Author Topic: Clean coal economics  (Read 205 times)

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Clean coal economics
« on: January 10, 2020, 05:35:30 PM »
West Virginia wants to go on mining coal.  Most of us agreed that we don’t want to keep on burning it. So what else can be done with Coal? 

”Other important users of coal include alumina refineries, paper manufacturers, and the chemical and pharmaceutical industries. Several chemical products can be produced from the by-products of coal. Refined coal tar is used in the manufacture of chemicals, such as creosote oil, naphthalene, phenol, and benzene. Ammonia gas recovered from coke ovens is used to manufacture ammonia salts, nitric acid and agricultural fertilisers. Thousands of different products have coal or coal by-products as components: soap, aspirins, solvents, dyes, plastics and fibres, such as rayon and nylon“
.
That’s from the coal industry itself. I’m a little nervous about benzene.  Can we do better?


https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/04/scientists-have-found-a-surprising-new-use-for-coal/




wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Clean coal economics
« Reply #1 on: January 11, 2020, 07:56:50 PM »
When Bill Clinton created the The Grand Staircase - Escalante National Monument (Kaiparowits "monument"), he did so to stop the mining of clean coal in the US - which allowed his benefactors in the Riaddy family to gain a monopoly. The Lippo Corporation in Indonesia is the only other source of the very low sulfur, non-polluting coal, outside the Utah Kaiparowits basin. Most of the articles on this have been conveniently deleted from news archives by complicit Leftist IT weenies.

Don't raise the spectre of "Dirty coal" when it was the Democrat idea to block "clean coal" in 1996.

No - this was not just about penalizing a State that voted against Clinton. This was a flat-out political windfall to the Riaddy family.  One proof which is in the pudding is the unarguable fact that if a person was to create a National Monument, even if done just to irritate the former landowners, that person would at least protect areas of land that was requested by environmental and conservation groups and include historical preserves. To avoid these areas and specifically take the land which prevents exploitation of the clean-burning coal is a defining action.

A key archeological site and other important environmental sites the local residents wanted protected were left outside, while ordinary desert land with no significance or unique natural features was included solely to block entrance to the environmentally friendly coal deposits.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Clean coal economics
« Reply #2 on: January 12, 2020, 01:00:04 AM »
I believe every word you said, but please note that has nothing to do with what I said. You’re talking about clean call while I’m talking about a clean economics for using coal.  And for the purposes I’m talking about, even what you call dirty coal (eg lignite) could be used cleanly, ie without burning it.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Clean coal economics
« Reply #3 on: January 12, 2020, 07:51:36 AM »
My biggest problem with coal is the mercury that is released by it that gets into the fish. I've probably said this before and I'm sure I'll say it again but if we could eat fish safely without having to worry about the mercury contamination that would probably do more for healthcare in America than all the healthcare schemes anyone can come up with by reducing the top killer which is heart disease. I wonder if there is any way to make a filter to stop such pollutants from getting out while burning coal and even trapping some of the pollutants to capture them and use them for other productive purposes like putting in thermometers or something. But that's my red line, where we need to focus and where the results are measurable so we know whether or not we're making progress or just blowing smoke.

And maybe that doesn't have much to do with what you're talking about but I hear another clean use for coal is making diamonds so that might go on your list, and not just pretty ones to look at but industrial grade diamonds, if there is such a thing, for drill bits and such.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Clean coal economics
« Reply #4 on: January 12, 2020, 11:42:45 AM »
There are other pollutants, as well, not to mention that the cost of "carbon capture" and difficulty of neutralizing it are not economically feasible.  That expense and effort should be put into expanding renewable energy sources.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Clean coal economics
« Reply #5 on: January 12, 2020, 04:35:59 PM »
Why are we trying to cobble together a use for coal?

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Clean coal economics
« Reply #6 on: January 12, 2020, 07:50:06 PM »
Because I feel bad for west virginians but not badly enough to screw the planet by burning the crap.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Clean coal economics
« Reply #7 on: January 14, 2020, 11:55:30 AM »
Doesn't matter, Pete.  Any use for coal that doesn't involve burning it won't justify the mining of tons of the stuff each year.  :(

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Clean coal economics
« Reply #8 on: January 14, 2020, 01:04:04 PM »
There are far more uses of oil (other than burning - asphalt, plastics, lubrication, physical processes, chemical processes) than for coal, but burning oil still currently consumes orders of magnitude more oil than all those other uses put together.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Clean coal economics
« Reply #9 on: January 14, 2020, 01:32:13 PM »
Quote
Because I feel bad for west virginians

More and more coal mining is being done via automation and unless the miners are prepared to update their skills nothing much will change even if the mines open up

Future Job security will require flexibility and adaption.
The days of having a job that isn't impacted by disruption are passing. Those who try to hold on to the way things were are going find them selves angry and frustrated.
It sucks but that's the way it is.
Personally I've learn the lesson the hard way. In my career disruption has meant updating skill and or finding new work every 5 +/- years. 

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Clean coal economics
« Reply #10 on: January 14, 2020, 01:42:20 PM »
The problem, of course, is that in rural West Virginia and such, there are no other high-paying job opportunities other than coal mining.  It's the problem with any one-industry town, as many of the steel towns learned a few decades ago.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Clean coal economics
« Reply #11 on: January 14, 2020, 06:33:43 PM »
Actually only 2% of West Virginians are involved in mining, and a smaller percentage of that actual miners. West Virginia's median income is 43k, while the average miner in WV makes 48k. Its not that compelling. You'll have to narrow down county by county I suppose, or come up with some other excuse why this is a terrible calamity.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Clean coal economics
« Reply #12 on: January 14, 2020, 06:50:35 PM »
High tech industries have tried to set up in wv and were driven out by a dearth of nonjunkie workers. Opiates are too popular there.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Clean coal economics
« Reply #13 on: January 15, 2020, 08:10:01 AM »
High tech industries have tried to set up in wv and were driven out by a dearth of nonjunkie workers. Opiates are too popular there.

Because they were over prescribed to people being injured mining coal.