Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Coal Kills

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 52 posts

Re: How Coal Kills

#11

Post by ProAm »

higherpurpose wrote: post #2

It seems unlikely we'll ever put a price on coal's impact on people's health (and therefore the cost of healthcare) and on the environment. But the very least we could do is cut the subsidies , and let it compete fairly against solar and other renewables. Eventually we'll chase it out of the market, because solar ill keep getting more cost-effective.

> cut the subsidies, and let it compete fairly against solar and other renewables

Almost all those other industries have massive subsidies. Solar would have gone no where without the government the last 10 years.

Re: How Coal Kills

#12

Post by _broody »

strictnein wrote: post #8

I'll flip the question: Considering that coal has provided a very significant amount of the electrical power and heat for humans over the past 100 years, how many lives has coal saved? How much has it improved the human experience? Put simply, a world without coal is a horrible world.

That's a moot point if there's another viable way to generate the same amount of power without trading lives in the process.

Slave labor also improved your life quite a bit, provided you were a slave owner. Thankfully we found an alternative.

Re: How Coal Kills

#13

Post by belorn »

For an article titled "how coal kills", I must say I am not much more wiser from reading it. Is it only from specific impurities which are themselves toxic elements, or does the carbon play a role? Is it the size of the particles in coal smoke/ash, or is it the molecules? Do they interact to form something deadlier than the sum of the parts?

I know coal kill. What would be interesting to know is how.

Re: How Coal Kills

#14

Post by strictnein »

_broody wrote: post #12
strictnein wrote: post #8

I'll flip the question: Considering that coal has provided a very significant amount of the electrical power and heat for humans over the past 100 years, how many lives has coal saved? How much has it improved the human experience? Put simply, a world without coal is a horrible world.

That's a moot point if there's another viable way to generate the same amount of power without trading lives in the process. Slave labor also improved your life quite a bit, provided you were a slave owner. Thankfully we found an alternative.

Slavery, really? That's your analogy?

What's your viable way to replace coal today? Include explanations of how your replacement can be as reliable as coal, and how the developing world can afford these sources without sacrificing other government services.

Re: How Coal Kills

#15

Post by strictnein »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #10
strictnein wrote: post #8

I'll flip the question: Considering that coal has provided a very significant amount of the electrical power and heat for humans over the past 100 years, how many lives has coal saved? How much has it improved the human experience? Put simply, a world without coal is a horrible world.

Well, temper that with a view of a world where coal was scarcer, more expensive. It would not have been used for so many purposes, we'd have been more efficient in our spoiling of the planet. Being as cheap as it was, led to a car for every garage, consumerism, inefficient insulation in houses for the first century etc.

You would prefer a world where only the rich can afford electricity and warmth? Because that's the world you describe.

Re: How Coal Kills

#18

Post by fleitz »

[deleted] wrote: post #16

[deleted]

In any random set of data there will be 'clusters'. There's actually a pretty good chance a cluster will appear.

It's like a lottery, it's very likely someone will win it each week. Humans have an incredibly poor intuition about statistics.

Re: How Coal Kills

#19

Post by nitid_name »

belorn wrote: post #13

For an article titled "how coal kills", I must say I am not much more wiser from reading it. Is it only from specific impurities which are themselves toxic elements, or does the carbon play a role? Is it the size of the particles in coal smoke/ash, or is it the molecules? Do they interact to form something deadlier than the sum of the parts? I know coal kill. What would be interesting to know is how.

I've heard east coast (US) coal is dirtier than west coast (US) coal, particularly in sulfides. The acid rain fix known as the Clean Air Act of 1990 was heavily lobbied by the east coast coal producers and bears some marks to show for it. Burning so called "Clean Coal" has to do with how much gross weight of sulfur you pull out of the coal, which makes sense for coal heavy in sulfides, but less so for west coast fuel. As it stands, to burn west coast coal in the US requires the addition of sulfides to the coal so it can then be pulled back out.

As for other impurities... there are a lot of radioactive crap in coal that is aerosolized during the combustion process. The most notable of these is uranium, which is carried away with the rest of the fly ash. There's a "shadow" around coal smoke stacks where such fly ash ends up accumulating. If it makes it into the water table or onto arable land that is used to grow crops, BAM, you've irradiated a small chunk of your population.

Depending on the source of the coal, there are various other heavy metals that can end up in your fly ash.

Re: How Coal Kills

#20

Post by sigmar »

strictnein wrote: post #14
_broody wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a moot point if there's another viable way to generate the same amount of power without trading lives in the process. Slave labor also improved your life quite a bit, provided you were a slave owner. Thankfully we found an alternative.

Slavery, really? That's your analogy? What's your viable way to replace coal today? Include explanations of how your replacement can be as reliable as coal, and how the developing world can afford these sources without sacrificing other government services.

Don't know where you have been, but coal use has decreased the past few years. Natural gas and renewables have already started to replace coal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_power_in_the_United_States...

Post reply on HN