4 largest coal power plants in Texas shutting down, end of coal

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by PracticalMac, Oct 17, 2017.

  1. PracticalMac macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #1
    On 9 OCT 2017: "The war on coal is over," Pruitt said at an event in the town of Hazard, located in the coal heartland of Kentucky.

    The state's largest power generator revealed Friday that the Big Brown Plant southeast of Corsicana and Sandow Plant northeast of Austin would close next year.
    A week ago, Luminant announced it was shutting down its Monticello Plant near Mount Pleasant.


    What is shocking is "Sandow 5" has the capacity to generate about 600 megawatts of electricity and was built in 2009. That something so recently built with pollution control system was also shuttered.

    Another coal plant, CPS Energy's J.T. Deely, is scheduled to close at the end of 2018. That closure was announced in 2013

    The cost to generate electricity from coal plants varies from $60 to $143 per megawatt hour, compared to $48 to $78 for natural gas, according to a report last year from financial advisory firm Lazard. The unsubsidized cost for wind was $32 to $62.

    The closure of 4 massive coal plants will immediately cause an oversupply of coal, resulting in price drop, and closure of coal mines, and of course a surged in unemployed coal miners.

    The only way to save coal now is to subsidize the industry (as Rick Perry wants), but McConnel has indicated he will not support that legislation, and I am sure many others (Rand Paul) will oppose that as well.

    [​IMG]


    Renewable development is accelerating and less vulnerable to market forces while gas is easily replacing coal in many power plants.

    I predict in next year another large drop in % and a short period of little change.
     
  2. zin macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #2
    Sad that the line for nuclear on the graph has been almost constant for decades. Could've easily replaced coal and natural gas with power to spare.
     
  3. duffman9000 macrumors 68000

    duffman9000

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Location:
    Deep in the Depths of CA
    #3
    Oh you think so? Can we store the nuclear waste in your back yard?
     
  4. 0007776 Suspended

    0007776

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #4
    Wait, how am I supposed to get the coal mining job Trump promised me with this happening?
     
  5. zin macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #5
    I wouldn't have an issue with it. Nuclear waste is relatively safe (stored correctly, as is accomplished in virtually every country that uses nuclear power) and the amount of high-level waste is miniscule.

    I'd let them build a plant in my back yard if they gave me free electricity for life.
     
  6. oneMadRssn macrumors 601

    oneMadRssn

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Location:
    New England
    #6
    Alright free-market Republicans - let's take away all energy subsidies (including on oil and anything having to do with oil, such as pipelines) and see what type of energy generation wins in the free market. Smart money says it won't be oil or coal.

    If we're going to subsidize anything, might as well subsidize the right thing: that which has safe jobs, that which provides clean energy, and that which isn't an finite resource.
     
  7. duffman9000 macrumors 68000

    duffman9000

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Location:
    Deep in the Depths of CA
    #7
    They will never agree to this lol. They despise government in general until it's time to use government to block competing products.
     
  8. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #8
    I've known a few coal miners. They would rather be mining than unemployed, but they'd rather have a better job than being stuck underground. The answer is not to subsidise coal, but to find the miners decent alternative employment.
     
  9. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #9
    The problem is the transporting of the waste.
    --- Post Merged, Oct 17, 2017 ---
    That is the gist of what Clinton said in her poorly worded speech to coal country.
     
  10. oneMadRssn macrumors 601

    oneMadRssn

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Location:
    New England
    #10
    Fine, I don't really disagree with that outlook. That a legitimate ideological view (other than the despising government part).

    If we end all energy subsidies, and I mean all including the tangential ones, our energy market will be flooded with foreign-built and cheaper solar panels and wind turbines - even more than it already is. Meanwhile, oil and coal can't stay competitive even with subsidies.

    So if we're going to spend billions of dollars subsidizing the energy industry (which we should do, but we should adjust what exactly is being subsidized), then let's do it with some intelligence. Let's use it to block competing products by subsidizing US-build solar panels and US-built wind turbines; let's subsidize the things that are rated and tested to last a long time and not disposable junk.

    I'm all for blocking competing products - our competitors aren't solar and wind. Our competitors are other countries. If I want to put solar on my roof (and I do), right now it costs me nearly 2x as much to buy quality US-made panels and parts. It's pretty hard to be patriotic in that situation.
     
  11. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #11
    China is leading the way in solar panel production and installation.
     
  12. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #12
    From the article:

    There is nothing that Donald Trump or the Republicans can do to reverse this trend. It is driven not so much by environmental regulation, but by economic reality. The innovations in fracking technology and the discovery of vast deposits of shale gas in the United States has made coal economically unviable as a fuel source. What coal we do end up burning will come from vast, highly automated mines in Wyoming. So the dream of bringing thousands of dangerous, dirty coal mining jobs back to West Virginia seems increasingly deluded.

