climate change. This follows "The Future of Nuclear Power" which focused on carbon dioxide emissions-free electricity generation from nuclear energy and was published in 2003.

This report, the future of coal in a carbon-constrained world, evaluates the technologies and costs associated with the generation of electricity from coal along with those associated with the capture and sequestration of the carbon dioxide produced coal-based power generation. Growing electricity demand in the U.S. and in the world will require increases in all generation options (renewables, coal, and nuclear) in addition to increased efficiency and conservation in its use. Coal will continue to play a significant role in power generation and as such carbon dioxide management from it will become increasingly important.

This study, addressed to government, industry and academic leaders, discusses the interrelated technical, economic, environmental and political challenges facing increased coal-based power generation while managing carbon dioxide emissions from this sector.

Led by co-chairs Professor John Deutch, Institute Professor, Department of Chemistry, and Ernest J. Moniz, Cecil and Ida Green Professor of Physics and Engineering Systems, the report states that carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is the critical enabling technology to help reduce CO2 emissions significantly while also allowing coal to meet the world's pressing energy needs.

The other key findings in this report are summarized here:

http://web.mit.edu/coal/

[xcel]

Hi Tarabell:

___Great read. Especially wrt congress removing any expectations of a new Coal based plant without CO2 sequestration being grandfathered.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

[litesong]

The future of coal in countries without carbon dioxide reductions in mind is....rosey, albeit dirty rosey. Yesterday's reading shows that India is seeking 40,000Megawatts of added electric power production per year to continue its economic growth! Much of that 40,000Megawatts will come from coal-fired plants. In addition, China will add 1000 coal-fired plants to continue its growth!

[Big Dave]

Cola also has a future as a feedstock for Fischer-Tropsch synthetic fuel plants.

[BailOut]

Great find, tarabell.

Just some quick info to add:

1) The current line from coal plant owners is that they consider CCS to be in its infancy, and that there won't be any commercially available retrofit kits for it for at least 15 years. And, of course, none of them have any plans to get into CCS until that point, if ever.

2) Modern coal plants - the superboilers - each produce an average of 7mil pounds (3.2mil kg) of CO2 per year. Older plants are even dirtier, by about 20%. Other harmful emissions they produce include SO2 (Sulfur Dioxide), NOx (Nitrogen Oxide), CO (Carbon Monoxide), VOC (Volatile Organic Compunds), PM (Particulate Matter), U (Uranium) and Th (Thorium). The typical modern coal plant creates 100 times more Uranium and Thorium waste than an actual Nuclear power plant does to produce the same amount of electricity.

3) Modern coal plants are only 48% efficient and require massive amounts (thousands of acre-feet per year) of fresh water - another finite resource - to operate. Older plants are as low as 34% efficient.

[warthog1984]

I'm curious as to where Bailout got all this info about coal plants. References, please

[BailOut]

Originally Posted by warthog1984

I'm curious as to where Bailout got all this info about coal plants. References, please

Point 1) Heard twice in the last two days, once from a Toquop (Sithe) representative (EIS public hearing) and once from a Sierra Pacific representative (new substation request "open house").

Point 2) Various EIS (Environmental Impact Studies) (example: http://www.blm.gov/nv/st/en/fo/ely_f...draft_eis.html ), http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/qu...ticle/co2.html , various presentations at public energy meetings/conferences (e.g. Reno Green Summit, Renewable Energy breakout session, April 2007), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_plant

Point 3) Same sources as Point 2


There are many more sources but that's a good core to get you started. This is the kind of thing that can consume your next month's Web surfing if you are truly interested.

If you would like to see this information brought out in real-time, as well as the spin some folks will put on it, simply attend a power-related event in your own neck of the woods. Contact your local environmental groups, utility commission, utility provider or governmental permit office to learn of times, dates and locations.

[phoebeisis]

Bailout- just 7 million pounds per year??That is less than 3 million pounds(or 150 tons) of coal per year(coal is more or less CH2-adding 2 O to it will more or less triple the weight-)?? Wow,that sure seems waaaaay too low. I could picture them using that much in a few days.I'm not familiar with coal plants but 3000000 lbs/yr seems way to low.
We will certainly be stuch using coal in one way or another for many more years,so I hope a good way to tie up the CO2 is found.
Thanks,
Charlie

[BailOut]

Charlie,

7mil pounds/year is the average number. Many of the coal plants in the world are small, and others are single purpose units such as a smelting plant producing its own electricity from coal and then flaring the exhaust for additional thermal output. Also remember that while environmental studies are based on the plant running full-tilt 24/7 the reality is usually much different. Wayne can chime in here with first-hand knowledge but I've heard it said by people in the know that most plants only run at 15-30% capacity for 20 or so hours per day, then spool up to 75% or so to help the grid at peak load times.

In my own service area plants will shut down 2/3 of their production capacity for days on end during stand downs and the remaining plants have no trouble at all picking up the slack.

I'm sure that a high-usage and large (e.g. 1,500mW) coal plant will produce much more than 7mil pounds but they are averaged by all the smaller plants (there are a handful of coal plants in my service area that are smaller than 500mW), and also by the very few plants that are flaring or scrubbing.

[Kermit]

I found a site that tries to put into perspective what we do to be green vs. what coal power plants do to negate that effect.

It's the intro, and some related information within, so don't skip the intro.
http://architecture2030.org