independence from coal

[sfzombie13 307]

i had a thought recently and want to gather opinions on it. it is a way to free ourselves from coal. if the seperate municipalitites were to erect renewable energy sources in their own areas, they could effectively supply their own electricity. the only thing it would take, at least in wv, is a loan for the initial establishment. example, in southern wv, there are mountains everywhere. windmills could be placed on top of them, without flatteneing or much modification. the existing transmission lines could be used, and it would create jobs in the construction and maintenance.

they could also be mingled with other sources, like solar, in some areas, but wind would be best for that area. once the initail investment is repaid, the only cost for the electricity would be the cost of maintenance, then it gets really cheap. if every area of the nation took the same initiative, then before too long, there would be no need for power plants. they would have the time of the transition, these things don't get built overnight, to invest heavily in the renewables and even the infrastructure.

thoughts? when i ran it by some people in logan today, they came up with the idea it is dangerous for birds. my answer, so what? we're not birds, we're people. and it actually doesn't affect them too much, a very small percentage get hurt. and they will learn to adapt, fly a little higher or lower in some places,. avoid others.

and some have said that the industries will lobby for and get injunctions or regulations against it. well, we will just have to circumvent that.

i'm trying to work out the bugs in my idea before taking it too far. anything else?

_________________________________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

[billvon 2,425]

>if the seperate municipalitites were to erect renewable energy sources in their
>own areas, they could effectively supply their own electricity.

That's a good goal. Problems will be baseline generation, storage and overall energy management. We'll always need baseline power, although technologies like nuclear are a much better way to achieve that than coal. We'll also need peaking power to produce extra power when there is no wind or sun. Natural gas is a good option for that.

The long term solution is power storage, allowing wind and solar to store power for times of calm/dark. This can be as simple as re-purposed mountain railways or retrofitted hydroelectric power plants, or as complex as thermal storage in solar thermal power systems. But it will take a while to get such a system on line.

>thoughts? when i ran it by some people in logan today, they came up with the
>idea it is dangerous for birds.

It is. But closing just one coal fired power plant saves tens of millions of birds, because thousands of acres of forests and streams will not need to be destroyed to get at the coal beneath them.

[Coreece 190]

Quote

i had a thought recently

I stopped reading right there...

Jk...Would it be more efficient for everyone to have their own windmill like some people up here in northern michigan? Perhaps even have it partially subsidized?

Quote

then before too long, there would be no need for power plants.

Damn...now it sounds like just another pipe dream for this capitalistic cuntry. There is no room for global warming if there is no profit.

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[DiverMike 5]

As long as coal is a cheaper energy source, it will be used. How many solar panel factories use solar energy to power the factory? How many windmill producing factories derive their energy from windmills? I would submit most of them use energy generated from coal, because the business is primarily interested in profit, so the cheapest form of energy is used.

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[billvon 2,425]

>As long as coal is a cheaper energy source, it will be used.

Right now it's cheaper because we ignore external costs. As we add them on to the cost of power coal will become less competitive - which is one reason coal generation is now dropping.

> How many solar panel factories use solar energy to power the factory?

I can think of three off the top of my head.

[DiverMike 5]

Is the solar energy generated from the panels the sole source of energy of these factories? Which ones are they?

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[Andy9o8 0]

Let me raise an angle that hasn't been discussed yet: politics and public relations, which in this case are more or less one and the same. As of course you know very well, WV is one of the the "coal is king" states. It's not just an integral part of the state's economy, it's ingrained into the psychology of the people with all the fervor of religious faith. You should expect the coal companies, the politicians that are in their pockets, the unions, etc. will counter-campaign against this tooth and nail.

