Take THAT Dirty Coal!

[smokinD]

Friends of Science Society asks Alberta Premier to Reject Pembina Institute Climate Change Proposal on Renewables Legislation, saying it will Cost Billions

 

[rzrgade]

Wasn't making any sort of comments or any discussions about what current governments are doing or not doing. Was only discussing renewable energies.

Ummm the two are interconnected, would you not say ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[S.W.A.T.]

If the thread was discussing that perhaps, but the thread started by raising awareness to a article about wind and solar technologies. They would only become one of the same after introducing the "thought" that renewable energies must imposed by government. Again I really struggle to understand why so many folks especially those who frequent a outdoor orientated forum are so opposed to ideas like wind and solar.

Ummm the two are interconnected, would you not say ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rsaint]

Your thinking too cut and dry, absolutely to instantly convert the whole country to renewables over night would be nothing short of a joke. But as a progression on a individual level it is there. 9 months a year Nevada runs air conditioners, huge drain on power, but imagine the return rather then subsidizing the solar deals they put up wind turbines out in the dessert? I think there is some sort of kick back in Hawaii for people who add solar to the roof tops. Not a perfect plan by far but it is a start. We burn wood for heat, ironically my outdoor stove requires power, I am currently looking for a system capable of handling its power requirements on its own. Rate of return just isn't there YET but its coming.

I had a outdoor wood furnace and spent 4000 on solar panels and batteries to run it off grid no way it would keep up. Had 8 solar panels and 4 batteries and trace inverter, the heater was global hydronics with a blower and grundfos circ pump good luck.

 

[DaveB]

Friends of Science Society asks Alberta Premier to Reject Pembina Institute Climate Change Proposal on Renewables Legislation, saying it will Cost Billions

The Friends of Science are wise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rightsideup]

Not picking a fight but why have those coal plants not been converted to natural gas, even cleaner yet....

There may not be a deposit of gas in those area's . Since deregulation almost all new generation does come from natural gas. Also I think the infrastructure of a coal Plant may be very hard to convert. Very good question.

 

[team dirt]

The bad part of going to more solar and wind is coal fired or nat gas power plants are idled back and still need to maintain a minimum fire to maintain boiler temp and pressure so when the sun disappears or the wind quits they can ramp up immediately to cover the demand. The whole time these boilers are running at low fire they are actually very inefficient so for fuel burnt vs output it probably takes away any gain in emessions that you might have saved from running solar or wind. These plants will never go away due to the fact wind and solar is totally unreliable and we rely on a dependable grid. Sure would be fun to see the c trains in Calgary start and stop due to wind or sun problems. That would really make things hit home for a bunch of people.

 

[rightsideup]

The bad part of going to more solar and wind is coal fired or nat gas power plants are idled back and still need to maintain a minimum fire to maintain boiler temp and pressure so when the sun disappears or the wind quits they can ramp up immediately to cover the demand. The whole time these boilers are running at low fire they are actually very inefficient so for fuel burnt vs output it probably takes away any gain in emessions that you might have saved from running solar or wind. These plants will never go away due to the fact wind and solar is totally unreliable and we rely on a dependable grid. Sure would be fun to see the c trains in Calgary start and stop due to wind or sun problems. That would really make things hit home for a bunch of people.

With out a doubt other sources of generation are needed for backup. Additional transmission lines will have to built and maintained from this new generation technology if not located near the backup generation.

 

[ABMax24]

There may not be a deposit of gas in those area's . Since deregulation almost all new generation does come from natural gas. Also I think the infrastructure of a coal Plant may be very hard to convert. Very good question.

Coal plants can be converted quite easily to Natural Gas, just fire the boiler with gas instead of coal. The kicker is NG powerplants are far more efficient as combined cycle. Which is where the natural gas first drives a gas turbine that produces power, and then the waste heat in the exhaust is used to create steam to drive a second steam turbine, some of these new plants are over 60% efficient where a converted coal boiler would likely be less than 50% efficient.

Like this one:

 

[rzrgade]

Coal plants can be converted quite easily to Natural Gas, just fire the boiler with gas instead of coal. The kicker is NG powerplants are far more efficient as combined cycle. Which is where the natural gas first drives a gas turbine that produces power, and then the waste heat in the exhaust is used to create steam to drive a second steam turbine, some of these new plants are over 60% efficient where a converted coal boiler would likely be less than 50% efficient.

Like this one:
http://img.directindustry.com/pdf/r...y-50-combined-cycle-power-plant-544145_1b.jpg

And as I have tried to point out in prior posts ... If our provincial government is determined to close all coal plants , no matter how efficient/ innovative they become , it is a non starter !
So yes , like it or not the government does control our use and development of our natural resources. Wether we like it or not ...
To assume otherwise is simply ignoring the facts .

 

[tex78]

In Canada we use a lot of energy to stay warm.Maybe we should all switch to wood and chop every tree down.

U mean like Saskatchewan is, flat and tree less

sent while drinking tea's

 

[ABMax24]

And as I have tried to point out in prior posts ... If our provincial government is determined to close all coal plants , no matter how efficient/ innovative they become , it is a non starter !
So yes , like it or not the government does control our use and development of our natural resources. Wether we like it or not ...
To assume otherwise is simply ignoring the facts .

That is quite simply the modern left wing way of thinking. Ban things they don't like or things they think need to change, instead of creating regulation to allow individuals or companies to create new solutions to a problem.

I simply don't know how people think this is an effective means of governing.

