Trump EPA to strike blow against climate rules, reports say

           

https://disqus.com/home/d...es_reports_say/

Probably I misunderstood your point. Fact is, NG does have its strong drawbacks, but they are not as bad as coal and maybe not as bad as petroleum, owing to the 4:1 hydrogen-carbon ratio. (Benzene - a major component of gasoline - has a 1:1 ratio, so much more of its energy comes from CO2 production rather than H2O production.) Yes, the link is somewhat disinformation, but not wholly. The only truly "clean" energy is whatever we can derive directly or indirectly from sunlight (photovoltaic, solar furnace boilers, wind, hydro.) But the Trumpian coal industry wants us to believe that they can be "clean" - which is almost like saying that cigarettes smoking can be made "healthy".


High efficiency low emission coal.
Moving the current average global efficiency rate of coal-fired power plants from 33% to 40% by deploying more advanced off-the-shelf technology could cut two gigatonnes of CO2 emissions.
That is only a 7% move in upgrades.

You see, by upgrading current infrastructure in the power industry, we do make things "better".

Wind and Solar can not make up the difference in our power needs.

Relying on Wind and Solar for the near term power needs of the nation, would also bring about yet more Sin Taxes in the form of taxing you more for the power that you use.

These taxes would of course be regressive, as those needing to upgrade their heating and cooling technology in their homes to avoid more taxation, are those that could least afford to do so.


It can't be stored indefinitely. Can't be. Although it cools off somewhat, both thermally and radioactively, it is still hot and corrosive. Those cooling ponds are a hazard and it must be processed. That cost is already there. A third of the 238 is still in there and that alone is fuel in the gen four reactors along with the residual Pu. Those used rods have to processed, why not use it.
In any event the ash and other problems of coal are not going away, and when those costs, all the costs, are figured in, along with the shorter plant life, the coal costs as much or more.


That is not about coal - it is about methane. Methane has its own drawbacks as noted. The only truly "clean" energy available to us is that derived directly or indirectly from sunlight: photovoltaic, solar furnaces, wind, hydro, burning of actually-sustainable vegetation (of which there is not very much.) Tidal forces can be harnessed at some very, VERY slight cost to the lunar orbit and Earth's rotation (you could never measure it.) Nuclear (fission) creates long-lived radioisotopes that are difficult to sequester for the necessary hundreds of thousands of years. Earth-based nuclear fusion (as opposed to solar-based) is not ready for prime time, and we really do not know what radioisotopes it will create. ALL fossil fuels (coal, oil, methane) release CO2 and other nastiness. Oil and coal contain sulfur, and coal tends to contain the neurotoxin mercury. Methane simply IS a greenhouse gas, but burning it destroys that in favor of CO2 and H2O - and less CO2 than generated by coal or oil.


New breeders work as well as straight fusion, it just changes the amount of plutonium in the spent fuel. Actually the percentage of Pu can be increased a bit just by pulling the rods before the end of the cycle. The increased cost figure may be in the processing, but the million toms of used fuel has to be processed in any event. . While it is true that reactors designed to produce plutonium in the old way, like Chernobyl and Hanford Washington would be prohibitive, power production units not so much. The real reason for the old injunction against breeders was an old arms control treaty that limited plutonium production except in research.
In any event even if I am not a designer and the details are off a bit, and the fast neutron reactors are a little pricey, modern nuke plants are safe, efficient, and dependable. They have a long life. And they fit into a plan to harden the grid by reducing the interconnection to disperse loads, but I digress.
Nukes are the way out, not coal. .