
Zombie Coal - toomuchtodo
https://theenergytransition.org/article/zombie-coal/
======
battery_cowboy
There's not a lot of options yet for base load. We need a lot more storage, or
an environmentally friendly and reliable source for base load. Nuclear would
fit, clearly, but it's not financially viable, moreso than coal right now.
It's a very hard problem, and it'll take time to sort out with "the market",
but building storage from dams and lakes and reservoir would be a good start.
Batteries might not be the best for the environment unless we can efficiently
recycle the minerals in them rather than mine them, since that is almost as
bad as mining the coal. We should also look into geothermal and other sources
that we've left behind in favor of oil and coal.

Edit: I'm "posting too fast" so i can't reply, but thanks for the comment
about batteries, they're good for decarbonization but maybe not great for the
environment in the mining of the materials. Maybe that's an okay trade off.

~~~
toomuchtodo
It's about 6,000 Tesla Megapacks worth of utility scale energy storage in the
US [1] to carry you through periods of intermittent renewables generation,
along with a more robust transmission network so renewable generation can more
readily flow to load centers. Tesla is already under contract to provide these
storage systems in California for PG&E (1.1 Gwh facility in Monterey County)
[2] [3]. For example, quite a bit of wind energy can't make it out of Texas
because of lack of interconnection capacity between ERCOT (Texas' electric
system operator) and other grids, so you need funding for upgrading
interconnectors. Upgrading electrical infra isn't sexy, but is very much a
necessary expense.

Very few areas are geographically suitable for pumped hydro storage, and
batteries can be recycled today with existing supply chains. Batteries can
also be rapidly shipped and installed (see: Hornsdale Power Reserve, installed
in 100 days).

With regards to generation, "all of the above" that is low carbon. As the cost
of renewables approaches less than a penny a kWh (we’re just about there for
utility scale projects), the majority of your costs are storage and
distribution infrastructure.

[1]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20814930](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20814930)

[2] [https://cleantechnica.com/2020/02/27/humongous-tesla-
battery...](https://cleantechnica.com/2020/02/27/humongous-tesla-battery-
plant-approved-in-california-is-10x-bigger-than-worlds-biggest-battery-plant/)

[3] [https://energycentral.com/news/tesla-pge-get-approval-
propos...](https://energycentral.com/news/tesla-pge-get-approval-
proposed-11-gw-storage-facility-california)

~~~
csours
From your 2 - they are approved to construct a 1.2 GWh energy storage
facility.

If a car took 100 kWh of battery capacity (to use round numbers), the storage
facility mentioned would use 10,000 vehicles equivalent storage. (If you use
25 kWh vehicle equivalent, it would be 50,000 vehicles, etc)

------
gwbas1c
> GE boasts 62 percent efficiency with its combined cycle gas plants using its
> H-Class turbines

That's huge! Normally generating electricity from fossil fuels is about 1/3rd
efficient.

Further more: If we assume, with grid loss, that the whole system is 50%
efficient once it reaches a home, and we pair it with an older 2.7 COE heat
pump, it means that home heating with a heat pump, when using GE's new
generator, is 135% efficient. (A typical gas furnace is 90-ish.)

For those who don't know: A heat pump has greater than 100% efficiency because
it sucks heat out of ambient air. It cools the outside air to heat the inside.

~~~
greglindahl
Combined cycle plants have been around for a while. Another common thing is
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cogeneration](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cogeneration),
which dates back to the start of electricity production. Both are more
efficient than the days when no one cared, but they still spew carbon. Your
heat pump can run on wind.

~~~
gwbas1c
> Your heat pump can run on wind

It can run on anything. As pro renewable energy as I am, the switch won't
happen overnight.

Furthermore, pointing out that heating with a heat pump and grid electricity
from natural gas is more efficient than heating directly with natural gas
hopefully encourages more homes to use heat pumps now, instead of waiting for
incentives that will come in the future.

When I built my house, I had to really push on the contractor to get a heat
pump. He wanted to do a gas furnace and still thinks I'm an environmental
bozo.

------
arkanciscan
> why are new coal-fired power plants still being planned and built?

Because digging holes is all that some people know how to do for a living
apparently.

~~~
mistermann
I don't think I understand your logic, could you expand on what you mean?

~~~
_mcdougle
I'm no expert but it seems like we keep subsidizing both coal mining & coal
burning, as well as creating legal obstacles for better energy technology, for
the sake of propping up an industry with a lot of jobs.