I remember during the last election cycle traveling up to my old stomping grounds in Upstate New York for a visit. Our route took us through rural central Pennsylvania (part of the same coal belt that includes WV). All along the roadsides we kept seeing "campaign" signs exclaiming "STOP THE WAR ON COAL!" They knew the mentality of their audience, and they were playing to it. Mommas will be screaming at you, asking why you want to take the food out of their babies' mouths. The Rolling Rock bottles will fly. So fair warning: that's the kind of shit you'll be up against; and on the local, grassroots level, it could get ugly.

[Channman 2]

> How many windmill producing factories derive their energy from windmills?

Valero Plant in "Sunray Texas" receives some of it's energy from a Windmill farm located around it. Not sure of the amount of energy it gets from this source but I believe It receives a percentage of it's power needs from Wind generated electricity.

[Channman 2]

> But closing just one coal fired power plant saves tens of millions of birds, because thousands of acres of forests and streams will not need to be destroyed to get at the coal beneath them.

Are coal producers not required to replant and or make efforts to restore the land scape? Just asking the question. I've seen photos of strip mining / mountaintop removal mining if that is the correct term and yes, it's like turning a large area in the thousands of acres into a lunarscape.

Why not Nuclear Energy...is that not a better idea?

[billvon 2,425]

>Are coal producers not required to replant and or make efforts to restore the land scape?

Yes, such requirements are slowly being added. One issue is that it is essentially impossible to do that with mountaintop removal, and even when they try to "restore" some of the mountain's contours the watershed is effectively destroyed.

[sfzombie13 307]

not only that, the actual process of removing the coal is terrible for the einvironment around it. the levels of selenium and other chemicals i forgot leaching into the groundwater have made most of the watersheds around here poisonous. hence the fact that 300,000 people in 9 counties got there water from one intake.

i don't really think it would be a bad idea for individuals to be able to have their own windmills, along with solar, which would be the est option, but also the most taxing on the individuals. the communities could shoulder all the costs with the help of government grants and loans. the initial price of electircity could be slightly increased until they are paid off, then they would bottom out to almost nothing.

storage would be a problem, but the wind never stops blowiing across some of those mountains. and another spot ripe for solar arrays is the souther side of all the hills under the transmission lines. all of that area they keep cleared anyway, and there would be no effort at all to tie it into the lines right overhead.

as far as politics go, that is the main obstacle i can see coming up. i have been talking to people here and thre to guage the reactions to this idea, and most have been warm to it. this is where i am trying to get an end run around the industry folks. i plan on introducing legislation creating a huge database of the will of the people where everyone has a voice. it would be accessible to all, and anonymous, and contain all the major issues which are around. since it would be available to all to see, it would be easy to match a politicians votes to the will of his constituents, if they don't match, he's out. i have one guy who likes it and is helping refine it for the next session, one of the good politicians i have met.

_________________________________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

[Amazon 7]

billvon

>Are coal producers not required to replant and or make efforts to restore the land scape?

Yes, such requirements are slowly being added. One issue is that it is essentially impossible to do that with mountaintop removal, and even when they try to "restore" some of the mountain's contours the watershed is effectively destroyed.

As is the water that has been made toxic by the leachates... all wildlife in the streams die, the "soil" does not support tree growth so the "forest" is stunted and subject to drying out and dying with the first hint of drought.

But the masters have made BILLIONS.. and that is all that is important. Who really cares if a bunch of rubes in the hollars get cancer from drinking the water.

[Amazon 7]

A link for you...

http://wvmdtaskforce.com/proceedings/80/80rau/80rau.htm


Ground-water pollution can occur both directly and indirectly as a result of surface mining. Direct degradation can occur to ground water situated downhill or down gradient from a surface mine, by flow of contaminated drainage from the mine. This mine drainage can come from pits, ponds, or from rainfall infiltration and ground-water flow during mining and after reclamation. Ground-water pollution would result from the same toxic overburden and coal materials that cause surface water contamination.

