5 ms·

It's hard to take this comment seriously when you haven't provided any of the relevant facts or sources to back this claim.

Robotbeat 4y ago
Easily googleable numbers for total us electricity, about 475GW averaged over the year, about 1000 grams of CO2 per kWh for coal also pretty easily googleable (and can be derived with just basic facts like the heating value of coal of 35MJ/kg for nice anthracite, the fact that anthracite coal is nearly all carbon, the relative atomic mass of carbon and oxygen and therefore 12 parts coal will release around 44 parts CO2, the fact that a coal power plant thermodynamic efficiency is around 35%, etc). (44/12)/(35MJ/kg * 0.35) in grams/kWh = 1078.grams/kWh. https://www.google.com/search?q=(44%2F12)%2F(35MJ%2Fkg+*+0.35)+in+grams%2FkWh https://www.google.com/search?q=(44%2F12)%2F(35MJ%2Fkg+*+0.3... Global warming potential of CO2 over 100 year timeframe also googleable. These figures are all basic and pretty objective. (You May quibble about me choosing 100year timeframe vs 20 year, but that’s fine… it is still about the same order of magnitude.) More complicated to measure methane’s atmospheric lifetime and infrared absorption proportions, but nothing really controversial. The EIA website also shows this stuff.
zekrioca 4y ago
https://www.eia.gov/coal/production/quarterly/co2_article/co2.html https://www.eia.gov/coal/production/quarterly/co2_article/co...
l3uwin 4y ago
Same for your baseless snark, maybe provide some facts yourself
- throw10920 4y ago
  > you haven't provided any of the relevant facts or sources to back this claim It should be pretty clear that no sources are needed beyond using your eyes and looking at Robotbeat's comment - unless it's been edited, then it's rather obvious that no sources were provided, which was the claim being made. Saying "what are your sources" without further elaboration is typically a little rude and combative, but this kind of "no you" comment is flat-out ridiculous.
- Cthulhu_ 4y ago
  They're not refuting the point or providing counterarguments, they're just questioning the lack of sources, which is valid. It's down to the person making a claim to provide evidence. If someone points out that there is no evidence provided, that someone doesn't need to provide evidence themselves. I mean yeah it's snarky, but it's a comment section on the internet.

Robotbeat 4y ago

Easily googleable numbers for total us electricity, about 475GW averaged over the year, about 1000 grams of CO2 per kWh for coal also pretty easily googleable (and can be derived with just basic facts like the heating value of coal of 35MJ/kg for nice anthracite, the fact that anthracite coal is nearly all carbon, the relative atomic mass of carbon and oxygen and therefore 12 parts coal will release around 44 parts CO2, the fact that a coal power plant thermodynamic efficiency is around 35%, etc). (44/12)/(35MJ/kg * 0.35) in grams/kWh = 1078.grams/kWh. https://www.google.com/search?q=(44%2F12)%2F(35MJ%2Fkg+*+0.35)+in+grams%2FkWh https://www.google.com/search?q=(44%2F12)%2F(35MJ%2Fkg+*+0.3... Global warming potential of CO2 over 100 year timeframe also googleable. These figures are all basic and pretty objective. (You May quibble about me choosing 100year timeframe vs 20 year, but that’s fine… it is still about the same order of magnitude.) More complicated to measure methane’s atmospheric lifetime and infrared absorption proportions, but nothing really controversial. The EIA website also shows this stuff.

zekrioca 4y ago

https://www.eia.gov/coal/production/quarterly/co2_article/co2.html https://www.eia.gov/coal/production/quarterly/co2_article/co...

l3uwin 4y ago

Same for your baseless snark, maybe provide some facts yourself

throw10920 4y ago
> you haven't provided any of the relevant facts or sources to back this claim It should be pretty clear that no sources are needed beyond using your eyes and looking at Robotbeat's comment - unless it's been edited, then it's rather obvious that no sources were provided, which was the claim being made. Saying "what are your sources" without further elaboration is typically a little rude and combative, but this kind of "no you" comment is flat-out ridiculous.
Cthulhu_ 4y ago
They're not refuting the point or providing counterarguments, they're just questioning the lack of sources, which is valid. It's down to the person making a claim to provide evidence. If someone points out that there is no evidence provided, that someone doesn't need to provide evidence themselves. I mean yeah it's snarky, but it's a comment section on the internet.