I feel like, lately, there's been a big effort to keep these things going in
spite of greener energy options being more and more affordable just so we
don't put a lot of people out of work.

~~~
jhallenworld
There are not even that many jobs. How many people do you think it takes to
run a strip mine? Take a look:

[https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Li...](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Liebherr_T282C_Coal_Haul_Truck.png/1280px-
Liebherr_T282C_Coal_Haul_Truck.png)

[https://earthfirstnews.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/narm_aeri...](https://earthfirstnews.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/narm_aerial_1203.jpg)

It turns out that the biggest competition for coal jobs is more efficient coal
mines- in this case the strip mines of the Powder River Basin.

It's all the more astounding that solar is cheaper than coal.

------
csours
I did not read the article in detail, but a keyword search and quick skim did
not show anything about base load or peak load. I don't think you can really
talk seriously about energy policy without mentioning those.

Solar doesn't produce energy at night, Wind doesn't produce energy when the
wind doesn't blow.

\---

My personal opinion is that the grid will have to get a lot smarter to realize
the benefits of cheap solar, and that home power distribution and appliances
will have to get smarter.

~~~
jcrawfordor
The point the article makes is that coal is still a poor choice, all this
aside. natural gas has the same reliability properties at a lower cost.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
And, Methane Hydrates! An enormous reserve of natural gas, estimated 6X all
the oil we've ever drilled, waiting to be tapped.

~~~
pstuart
I hope not. Especially if it means strip mining the ocean floor. Oh, and that
CO2 thing as well.

Fossil fuels should be incentivized away as quickly as possible.

~~~
FlyMoreRockets
The problem is that this slush methane is going to melt with global warming
and is a much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
There are oceans of it under the seafloor.

~~~
pstuart
Yep. Let's leave 'em there.

We need to decarbonize as quickly as possible.

------
htnsao
Heads up, the Safire Project has solved plasma fusion and started
commercialization. See [https://aureon.ca/](https://aureon.ca/)

<SAFIRE can create, control, contain, sustain, and repeat-at-will any number
of plasma regimes. No other technology in the world can do this.

Seven years of empirical testing has resulted in a unique patented stable
spherical "SAFIRE" plasma reactor. AUREON ENERGY LTD. will commercialize the
SAFIRE technology into three key markets:

> clean energy production > heating > remediation of nuclear waste

Each market in itself represents a trillion dollar industry over the next ten
years. AUREON ENERGY is currently engaging investors to commercialize the
technology.

Edit: More details and direct URL added.

Edit again: ha to the down voters. Pretty weak pressing a button without
explaining why you think their science is flawed.

In essence it's just a cathode chamber containing hydrogen gas surrounding a
spherical anode which they are able to make light up like the sun when the
current and voltages are held below arc discharge levels.

The end is nigh for oil and coal.

~~~
gus_massa
I didn't downvote this, but I'll try to explain:

First, it is somewhat related to the post but not very related, so the comment
adds more noise than information. Perhaps you can submit it as an independent
post instead of a comment.

Nuclear fusion is full of promises, fraud and snake oil. There are some
interesting project, but there are also a lot of bad projects.

> _clean energy production_

Prototype or it didn't happen. IIUC they are still researching that, so the
commercialization to the trillion dollar market should wait.

> _heating_

This look easier, you don't need a self sustainable reaction (ignition).
Anyway, it would be interesting to see the analysis of the cost of the
equipment and how often it need replacement, and how much power it can
process. I can believe they have something here, but I'd like to see the
evidence.

> _remediation of nuclear waste_

I don't understand what they are talking about. (I actually can imagine
something like that, but what I imagine seams too difficult. So it smells like
a void promise to get money. But let's be optimistic and say that I don't
understand what they are trying to do.)

~~~
htnsao
Good for you.

<First, it is somewhat related to the post but not very related, so the
comment adds more noise than information. Perhaps you can submit it as an
independent post instead of a comment.

It's very related in my opinion. I submitted a post once about a important new
method of electromechanical desalination but it didn't get anywhere so it
seems like comments are the surest way to get eyes on the info here. I have
been reading the bickering scene here for awhile and just recently signed-up
to post, not sure how the algo works.

< Prototype or it didn't happen.

They have two working protypes already after many years of research. Check the
vid.

Actually perhaps the most controversial part of what they have done with their
work is validation of the Electric Sun theory. The energy spin-off was not the
original goal.

~~~
gus_massa
Thread hijacking is an easy way to get downvotes. Expect downvotes if you do
this again.

About the other submission, some submissions are lucky and some unlucky. Keep
trying. (I took a look, it looks too complicated. Do they have a working
prototype?)

\---

I watched the video. It shows a device to produce plasma. Fluorescent lamps
also use plasma, so I'm not impressed.

It is not a working prototype, it is just an experiment. They should show a
device that can create a self sustainable reaction without being plugged in,
and release energy. Specially because it is a low energy nuclear reaction (aka
cold fusion) that is an area with a very shady history.

The video has some claims like "Energy density analogous to the Sun" but note
that the outer layers of the Sun have a very low density.

The main result is that the device gets hot (113°C = 235.4°F), but it is only
the temperature of a single spot in a big device running for a long time. Why
don't they keep the temperature stable for a while?

They reuse the Hydrogen? All of them or a part is lost in fusion?