Indirect degradation of ground water could result from blasting, which causes a temporary shaking of the rock and results in new rock fractures near working areas of the mine. Blasting can also cause old preexisting rock fractures to become more open or permeable, by loosening mineral debris or cement in these fractures; this could affect nearlyvertical fractures located up to several hundred feet away from the surface mine, causing vertical leakage of ponded mine drainage from nearby abandoned deep mines to underlying aquifers. These deep mines could be situated in the same coal seam being surface mined or in a lower coal seam.

Acid mine drainage originates by geochemical reactions described by Harold Lovell in a companion paper of this symposium proceedings. Pyrite from exposed coal or associated rocks reacts with oxygen gas and water to yield dissolved iron and sulfuric acid. The iron then further oxidizes to yield more acid and precipitated iron mineral solids. Further, dissolved oxidized iron can react with more pyrite generating more sulfuric acid. Mine drainage may then be artificially or naturally neutralized. Most mine drainage becomes at least partially neutralized by natural exposure to alkaline rocks and minerals even without any treatment by the coal mine operator. The strong acid may become partially neutralized primarily by solution of carbonate minerals (such as calcite and dolomite). This happens in the reclaimed mine site as well as in rock strata underlying the mined coal seam.

Ground water contaminated by mine drainage often is different in chemistry from polluted surface water before chemical treatment. Polluted ground water typically has undergone a higher degree of natural neutralization than has polluted surface water, because of its greater contact with carbonate minerals and slower rates of movement. Typically, ground water contaminated by mine drainage in northern West Virginia has higher pH and total hardness, and lower acidity, total iron, manganese, aluminum, and suspended solids than untreated surface mine drainage. Ground water polluted by mine drainage is better in overall chemical quality. However, even after complete neutralization of acidity in mine drainage waters, residual pollution still exists in the form of dissolved sulfate. Sulfate is not normally precipitated, and mostly remains in solution following natural or artificial acid treatment. This sulfate is a good tracer or indicator of present and past mine drainage pollution.

[billvon 2,425]

> the initial price of electircity could be slightly increased until they are paid off, then
>they would bottom out to almost nothing.

?? How do you figure? A contemporary off-grid power system results in power costs of 4 to 7 times more than on-grid power costs. Battery and turbine replacement, amortization of capital expenditures, gas for the generator (which you will occasionally need even with a wind + solar system) etc. With a lot of clever design AND connection to a central grid you could probably get that down to 2-4 times what power costs but it's not going to be cheap.

>i don't really think it would be a bad idea for individuals to be able to have their
>own windmills, along with solar.

Solar scales down pretty well but wind doesn't. There are going to be a handful of people with good locations for wind, but most people live in places where wind just isn't practical. (As a simple guide, if you regularly go into your back yard for things like barbeques, playing basketball etc you're not in a good wind area.) For wind you are better off choosing good locations and then mounting larger turbines there.

> i plan on introducing legislation creating a huge database of the will of the people
>where everyone has a voice. it would be accessible to all, and anonymous, and
>contain all the major issues which are around. since it would be available to all to
>see, it would be easy to match a politicians votes to the will of his constituents, if
>they don't match, he's out.

The problem there is that no one will want to do what it takes. Imagine these two questions:

1) Do you want to switch to independent power systems and shut down coal power plants?

2) Are you willing to pay four times as much for electric power?

You'd probably get a lot of "yes"es to 1) and very few "yes"es to 2).

Of course, politicians will promise to do 1) without doing 2), the same way they are always promising to cut taxes while funding their region's pet projects.

As a suggestion, why not start with your house? If you need help I'd be happy to give you suggestions. You'll learn a lot about alternative power and will be able to use your house as an example to others about what can be done. People believe what they see a lot more readily than they believe politician's promises.

