Comments on: AskPablo: Coal-Fired Power Plants

By: Corey

Corey — Mon, 18 May 2009 21:16:27 +0000

I am sorry…you guys need to wake up and smell the coffe…all of your ideas are wonderful in a fairie tale land, but, the fact of the matter is …. we are stuck with what we were given…it is important to utilize a more efficient method of producing power…. but we will never live to see those changes make a difference… because it will take the next 50 – 100 years to develop and ensure these new methods… so i guess the bottom line is try making the process that we currently have more efficient and less harmful to our environment until a better method is proven…sorry guys but we are stuck with it….the only thing we can do is get a head start for our children

By: timourau

timourau — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 16:24:26 +0000

Efficiency is getting the same benefit by using less resources. We are not using too much energy. We are wasting too much energy. If it takes 0 kWh to bring sunlight into the building (after application is installed), everything else, even LED would be a waste of energy. If we can have a building which can use 30% less energy to maintain comfort levels, those 30% are just being wasted without any benefit gained.
And the last, if I can get from point A to point B safely at satisfactory speed using 0 gallons of gasoline, everything else will be a waste. [we'll have to use electricity from clean sources for these vehicles for this statement to be true to its fullest extent]

By: albern zuniega

albern zuniega — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:11:20 +0000

I do believe that we’re all concern about the harsh effects of using fossil fuels in our atmosphere. I just hope that more and more people will try to understand the situation. Information and communication campaign may be a great move to do our part as responsible citizens.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 00:31:29 +0000

Water can be used..but is water available in the required amounts….water is being sold for drinknig so do u think it it sustainable to use water for generation power by constructing a dam…? It depends on the availability of water i suppose. I understand that fossil fuels do create a lot of pollution but how much power are we using legibily. Do we turn off the fan, lamp, heater and other utilities when not in use. Have a thought about it…friends…

By: WALLACE

WALLACE — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 02:08:37 +0000

WHY ARE WE STILL USING COAL AND OTHER FOSSIL FUELS WHEN THERE ARE MANY ALTERNATIVES TO USE LIKE WATER. WITH SO MUCH OF OUR PLANET WATER AND SO MANY DIFFERENT WAYS TO HARNEST ENERGY FROM IT THERE IS NO REASON TO USE POLLUTING FOSSIL FUELS.

By: Sameer

Sameer — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:49:31 +0000

I agree with you guys. If some one could help me find a list or directory of Coal based power plant all around the world I would be highly Obliged. Please send the link at sameerkhosla007@gmail.com Thanks

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:33:36 +0000

Well Edmund, that’s actually considered to be good and not “only…a third”. Typically, 35% efficiency is considered average. There are limits to what you can do from thermodynamics. Entropy and all that.

By: Edmund

Edmund — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 01:04:16 +0000

You forgot to mention that many modern coal plants only capture a third of coal’s energy…

By: Amaldi

Amaldi — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 05:37:01 +0000

Just one more comment if I may.
I’ve just noticed a comment by alvinwriter: “Soon, all the fossil fuel deposits in the world will be exausted and we will plunge into an energy crisis…”
This might be true about crude oil and natural gas but not about coal. We have enough coal to keep us going for about 200 years, maybe longer. (See “The Little Green Handbook: Seven trends shaping the future of our planet”)
Our potential for killing ourselves is practically unlimited. If we continue using fossil fuels, we are likely to be dead before we exhaust all their deposits.

By: Amaldi

Amaldi — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 05:26:36 +0000

Your article is most interesting but your link between Btu and kWh appears to be incorrect. It should be GWh = 3412MBtu, where MBtu is million Btu.

By: Tetsuo

Tetsuo — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 12:56:53 +0000

Efficiency, efficiency, efficiency…. if people don’t do it by themselves, we need to just crank up the cost of fuel/energy. That may be the only way to get people to listen! I’ll keep riding my bike to work and chuckle!

By: alvinwriter

alvinwriter — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 08:04:56 +0000

Soon, all the fossil fuel deposits in the world will be exausted and we will plunge into an energy crisis, unless alternative sources can be used. I’d like to think that when that happens, carbon dioxide emissions will no longer be an issue (at least if climate change is bearable). What else can we do, if all the stored CO2 in fossil fuels is already released into the air? Let’s hope there are enough natural self-regulating factors, like trees, left on the Earth to keep the cycle going. If not, there should be more climate sinks established beginning now.
Europe’s first climate sink inaugurated in Monaco: http://www.thenewsroom.com/details/45779?c_id=wom-bc-ar
- Alvin from TheScienceDesk at TheNewsRoom.com

By: Amy Jewel

Amy Jewel — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 18:17:08 +0000

Although China is opening one new coal-fired plant per week, the U.S. is also planning to open lots more coal plants – up to 145GW by 2030. Check out this report, which lists all the proposed coal plants by region, from the National Energy Technology Lab of the Dept. of Energy:
http://www.netl.doe.gov/coal/refshelf/ncp.pdf