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

The Cheap Energy Revolution Is Here, and Coal Won’t Cut It

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 160 posts

Re: The Cheap Energy Revolution Is Here, and Coal Won’t Cut It

#111

Post by [deleted] »

dangerlibrary wrote: post #84
jartelt wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If coal is so great and cheap, then why is no one building new coal plants? Over the past few years wind and solar account for ~40% of new generation capacity and natural gas makes up the rest. Based on your comment, one would expect to either see only natural gas capacity being built out or some mix of natural gas and coal. That is not what is happening and it's because wind and solar are cheaper than coal in severa…

I feel like you and I don't disagree, but for some reason you think we do. Natural gas is replacing coal for base load generation because it is cheaper. from wind-watch.org: > "How does wind power affect base load? Wind power has no effect on base load. https://www.wind-watch.org/faq-electricity.php

[deleted]

Re: The Cheap Energy Revolution Is Here, and Coal Won’t Cut It

#112

Post by crdoconnor »

matt4077 wrote: post #31
mirko22 wrote: post #5

More and more people are turning to Molten Salt Nuclear Reactors, like Liquid Fluoride Thorium Breeders, If Kirk Sorensen and others are right this will revolutionize energy (and probably not just energy but mining, water desalination etc.) as we know it unlike wind or solar ever could. Natural gas and coal should die once and for all as they are as dirty as it gets. I strongly believe we are ready for truly nuclear…

Yeah, and fusion is just around the corner... I wonder why the tech community has this infatuation with nuclear power. Ever since I registered my three-digit slashdot account, I've been reading exactly this post, just that the type of reactor people dream of seems to change every five years or so. Good to know it's "Liquid Fluoride Thorium Breeders", right now. Meanwhile, solar power has lowered prices by a factor of…

"Yeah, and fusion is just around the corner..."

Fusion probably would have been if funding for nuclear fusion research had been kept at the same level as it was in the 70s. It took a deep dive after that though for reasons which most people can probably guess.

Re: The Cheap Energy Revolution Is Here, and Coal Won’t Cut It

#113

Post by Animats »

yessql wrote: post #104
awqrre wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why do you exclude hydroelectric?

Too geography dependent, and we will probably never build another large hydro project because of the environmental impacts.

Great quote: "All the good dam sites were gone by 1940".

The ideal dam site is Hoover Dam. One dam at a narrow point created a large lake with a high drop for power generation. No population to displace; the surrounding land is desert. Few other sites in the world are that good.

There's nothing anywhere near that good left in the US. China has some good hydro sites in the west, and they're building hydroelectric dams there. Million-volt DC lines going thousands of kilometers are being used to move the power to the loads in eastern China.

Re: The Cheap Energy Revolution Is Here, and Coal Won’t Cut It

#114

Post by Mendenhall »

stale2002 wrote: post #100
Mendenhall wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That falls under "rhetoric" the author takes a small unit of time "when sun is shining and wind is blowing" to then use the word "free". Thats cherry picking to the extreme and rhetoric 101. It is used to paint a picture that does not really exist. What happens to solar and wind when its night and the wind is still? By cherry picking and creating a scene which doesnt truly exist it paints a false picture of the effic…

It is not rhetoric, it is jargon. Marginal cost is something that people who study economics would instantly understand, to the point where they would be confused as to why others are confused. It means something very specific, but it is very common to talk about in economics. I will throw around the term accidently, without even realizing that it would make some people confused. Capital costs vs marginal costs is an…

I was not speaking to what marginal cost is, I was speaking to the reason they chose to use the term marginal cost and also chose to pin it to sunny/windy and free.

Some are assuming I did not see "marginal" in there, but the rhetoric angle is exactly why author chose marginal cost. It was simply to get the word "free" in there and then again author used "free" when speaking about shale.