 

[rightsideup]

U mean like Saskatchewan is, flat and tree less

sent while drinking tea's

There is more tree's in Saskatchewan than you think

 

[rzrgade]

Totally agree ! We are eroding our entrepreneurship which made this country great to start with ...
Sadly the pendulum has passed centre and is heading back upwards ...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rightsideup]

Coal plants can be converted quite easily to Natural Gas, just fire the boiler with gas instead of coal. The kicker is NG powerplants are far more efficient as combined cycle. Which is where the natural gas first drives a gas turbine that produces power, and then the waste heat in the exhaust is used to create steam to drive a second steam turbine, some of these new plants are over 60% efficient where a converted coal boiler would likely be less than 50% efficient.

Like this one:
http://img.directindustry.com/pdf/r...y-50-combined-cycle-power-plant-544145_1b.jpg

Thanks for the information just wonder if gas is always available near a plant that can be converted?

 

[ABMax24]

Thanks for the information just wonder if gas is always available near a plant that can be converted?

If there is a Natural Gas pipeline then the gas should be there. There are large underground storage facilities in Alberta that store Natural Gas for peak periods such as the cold winter months, so even if there was a supply shortage the gas would still flow. In fact the company I work for has been continually expanding one of these storage facilities for the last 2 years.

 

[Ronaha]

U mean like Saskatchewan is, flat and tree less

sent while drinking tea's

Sasky is halve tree, it starts north of Loydminster, we burn them trees first

 

[52weekbreak]

Interesting commentary. I liked the article as to me it signifies change toward different types of energy production. Solar has a ton of things to get worked out with storage being one of the big hurdles - probably the biggest. Some very cool developments in that area with a variety of different materials including sodium. Thats right. Good old salt.

I look at this as the progress of technology no different than cell phones that started out being like a WWII walkie talkie that evolved to become smaller and smaller and then got bigger again as they changed from cell phones to computers to portable entertainment systems and they are still changing.

I do not relate this in any way to either the provincial or proposed federal carbon taxes. That is a separate issue even though it is on the other side of the coin.

Some pretty cool research being done though. Apparently some scientists have developed a method of turning carbon dioxide into solid carbon which can be used for most anything. Work is being done with graphene that blows my mind. Carbon nano-tubes can be arranged in a way that the end product is stronger than steel, thinner than paper and lighter than anything else with those properties. Imagine a 300 HP sled that weighs 250 pounds and is, quite literally, bulletproof.

All of this stuff requires energy to create and produce so old man oil will be around for a long time but for all of the technological changes that have happened in the last 30 years, the next 30 will bring 3 times that amount of change. There will be lots of change I will not care for but a lot of it I will. I might be an old B*tard who doesn't like change too much but there is some really cool stuff coming.

Eventually everyone figures out that fuel injection and computers are way better than carburetors and coils/points/mechanical. I remember listening to guys wax on about how much they liked to change jets as the altitude changed and I thought they were eff'n nuts. There will be plenty of missteps along the way to better technology but quite a bit of it will get there and even more will get lost on the wayside.

The new entrepreneurs are the same as the old ones: Those who like the Edisons of the world invent stuff and those who figure out how to use that invention differently and market that. Based on what I am seeing, those who are professional drivers now will likely be the last generation that does that.

I guess I strongly lean toward embracing good new technology and while I might be fond of old stuff, it really wasn't that good and am glad to move on. Vintage sleds are cool because they are old and extremely cranky but I wouldn't want to rely on one.

 

[Cdnfireman]

There is no such thing as "clean" energy. Every source of energy we use either creates emissions directly or causes emissions in its manufacturing.
Photovoltaic cells (solar) require huge amounts of highly refined silica for the cells and the glass that covers them, and the copper that interconnects them requires huge energy inputs to mine, process and refine the ore and then smelt and produce the wire. Add to this the energy burned to transport and install the solar farm, the energy produced by the photocell will never in its lifetime compensate for the energy required to build it.

A wind turbine assembly requires approx 240 tons of steel, 4 tons of copper, needs 100 tons of reinforced concrete to sit on, an electrical grid to interconnect it, a road to get to it, and several tons of diesel fuel to transport and install it, several hundred more tons of diesel to mine the iron ore to build it, the coking coal to make the steel, the oil to make the paint on it etc, etc, etc. A wind turbine too will never produce enough " clean " energy to offset energy used to build it.

How about a hydroelectric dam? How many thousands of TONS of diesel fuel does it take to build a dam that has millions of cubic yards of material, thousands of cubic yards of concrete, thousands of tons of reinforcing steel, trucking everything on site, cutting down all the trees, building the access roads, transmission lines etc etc etc. A dam might eventually break even on the energy it cost to build it, but only because of the massive amounts of power generated and the long lifespan of the project.

Renewable energy is is a feel-good farce. Nowhere in the world do "renewable" energy projects function without massive government subsidies. There's no free lunch. Instead of taxing money out of the economy in a blind attempt to change people's behaviour ( which has never ever worked anywhere it has been tried), the government should set realistic goals for emission reductions and let industry and technology meet the targets. Look how much cleaner and more efficient automobiles have become over even the last 10 years.

Instead of shutting down coal fired plants, set a realistic annual emissions reduction on them and give technology time to produce the results, or give them tax incentives to re-tool to natural gas. This would create jobs and instead of directly sucking billions out of the economy like a carbon tax, would worst case defer a loss of tax revenue from the plant operators for the life of the incentives, after which they would again contribute normally. That's how a smart govt would reduce emissions and help protect the environment.

But no one ever accused Notley or Trudeau of being smart.

 

[TROLLCAT]

There is more tree's in Saskatchewan than you think

2 tree's for every jackfish !?!?