    And yet the Trumpistas seem to cling to it.
     
  13. PracticalMac thread starter macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #13
    With the right design and a plan for waste disposal and funded EOL plan, I also support Nuke.

    Unfortunately the current highly risky BWR is the norm and no one in US wants to risk billions for a proven in small scale reactors.
    China could change this, but they too are going with what industry knows best, dangerous BWR.
    --- Post Merged, Oct 17, 2017 ---
    And how!
    This is in China
    Solar, Wind, and a fish farm!
    [​IMG]
     
  14. velocityg4 macrumors 601

    velocityg4

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2004
    Location:
    Georgia
    #14
    Molten Salt reactors can be designed to run off existing waste. Reducing the stockpile.

    They generate far less waste due to the much more efficient use of fuel.

    Waste generated has a short half life. 300 years storage instead of tens of thousands.

    Requires far less fissile material to get started.

    They have walk away safety. So, in a worst case scenario of a terrorist attack. The molten salt oozes out and solidifies as it cools down. No explosions into the atmosphere as it is low pressure and already in a molten state.

    I'd much rather have these in my city than fossil fuel plants belching out CO2. Even if it isn't the absolute ideal solution. They are a far better option.
     
  15. PracticalMac thread starter macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #15
    Oh, they most defiantly WILL agree to this.



    ....if they can donate to political (not just R) fund raisers.
    --- Post Merged, Oct 17, 2017 ---
    Thank you!
    I could not recall the name of this reactor, MSR.
    All the BWR (boiling water reactors) need to be replaced.

    FACT: the BWR became popular because the US Navy decided to use it for its subs and ships. The design worked best for the ships, but the USN made incredibly rigorous operation and safety program. No known USN reactors had a catastrophic release (not true for Soviets, who copied it).

    Unfortunately the public sector took the cheap path and copied the BWR design, but not the USN operating book :(
     
  16. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #16
    Solar and wind, unfortunately, are limited to how much of the national grid power they can supply. I have been very intrigued by the possibilities of Molten Salt Reactors to be a significant source of clean power in the next ~ 50 years. If engineers and scientists can make this technology work, it will truly be a game-changer not just for the environment, but also the economics of power generation.

    A truly forward-thinking US President would spearhead an investment in research and development for this technology so that it will be US engineers and companies that build the world's green power sources in the year 2050 and 2060. Rather than trying to take us back to the 1920s.
     
  17. duffman9000 macrumors 68000

    duffman9000

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Location:
    Deep in the Depths of CA
    #17
    Send those cheaper panels over here please.
     
  18. PracticalMac thread starter macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #18
    MSR does work, PROVEN to work, decades of solid performance.
    But to scale it up to megawatt size few are willing to risk it, especially after Fukishima.
    But only thing Trump "cares" about is Coal. Barely mentioned Nuclear.

    As for Wind/Solar, 30~40% of total US needs can be met by those (some areas nearly 90+%, others 15%).
    The grid, of course, will need major adjustments to make this work.
     
  19. velocityg4 macrumors 601

    velocityg4

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2004
    Location:
    Georgia
    #19
    Thorium needs to be mined. The coal workers could just switch jobs. Mining's mining right.
     
  20. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #20
    I doubt Trump even knows what Molten Salt Reactors are. He only knows what people tell him. The most uneducated modern day president we have seen. He isn't curious about anything. He has no depth of knowledge on anything other than building buildings. I'd say we have elected a child, but childern actually are curious and take an interest in things. This so-called president doesn't even do that.
     
  21. s2mikey macrumors 68020

    s2mikey

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2013
    Location:
    Upstate, NY
    #21
    So would I. Nuclear has been our energy "answer" for a long time now but it continues to elude us due to unfounded fears. Really too bad. Nuclear is extremely efficient and gets us OUT of the middle east for the most part. But, alas, the FUD-spreading whackjobs wont allow it :(
     
  22. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #22
    I agree, end the subsidies.
     
  23. HEK, Oct 18, 2017
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2017

    HEK macrumors 68040

    HEK

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    Location:
    US Eastern time zone
    #23
    Molten Salt Reactors using Thorium as fuel can burn all past nuclear waste and weapons material without producing new waste. We can make em or buy em from China. Please build MSR in my back yard. Fails safe, can’t melt down or explode. Smaller, than current high pressure uranium reactors. Needs no pressure vessel.
     
  24. Stella macrumors G3

    Stella

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    Canada
    #24
    Coal is done and has been for a while. Its expensive and dirty. There are better, cleaner and cheaper ways to generate electricity.

    Its unfortunate people will lose their jobs, but time to move on. Better to help those unemployed than using tax payers $$ than spend the money to prop up a dead industry.
     
  25. Phonephreak macrumors 6502a

    Phonephreak

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Location:
    Here and there
    #25
    Shoot it into space. Problem solved
     

Share This Page

28 October 17, 2017