4 ms·
You said that entertaining the idea of "clean coal" is a referendum on science education in our country. I'm saying that the idea is completely compatible with
by arcticfox 10y ago
You said that entertaining the idea of "clean coal" is a referendum on science education in our country.
I'm saying that the idea is completely compatible with science, and at a cursory inspection seems like a completely viable solution. There's no education problem involved in at least discussing it.
Is coal at ~70% efficiency a better solution than nuclear, solar, wind, hydro, etc.? I'm not sure, but that is sure as hell not snake oil.
- idanoeman 10y agoHold on, coal plants are already only ~35% efficient at converting heat into electricity. Subtract 30% and you're left with 5%, not 70%.
- Sacho 10y agoErr... that's not how an efficiency rate works. If it takes you 30% of the initial energy to get to the heat->electricity phase, then the heat->electricity phase receives 70% of the initial energy. From that point, a 35% efficient transfer means 24.5% efficiency from the initial energy.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]