A Service of Energy CentralEnergyBlogs.com Logo

With so much uncertainty about federal carbon legislation, power generation companies continue cancelling plans for new coal-fired plants. The economist in me has concerns about these developments, because there is nowhere near enough wind, solar, demand side management, and nuclear power to avoid blackouts if the recession ends and demand starts growing more rapidly. Natural gas prices are too high and volatile to consider it as a legitimate substitute for coal. The part of me that’s concerned about our planet’s future is optimistic, because the crisis can spur clean and smart innovation in demand-side and grid management.

Cancelling new coal-fired generation will also force the continued operation of existing coal-fired plants that would otherwise be retired. The optimization champion in me sees this as an opportunity for generators to get more out of their existing coal-fired assets with real-time optimization software solutions. The technology’s ability to improve efficiency, lower emissions, and manage multiple tradeoffs in a rapidly shifting environment make optimization a highly viable solution for generators looking to maximize existing assets in an uncertain regulatory environment.

www.neuco.net

www.theoptimizationblog.com

1103 Views Comments 6 Comments Comments Add Comment Author BioAuthor Bio
ReportReport This Post as Foul/Inappropriate
member photo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underground_coal_gasi...

In-situ mining of hydrocarbon resources solves nearly all the environmental problems associated with burning coal. Unfortunately, the people that own the mineral rights do not see the wisdom of technological advances...
# Posted By William Norquay | 3/16/09 9:53 AM | Report This Comment as Foul/Inappropriate
member photo Thanks Peter, my concerns exactly. I think we have about a 10-20 year gap where environmentalists are going to shut down coal before anything else is available to take up the slack. Add rolling blackout/brownouts to residential price increases ranging between 15% and 100%, or more, and you have a volitile situation with the general public. It's going to be interesting.
# Posted By Warren Causey | 3/16/09 11:17 AM | Report This Comment as Foul/Inappropriate
member photo Radical environmentalism is bad for the environment. I am not a big fan of coal but new coal plants are a lot cleaner than old ones due to retire.
# Posted By Penny Gruber | 3/16/09 1:29 PM | Report This Comment as Foul/Inappropriate
member photo Granted, there is no such thing as truly clean coal, just as there is no way to burn hydrocarbons in combination with oxygen bearing atmosphere without an environmental impact. In-situ recovery of coal and shale oil hydrocarbons is the best case scenario for tapping into the vast mineral resources in North America, giving us energy independence, and minimizing environmental impact until more advanced energy generation, transmission, and storage technologies develop.
# Posted By William Norquay | 3/17/09 2:07 PM | Report This Comment as Foul/Inappropriate
member photo James coal has a big environmental footprint. Old coal plants have much bigger footprints than new ones. Going dark is not a viable option.

Using the same logic extremists use to oppose all new coal plants, one might point out all the untreated sewage spills that occur as a reason to ban construction of new sewage treatment plants. Like energy consumption, sewage isn't going away, and old plants are dirtier and fail more frequently than new plants. It is ill considered and contrary to the purpose of environmentalism to induce a result: keeping aging very dirty plants on line, so as to oppose all plants on principle.
# Posted By Penny Gruber | 3/17/09 2:37 PM | Report This Comment as Foul/Inappropriate
member photo What "STOP CLEAN COAL" really means is:

-Stop building high efficiency clean coal power plants that , without any specific CO2 capturing, can potentially save 1.4 Billion tons CO2 per year by replacing older less efficient power plants with modern high efficiency clean coal power plants.

-Even in the best case scenario, where wind and solar can replace 10% of the base load generation (wind and solar is 0.35% of today's total energy consumption), the saving would be 0.411 Billion tons CO2 per year if modernization is not allowed of the old coal plants. I.e. by fighting development of new clean coal plants environmentalists block the additional potential of about 1 Billion tons CO2 per year saving.

-Necessary investment in back up sources for wind and solar generation that are dependable and can be available when the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining.

-Higher energy rates due to additional transmission fees, higher cost energy generation, and cost of redundancy to mitigate unpredictability in the availability of wind and solar power generation.

-Stop building financially sound modern clean coal power plants that can produce electricity at today's competitive energy rates.

-Focus all the efforts to grow the 0.35% wind and solar generation to 10% while the big potential to make both environmentally and financially significant difference is in the 50% of old coal generated energy production by replacing them with modern high efficiency clean coal plants.

-Stop building modern power plants that can efficiently use domestic fuel sources such as waste coal, product coal, biomass, tar sand etc. etc.

-Stop securing a reliable base load generation by focusing on unreliable sources of generation.

-Start investing in wind farms that, for replacement of one regular size clean coal power plant, needs 300 – 500 wind turbines spread out over 70,000 – 100,000 acres of land each requiring access roads and power lines.

-Start transporting power over long distances with higher transmission losses resulting in overall lower efficiency.

I assume everybody agrees that we need energy and can not shut it off so the most beneficial approach is a dialog to come up with an "ALL OF THE ABOVE" solution using all the available technologies within an acceptable COE.
There is plenty of need, space for improvement, and market share for everybody who has a viable technology!
# Posted By Esko Polvi | 3/18/09 8:58 AM | Report This Comment as Foul/Inappropriate
 
Toolbox

Blog Editor
Search
Calendar
Recent EntriesRecent Entries
Recent CommentsRecent Comments
RSS
Energy Central
Power Network


Sponsored Content

Copyright © 1996-2013 by CyberTech, Inc. All rights reserved.
Energy Central ® is a registered trademark of CyberTech, Incorporated.
CyberTech does not warrant that the information or services of Energy Central will meet any specific requirements; nor will it be error free or uninterrupted; nor shall CyberTech be liable for any indirect, incidental or consequential damages (including lost data, information or profits) sustained or incurred in connection with the use of, operation of, or inability to use Energy Central.
2821 S. Parker Rd. Ste 1105 Aurora, CO 80014
Contact: Phone - 303-782-5510 Fax - 303-782-5331 or service@energycentral.com.