[sfzombie13 307]

i don't figure at all yet, it is an idea. i don't know how much any of this costs. the whole problem is that nobody wants to do what it takes. we are at the point where what people want is no longer relevant. steps need to be taken now, and it may already be too late to get very far. i am talking about replacing not only a whole way of thinking, but a way of life. the obstacles are enormous, the benefits substantial. in wv, coal employs about 15-20% of the population, directly and indirectly. if i can come up with a plan which not only eliminates the need for coal power plants, but at the same time, brings in a replacement industry as well as a job surplus, then the additional cost will be offset by the added prosperity.

this reminds me of one of my first debates on dz, back when i said that industry needed to convert from ac to dc to make solar cheaper and more useable. i think it was you, may not have been, said that they would never agree on a standard. well, they don't have to agree, it can be mandated. htere is precedent there, automotive standards, eletrical code standards, phone standards, radio standards, etc. have all been handed down from somewhere. it can be done, and it must be. we just need to get people working on the details and making sure they work for the majority, not all of us. if we wait for all of us, nothing would ever get done.

_________________________________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

[Southern_Man 0]

WV has the Mount Storm Wind Farm and Mountaineer Wind Energy farm near Thomas. Also the Beech Ridge Wind Farm in Greenbrier Co. Those things are very impressive to view but represent only a fraction of the energy your state needs.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[rushmc 18]

sfzombie13

i don't figure at all yet, it is an idea. i don't know how much any of this costs. the whole problem is that nobody wants to do what it takes. we are at the point where what people want is no longer relevant. steps need to be taken now, and it may already be too late to get very far. i am talking about replacing not only a whole way of thinking, but a way of life. the obstacles are enormous, the benefits substantial. in wv, coal employs about 15-20% of the population, directly and indirectly. if i can come up with a plan which not only eliminates the need for coal power plants, but at the same time, brings in a replacement industry as well as a job surplus, then the additional cost will be offset by the added prosperity.

this reminds me of one of my first debates on dz, back when i said that industry needed to convert from ac to dc to make solar cheaper and more useable. i think it was you, may not have been, said that they would never agree on a standard. well, they don't have to agree, it can be mandated. htere is precedent there, automotive standards, eletrical code standards, phone standards, radio standards, etc. have all been handed down from somewhere. it can be done, and it must be. we just need to get people working on the details and making sure they work for the majority, not all of us. if we wait for all of us, nothing would ever get done.

One thing I have posted here many times is the fact, yes, a fact that, for every megawatt of solar and wind generation, you MUST have a matching amout coming from coal, nuke or gas, period
This efectively doubles the capital investment needed to provide power
My company has build a wind farm
Last report shows is does not make money
And they dont. Wind farms only pencil out when tax incentives are given
I know less about solar but I would think it much the same

Billvon even talked to this earlier and he is correct, IF we could devise some kind of storage the need for double generation facilities would be reduced
I think this is decades out however (at best)

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,425]

>i don't figure at all yet, it is an idea. i don't know how much any of this costs.
>the whole problem is that nobody wants to do what it takes.

?? I power my house with solar, and can run off either batteries or EV power if it's dark out and we have a power emergency. Last I heard, almost 5% of the people in San Diego had solar installed on their homes. In the US a new solar power system is installed every 4 minutes, and that's pushed us to 150 gigawatts of solar generation. (equivalent to 150 coal power plants at peak generation, or 35 power plants averaged over an entire day.) The work to do this has employed over 150,000 people.

A lot of people want to do what it takes.

>this reminds me of one of my first debates on dz, back when i said that industry
>needed to convert from ac to dc to make solar cheaper and more useable. i think
>it was you, may not have been, said that they would never agree on a standard.

It definitely wasn't me, since there are already two DC distribution standards out there - the US EPRI standard at 380 volts and the Asia standard at 400 volts. (They will probably interoperate.) Going to DC power transmission and local distribution will save a lot of energy. Again, a lot of work is going on in these areas, and a lot of buildings that use a lot of power (like data centers) are already using HV DC distribution.

[DanG 1]

I'm struggling to remember by EE classes here, but I though DC was not viable for long range transmission due to line losses. How do they make HV DC work?