I also read the link in Science and Technology > Theory and is has a huge
disclaimer and then three theories that are unrelated to how the device work
and that have no experimental support and have very little support in the
community.

~~~
htnsao
>Thread hijacking is an easy way to get downvotes. Expect downvotes if you do
this again.

Right, ok well thread drift seems to be the norm on HN. Connecting ideas et
al. The link is to 'theenergytransition.org' \-- and this is about that.

>About the other submission, some submissions are lucky and some unlucky. Keep
trying.

OK, might do that with a sharper hook.

>(I took a look, it looks too complicated. Do they have a working prototype?)

Actually the mechanical induction desalinator design looks like it could be
relatively simple to make with 3D printing and a pancake coil. It's on my
project list. Not sure at what stage Vorsana has taken it to so far. The suite
of related radial counter-flow patents were sold to an ex-employee who now has
a manufacturing startup based in Vernon, BC. I think they previously ran a
successful company based on prior patents from the same inventor. A similar
counter-spinning design purifies water via cavitation, can be powered by a
bicycle.

>I watched the video. It shows a device to produce plasma. Fluorescent lamps
also use plasma, so I'm not impressed.

It's controlled ball lightning producing transmutations (like turning
radioactive uranium waste into lead (Pb), apparently). And it's a possible
replication of the sun, complete with solar flares.

>It is not a working prototype, it is just an experiment.

ok agreed. They were hired to test the Electric Sun theory (aka Electric
Universe). Their first experiment was done in a bell jar and was successful so
they built this reactor to take further measurements.

>They should show a device that can create a self sustainable reaction without
being plugged in, and release energy.

Their current reactor needs to be shut down after reducing input to 7% because
the temperature goes off the charts. So now they are building a new reactor
that can remove heat.

>Specially because it is a low energy nuclear reaction (aka cold fusion) that
is an area with a very shady history.

The shady history part is mainly one of science suppression. Amongst many
others, even the US Navy SPAWAR has published replications of the original
reactions. Pons & Fleischman have been fully vindicated but mainstream hasn't
caught up yet. Till now the effects have not been controlled to such a level
because they were working with gas loading powders etc and using heat instead
of electricity.

>The video has some claims like "Energy density analogous to the Sun" but note
that the outer layers of the Sun have a very low density.

Maybe you are mixing physical density with energy density? Haven't watched it
all in awhile.

>The main result is that the device gets hot (113°C = 235.4°F), but it is only
the temperature of a single spot in a big device running for a long time. Why
don't they keep the temperature stable for a while?

See [https://aureon.ca/experiment-results](https://aureon.ca/experiment-
results)

>They reuse the Hydrogen? All of them or a part is lost in fusion?

Yeah the hydrogen is not consumed.

>I also read the link in Science and Technology > Theory and is has a huge
disclaimer and then three theories that are unrelated to how the device work
and that have no experimental support and have very little support in the
community.

Right. Well I think what they are getting at is their system could be an
explanation of what is being seen elsewhere in the LENR community. Their
website needs work.

As mentioned in the article about Safire linked in my other comment
([https://e-catworld.com/2020/04/04/all-revealed-the-safire-
pr...](https://e-catworld.com/2020/04/04/all-revealed-the-safire-project-and-
self-organizing-plasmas-evos-faq-director/)):

>26) Are you saying that the phenomena in The SAFIRE Project reactor could be
the explanation for Cold Fusion?

>Yes! Although this is not absolutely proven yet, the evidence seems to be
clear. What’s important to note though is that what The SAFIRE Project has
done, even without knowing, is isolate the central mechanism of LENR (probably
millions or more of tiny EVOs) and produce a system that generates a singular
LARGE SCALE and steady state EVO that can be reproduced on demand. So instead
of having to struggle with electrolytic and powder based systems, we now have
the knowledge of how to “purify” the phenomena. You see, tradition LENR
systems depend upon getting hydrogen into metal which can be challenging to
say the least. The fuel has to be specially treated (cleaned, degased,
subjected to repeated hydrogen loading cycles, coated with nano-particles,
etc) which can make the results difficult to repeat. A pure plasma based
system like The SAFIRE Project reactor is FAR more reliable and potentially
MUCH more powerful. Many of the variables are removed because we are no longer
having to deal with the extreme complexities involved in traditional cold
fusion systems.

Anyways, now some of you know. cheers.

~~~
gus_massa
There is a thin line between thread hijacking and thread drift. In my opinion
your first comment was in the thread hijacking category.

> _The shady history part is mainly one of science suppression._

Physicist _love_ unexpected experimental results. You make a few tweaks here
and there, you get a somewhat interesting result and then you have a paper or
a dissertation for your graduate student.

Take for example high temperature superconductivity. The idea that a ceramic
can be a good high temperature superconductor is totally ridicule. There was
no theoretical explanation. But they had a good recipe to make your own
ceramic superconductor, so a lot of people confirmed and improved the result.

