cleaner coal (coop, transfer, tax)

[jody_wy]

Scientists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) announced Monday they found a way to make electricity from coal twice as environmentally friendly.

Coal gasification and fuel cell research could lead to a 50 to 60 percent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions per unit of electricity produced, according to an abstract of the scientists’ work.

The technique extracts fuel from pulverized coal and uses an electrochemical reaction that generates electricity without burning the fuel. Since the fuel is not burned, less coal ash, CO2 and other air pollutants are produced. The technique would also make it easier to capture and sequester any CO2 or air pollutants produced.

https://stream.org/mit-finds-way-make-coal-twice-green/

[sunsprit]

at what cost on a large scale generation plant?

can they develop this to the point of being competitive with cost per KWH as gas generation?

if so, WY coal is "back in business" sooner than later and good news for the region.

[jody_wy]

Originally Posted by sunsprit

at what cost on a large scale generation plant?

can they develop this to the point of being competitive with cost per KWH as gas generation?

if so, WY coal is "back in business" sooner than later and good news for the region.

Sent this to a couple Chemical Engineers I know. they usually tear apart these thing pretty fast.
here is an early fuel cell tractor
Allis-Chalmers Farm Tractor Was First Fuel Cell Vehicle | Hydrogen Cars Now

[WyoNewk]

That's certainly good news!

[GraniteStater]

I would like to see the cost benefit analysis of this study compared to the factual rapid and continuous decline of all renewable energy sources which are now cheaper than traditional generation.

[sunsprit]

Originally Posted by GraniteStater

I would like to see the cost benefit analysis of this study compared to the factual rapid and continuous decline of all renewable energy sources which are now cheaper than traditional generation.

I'd like to see your cost benefit analysis of "all renewable energy sources" and supporting documentation that they "are now cheaper than traditional generation".

As well, my understanding is that much of the renewable energy generation coming on-line has been due to substantial gov't subsidies and tax breaks for the power companies. That money didn't come from nowhere and it's a part of the cost to get those renewable sources on line.

Case in point: my COOP member owned T&D electric utility just sent me my new rate sheets for 2016 after having held a conference with our electric supplier. That supplier now delivers 25% of their power generated by wind and solar using the latest available technology.

At our recent irrigators conference, we were comparing the historic rates of coal or natural gas generated power, typically 2 to 3 cents per KWH and delivered with nominal (but recently increasing) demand charges per KW. In comparison, their cost per KWH for renewable power was closer to 12 cents per KWH. On top of that, my demand charges are going up 33% this year. Their estimate is that my electric power will go up 7% this year, but that was an average figure and I'm anticipating an increase closer to 12% this year starting next month. Demand charges are forecast to see similar, if not larger, increases for the next two years, too.

Our supplier forecasts similar percentage increases for each of the next 2 years.

Where's your data? and how do you see demand energy charges without baseline generation faring? brownouts? blackouts?

PS: I live in an area with among the highest average wind energy densities of the entire continental USA. Wind is very abundant, but the real costs of uptime for the generators is devastating. Yesterday, driving past several sizable wind farms where we had road closures to lightweight/high profile vehicles due to the winds and gusts (50-70 mph gusts), I observed that over half of the generators weren't turning. That's pretty typical around here, even at more modest wind days.

PPS: in all candor, the only cost-benefit benefit I've seen so far in the renewable energy business has been the gold lining the pockets of a select few. Witness Solyndra and other companies of their ilk foisting their organizations upon the taxpayer. How many hundreds of millions of dollars did we pour down that rathole? I think it reasonable that we include such debacles in the total cost to the consumer as part of the cost basis analysis of renewable energy today.

[jody_wy]

Originally Posted by GraniteStater

I would like to see the cost benefit analysis of this study compared to the factual rapid and continuous decline of all renewable energy sources which are now cheaper than traditional generation.

Just Wyoming at previous higher consumption had like over 300 years of coal reserves....

[jody_wy]

one report back.
I quickly read through the journal article, which is enclosed. Here is a quick synopsis. The theory does seem promising. Essentially it is using a carbon fuel source (coal) to form hydrogen for a fuel cell. One catch as the article stated is the need for high temperature heat exchanger technology for the heat transfer between the fuel cell and the gasification unit. Another problem is that the fuel source needs to void of sulfur compounds. The sulfur may react and form H2S. Having a sulfur rejection unit would decrease the efficiency of the process and may make it ineffective. Another problem the article presented was the need for a condenser in some situations which again would undermine the efficiency of the system. Last is the use of air instead of pure oxygen. The nitrogen in the air will decrease the efficiency of the process but using an air separation unit would also be costly. One thing to note is that the system is simulated to run at a temperature of 800C which fortunately will not produce NOx (forms around 1300C) and hence does make the system cleaner. Also it reduces the chance of releasing CO to the atmosphere.

[ScottStielow]

Interesting to say the least. Good information. Hope it works out.

[GregW]

People have been turning coal into "Town Gas" for a couple of centuries. It is not exactly a new technology. It was very popular in the North East until the Natural Gas pipelines were built. The major problems were the smoke and the coal tar residue left over from the process. Also the "Town Gas" was about 2/3 Methane and 1/3 Carbon Monoxide.