- Dan G

[rushmc 18]

DanG

I'm struggling to remember by EE classes here, but I though DC was not viable for long range transmission due to line losses. How do they make HV DC work?

I know of some 500Kv DC lines here and in China
But I have never had any experience with them

Here is some history and info

http://www.cleanlineenergy.com/technology/hvdc/how

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,425]

>I'm struggling to remember by EE classes here, but I though DC was not viable
>for long range transmission due to line losses.

No, DC is great, especially compared to AC - since AC has skin depth losses and DC does not. It used to be problematic because it was hard to convert DC to the high voltages needed for efficient transmission. That hasn't been true for about 20 years now. We can now easily upconvert and downconvert DC power. The drawback is that the equipment is more expensive than transformers, but for long distances you save so much on copper that it's worth it.

Note that all our highest power transmission lines are now DC since they can just plain carry more power than AC. We go as high as 600,000 volts now, and some places in Europe go to 800,000.

[DanG 1]

Okay, I was mis-remembering. Thanks.

Screw Nikola Tesla, Edison was right after all!

- Dan G

[rushmc 18]

billvon

>I'm struggling to remember by EE classes here, but I though DC was not viable
>for long range transmission due to line losses.

No, DC is great, especially compared to AC - since AC has skin depth losses and DC does not. It used to be problematic because it was hard to convert DC to the high voltages needed for efficient transmission. That hasn't been true for about 20 years now. We can now easily upconvert and downconvert DC power. The drawback is that the equipment is more expensive than transformers, but for long distances you save so much on copper that it's worth it.

Note that all our highest power transmission lines are now DC since they can just plain carry more power than AC. We go as high as 600,000 volts now, and some places in Europe go to 800,000.

When I was in school for lineman we had a training video of insulator strings being changed out on an operation 500Kv DC line. This line was in China
the crew was one or two dozen wormen
They had the suits on with the metal fiber in them. They climbed the towers and then climbed out to the conductor on insulator at a time son that they equalized their bodies to line voltage
They then used ropes, hot line tools and ladders and changed out the whole string at once
It was something to watch
Very skill people at doing it

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

i don't figure at all yet, it is an idea.

How do you know it's not specious?

spe·cious
[spee-shuhs]
1. apparently good or right though lacking real merit; superficially pleasing or plausible: specious arguments.
2. pleasing to the eye but deceptive.

Quote

i don't know how much any of this costs.

Well, at least you admit such.

Quote

the whole problem is that nobody wants to do what it takes.

No, the problem is those that are "doing what it takes" don't know what is costs, and refuse to consider practical alternatives. They are out there, and it starts with nuclear (at least with the adults in the room).

Quote

we are at the point where what people want is no longer relevant.

It's people like you who can be considered a clear and present danger. You actually admitted you haven't thought it through. Nor, do you have any idea what its going to cost. But, what other people think/want isn't relevant. Seriously?

Quote

steps need to be taken now

Wow. You are taking yourself far too seriously. You should stop reading the NYTimes, and related papers.

Quote

and it may already be too late to get very far.

Give me one link to a real climate scientist's publication that you've read. At this point in the conversation, you get to define "real".

Enough of my reply to yours.

One more question - what is the weight fraction of CO2 in the atmosphere?

We are all engines of karma

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

?? I power my house with solar, and can run off either batteries or EV power if it's dark out and we have a power emergency. Last I heard, almost 5% of the people in San Diego had solar installed on their homes. In the US a new solar power system is installed every 4 minutes, and that's pushed us to 150 gigawatts of solar generation. (equivalent to 150 coal power plants at peak generation, or 35 power plants averaged over an entire day.) The work to do this has employed over 150,000 people.

A lot of people want to do what it takes.

billvon, you are a very smart man who communicates well (when you want to). You live in a climate that allows this, and clearly you have neighbors that didn't mind you doing this.

Good. This doesn't apply to everyone. I'm sure you've been to Britain...

We are all engines of karma