Re: The Cheap Energy Revolution Is Here, and Coal Won’t Cut It

#115

Post by crdoconnor »

opo wrote: post #98
cagenut wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry if this is nitpicky but fyi, coal in 2016 was almost exactly 40%, not 'well over': https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cf... But you are absolutely right that its entirely due to natgas and that will maybe last us a decade or two but certainly not three. In fact its just enough time to build a fleet of nuclear plants, but as you also point out, fear rules that decision far more than physic…

>...But you are absolutely right that its entirely due to natgas and that will maybe last us a decade or two but certainly not three. Citation? Unfortunately it looks like there are large proven reserves of natural gas: >...The U.S. Energy Information Administration estimates that as of January 1, 2014, there were about 2,474 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of technically recoverable resources of dry natural gas in the Uni…

"Yea, nuclear has so far been the safest form of base load power we have ever used. Unfortunately anything at all related to nuclear is covered by the media orders of magnitude more than other power sources so people have an understandable perception that it is much more dangerous than other sources of power."

I thought it was telling that the only world leader who reacted to Fukushima by mandating the end of nuclear power wasn't a hippy but a physicist.

I don't see the problem being that nuclear can't be made safe. I see the problem being that operators are motivated to stretch the margin of safety in order to make a buck and lawmakers appear to be prepared to let them and the one thing nuclear operators will never, ever, ever, EVER stand for is allowing the privatization of that risk (i.e. let insurance companies instead of taxpayers shoulder the risk).

Re: The Cheap Energy Revolution Is Here, and Coal Won’t Cut It

#116

Post by dangerlibrary »

jartelt wrote: post #107
dangerlibrary wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like you and I don't disagree, but for some reason you think we do. Natural gas is replacing coal for base load generation because it is cheaper. from wind-watch.org: > "How does wind power affect base load? Wind power has no effect on base load. https://www.wind-watch.org/faq-electricity.php

Well, you said wind and solar are more expensive than coal and I am saying they are not (hence why they are being built out like crazy). You seem to be arguing that wind and solar cannot replace coal since there are intermittent. I think that is wrong.

Okay, cool.

When power generation companies demonstrate that you are correct and replace their base load production capacity with solar and wind I will (joyfully) eat crow. That isn't really happening right now, though. Natural gas is replacing coal and non-hydro renewables make up a very small fraction of overall capacity.

https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cf...

Re: The Cheap Energy Revolution Is Here, and Coal Won’t Cut It

#117

Post by astrodust »

Animats wrote: post #71

Well over 40% of US electricity is still from coal. Despite all the hype, renewables other than hydroelectric are only 3% in the US. What's driving energy prices is cheap natural gas. Natural gas is cheap to extract and can be extracted fast. But after a while, it's all gone. Britain's North Sea Gas boom is over.[1] Gas fields also drop off faster than oil fields. The cheap natural gas boom won't last forever. It's c…

> Nuclear now looks like a technology where every decade or two you lose a city.

No, it's a technology where if you use power plants decades out of date, that have known safety issues, and then cover-up the magnitude of the problem once a catastrope occurs then you have a very expensive clean-up operation.

Cleaning up Fukushima will be expensive, there's no denying it, but it's arguably the case that the Deepwater Horizon rig mess could cost significantly more.

Re: The Cheap Energy Revolution Is Here, and Coal Won’t Cut It

#118

Post by ska »

danmaz74 wrote: post #106
awqrre wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why do you exclude hydroelectric?

Not the OP, but usually hydro is excluded because it's "old renewable" and most potential sources have already been developed.

Due to silting, most hydro isn't really renewable either iiuc. It's just looks that way for long enough that we tend to talk about it that way.

Re: The Cheap Energy Revolution Is Here, and Coal Won’t Cut It

#119

Post by astrodust »

Animats wrote: post #53
lettergram wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are actually things like peat moss[1], which are a semi-renewable energy, which I see being far more useful in a "dark age" scenario. Not to say, it's not good to keep coal in the ground for the same reason. Just thought I would share another tid-bit lol [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphagnum

Have you ever seen a large peat moss power plant? Ireland has some. They're gross polluters.

Who thought that was a good idea?

Re: The Cheap Energy Revolution Is Here, and Coal Won’t Cut It

#120

Post by ska »

Mendenhall wrote: post #59
Dylan16807 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand. If someone is giving out free balloons but only during certain hours, you shouldn't call it free?

As rhetoric I would compare it more with "I will be giving everyone free balloons all day while supplies last!" and the supply is one balloon. Sounds great but reality is vastly different. Again though I dont expect everyone to see the rhetoric I see.

   Again though I dont expect everyone to see the rhetoric I see.
When you get to this point, it's a good time to ask yourself if you are tilting at windmills, in my experience.
Post reply on HN