Just when you thought that the US had heaps of Gas

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: chuck1955
The part that is crazy about this program is we are totally ignoring the polluting China and numerous other countries are doing. The impact is driving more production with increased pollution to these countries. When I hear our leaders say what we need to do compete with China. How do you possibly ignore this problem? 20% of the air pollution in California is coming from Asia. Their impact on climate change is huge. We need to put tariffs on product from these countries until they do something. Then use that money to bring production back here. China plans on building 363 new coal plants. Obama needs to wake up and access the real world. This program will not make a dent in climate change if countries like China and India are allowed to run free.


One can lead or follow. The regs aren't that hard to meet.


If you want to have an impact stop buying stuff made in China.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: BMWTurboDzl
The regs aren't that hard to meet.


Very very interested in how they aren't hard to meet...the gas ones yes, the coal ones I'll take some convincing.

As to China, the hundreds of power stations that they are building are more efficient that nearly anything in the US fleet...and they won't meet the new US coal regs.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
There is so much wind power available to the grid in the Midwest that Excelon is thinking about shutting down some of it's nukes because they can't compete.

Ameren, who runs the grid and supplies the urban areas of central Illinois and already put a rate cut in effect and has another scheduled for this fall.


It will result in big plants being shut down, and soon after that will result in grid instability...wind and solar don't control system frequency, and need a large mass of spinning metal, with a governor and governing margin to keep it stable.


With 5 nukes within 100 miles there is plenty of stable power if they can make it efficient. A lot of over head and legacy issues with them though.
 
BMWTurboDzl my point is we don't need more regulations that do nothing but drive product to another country that has no concern for climate change. We end up losing jobs and the product we lose is made in a dirtier climate. Obama has people lined up to profit from his agenda. The real impact happens when we refuse to accept product not made to the same pollution standards we have. Obama openly admits this agenda cost every consumer but ultimately the product gets made in a dirtier climate so we lose. My question to you is do you really think that works? Hoping people won't buy product from china. In 2013 U.S. imported 440 billion of Chinese goods, we exported 120 billion U.S. good to china. So how's that working out?
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: BMWTurboDzl
The regs aren't that hard to meet.


Very very interested in how they aren't hard to meet...the gas ones yes, the coal ones I'll take some convincing.

As to China, the hundreds of power stations that they are building are more efficient that nearly anything in the US fleet...and they won't meet the new US coal regs.


When a major regional (i.e most of the SE USA) power company basically states that the new regulations aren't going to be that difficult I listen.

Coal, from a business perspective, is a poor choice. Coal is being reduced but won't go away from what I understand.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: chuck1955
BMWTurboDzl my point is we don't need more regulations that do nothing but drive product to another country that has no concern for climate change. We end up losing jobs and the product we lose is made in a dirtier climate. Obama has people lined up to profit from his agenda. The real impact happens when we refuse to accept product not made to the same pollution standards we have. Obama openly admits this agenda cost every consumer but ultimately the product gets made in a dirtier climate so we lose. My question to you is do you really think that works? Hoping people won't buy product from china. In 2013 U.S. imported 440 billion of Chinese goods, we exported 120 billion U.S. good to china. So how's that working out?


Regardless of the regulations coal is being exported because it's still cheaper to use natural gas. There's no market for it in the US. That may change but right now gas is cheap and cleaner.

I wouldn't get to worked up over any conspiracy. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
 
Last edited:
BMWTurboDzl climate change is being hurt by countries like China that are allowed to run free and not held accountable. Shipping coal into countries with no accountability just adds to the problem. Yeah you can put lipstick on a pig and its still a pig.
 
Originally Posted By: chuck1955
BMWTurboDzl climate change is being hurt by countries like China that are allowed to run free and not held accountable. Shipping coal into countries with no accountability just adds to the problem. Yeah you can put lipstick on a pig and its still a pig.


