4 ms·

What we see here (in the parent comment) is someone parroting standard nuclear industry propaganda: coal is bad too. While those line at least made a bit of se

by marze 10y ago

What we see here (in the parent comment) is someone parroting standard nuclear industry propaganda: coal is bad too. While those line at least made a bit of sense 15 years ago, it is totally pointless in 2017. No new coal plants are being built now. It is in phase out mode. All new generation is wind, solar, and to a lesser degree methane. Coal is going away; like nuclear, it can't compete.

jcrawfordor 10y ago
> No new coal plants are being built now. It is in phase out mode. All new generation is wind, solar, and to a lesser degree methane. Coal is going away; like nuclear, it can't compete. In the United States, at least, natural gas is the largest component of new generating capacity. Wind and solar are both independently fairly close to natural gas recently, but natural gas is still the #1 increase and has been for most of the last 10 or so years. So yes, the rate of increase in coal capacity is very low (but still net positive), but it is not true that all new generation is wind and solar. New generation is roughly 1/3rd each natural gas, wind, and solar, ranked in that order. Again - in the United States. This varies from country to country, e.g. I believe China is still seeing substantial net increases in coal, whereas I believe Western Europe is seeing a lot more wind/solar. You can get these numbers for the US from EIA reports: https://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/ https://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/
- petre 10y ago
  The US also has vast geothermal potential and about 3.4 MWh installed capacity. Geothermal power is a suitable replacement for nuclear and coal/gas as one can build base load power stations.
- marze 10y ago
  Wrong on all points, data helpful: http://www.ecowatch.com/ferc-renewable-energy-capacity-2233026420.html http://www.ecowatch.com/ferc-renewable-energy-capacity-22330...
  - jcrawfordor 10y ago
    I did refer to the data, and that article gives about the same numbers. FERC and EIA are 'sibling' components of the Department of Energy, I suspect EIA's information on new generation comes directly from FERC. The article you link shows that wind and solar combined add up to a bit less than twice natural gas. This is because, as I said, the three dominant forms of new production (natural gas, wind, solar) added up to about one third each, with natural gas being the largest portion.
tszymczyszyn 10y ago
1. It is not true that no new coal plants are being built. It is not even true in developed countries. https://energydesk.greenpeace.org/2017/01/13/southeast-asia-coal-plans-health-japan-indonesia/ https://energydesk.greenpeace.org/2017/01/13/southeast-asia-... 2. Usefulness of renewable energy sources is still not universally comparable to fossil/nuclear.
- marze 10y ago
  http://www.ecowatch.com/ferc-renewable-energy-capacity-2233026420.html http://www.ecowatch.com/ferc-renewable-energy-capacity-22330... Can you name a coal plant that went online last year in the USA? Then list all the coal plants that are shutting down. Phase out in progress, USA led.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

by marze 10y ago

jcrawfordor 10y ago

> No new coal plants are being built now. It is in phase out mode. All new generation is wind, solar, and to a lesser degree methane. Coal is going away; like nuclear, it can't compete. In the United States, at least, natural gas is the largest component of new generating capacity. Wind and solar are both independently fairly close to natural gas recently, but natural gas is still the #1 increase and has been for most of the last 10 or so years. So yes, the rate of increase in coal capacity is very low (but still net positive), but it is not true that all new generation is wind and solar. New generation is roughly 1/3rd each natural gas, wind, and solar, ranked in that order. Again - in the United States. This varies from country to country, e.g. I believe China is still seeing substantial net increases in coal, whereas I believe Western Europe is seeing a lot more wind/solar. You can get these numbers for the US from EIA reports: https://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/ https://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/

petre 10y ago
The US also has vast geothermal potential and about 3.4 MWh installed capacity. Geothermal power is a suitable replacement for nuclear and coal/gas as one can build base load power stations.
marze 10y ago
Wrong on all points, data helpful: http://www.ecowatch.com/ferc-renewable-energy-capacity-2233026420.html http://www.ecowatch.com/ferc-renewable-energy-capacity-22330...
- jcrawfordor 10y ago
  I did refer to the data, and that article gives about the same numbers. FERC and EIA are 'sibling' components of the Department of Energy, I suspect EIA's information on new generation comes directly from FERC. The article you link shows that wind and solar combined add up to a bit less than twice natural gas. This is because, as I said, the three dominant forms of new production (natural gas, wind, solar) added up to about one third each, with natural gas being the largest portion.

tszymczyszyn 10y ago

1. It is not true that no new coal plants are being built. It is not even true in developed countries. https://energydesk.greenpeace.org/2017/01/13/southeast-asia-coal-plans-health-japan-indonesia/ https://energydesk.greenpeace.org/2017/01/13/southeast-asia-... 2. Usefulness of renewable energy sources is still not universally comparable to fossil/nuclear.

marze 10y ago
http://www.ecowatch.com/ferc-renewable-energy-capacity-2233026420.html http://www.ecowatch.com/ferc-renewable-energy-capacity-22330... Can you name a coal plant that went online last year in the USA? Then list all the coal plants that are shutting down. Phase out in progress, USA led.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]