Chuck, one day you'll see that once someone's mind is set on a subject that is it for them. All done.

But I totally agree there is nothing sillier than killing our own economy and putting more folks on unemployment to clean our air when other countries create an even worse mess around us...
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Cujet
Why not use natural gas to drive plants that capture and sequester or convert the CO2..............

Ducking the thrown objects......


ummm. because then they waste even more energy...

Unless you've been reading my favourite's list.

http://www.toshiba.co.jp/about/press/2013_08/pr0101.htm

However drawing a pipe, and pointing it into the ground doesn't explain a lot of really high tech stuff that is dependent on geology...


Of course, my statement was a joke!

However, you provided a very interesting link. I withdraw my joke.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted By: chuck1955
The part that is crazy about this program is we are totally ignoring the polluting China and numerous other countries are doing. The impact is driving more production with increased pollution to these countries. When I hear our leaders say what we need to do compete with China. How do you possibly ignore this problem? 20% of the air pollution in California is coming from Asia. Their impact on climate change is huge. We need to put tariffs on product from these countries until they do something. Then use that money to bring production back here. China plans on building 363 new coal plants. Obama needs to wake up and access the real world. This program will not make a dent in climate change if countries like China and India are allowed to run free.




One can lead or follow. The regs aren't that hard to meet.


If you want to have an impact stop buying stuff made in China.


Easier said than done, considering about 90% of everything sold here is made in China...
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Cjsporl
Nuclear energy for the win.


Not the way it currently is used in the US. A big waste problem that isn't going away anytime in the next 100000 years I guess.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow

It will result in big plants being shut down, and soon after that will result in grid instability...wind and solar don't control system frequency, and need a large mass of spinning metal, with a governor and governing margin to keep it stable.


would a series of synchronous 'support' condensors throughout the grid who's job it is to maintain frequency using gigantic flywheels help get some turbines offline? the thinking is that they can stabilize frequency and store some joules in giant masses


just a wild suggestion, I have not thought about the logistics of that idea
 
jrustles, I think that you are spot on...for part of it at least.

You can cut the generator off a turbine (if that takes your fancy...GE do it, and I'm pretty sure Alstom do)...it can fix the power factor locally, and provide some ride throughissues with faults and the like.

Obviously can't provide power per se.

There's a really good example (somewhere in Canada, name escapes me) where a community at the end of a long underwater cable had a local 30MW oil fired steam set...that was obviously too expensive to run.

When they stopped, they had problems with power factor, line load restrictions, and the Ferranti effect (google it, it's amazing) meaning that it was difficult to reconnect after they lose the line.

Pretty sure that it was GE who decoupled the generator, made it a synchronous condenser, fixed the powre factor, and increased the line power by 30%.

They do good things
 
I don't think anyone is suggesting getting rid of all the coal and nuclear power. No way can solar or wind cover everything. But it can contribute quite a bit, especially during peak times during the day.
 
The people behind "solar freakin' roadways" are stating that they can, as are alot of the green groups...I know that they can't...they don't.

I only try to inform in these threads.
 
Another factor is the electrical consumption is dropping due to greater efficiencies. There is a lot of room to grow here. Especially as the incandescent bulbs get phased out around the country.
 
TVs are huge...not so long ago, people had Plasma TVs, which not ony produced a lot of heat, but then needed to shift that heat out of the room vian air-con...roll on LCS and LED, and here's a couple hundred watts a household 24/7 in many.

While not a fan of resistance heating in any respect, I can see why off peak power for storage hot water and "heat bank" heating is 8c/KWh, versus 27 full freight during the day.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

CourierDriver
  • Locked
The internal combustion engines--history
Replies
9
Views
6K
HerrStig
H
  • Locked
Is the End in Sight for ICE ?
2 3
Replies
59
Views
10K
wwillson
OVERKILL
  • Locked
Mini-nukes, the future of distributed power?
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
wwillson
Back
Top