The science of coal

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

KMFJD

Lifer
Aug 11, 2005
32,646
52,077
136
I can see coal as a more viable form of energy in remote villages. They don't have a grid, let alone the battery arrays, so you'd see a star configuration where you have the central power plant and the village laid out around it. It would produce power at night when they need it most for lighting, and is a more simple way to do things like heat water, opposed to solar array + grid + batteries + electric heater.

It has the cheaper cost of entry, where there is no money. It would be nice if their government decided to run power but until then what are they to do? Move elsewhere? I've always thought that was the better idea.

Granted politicians think in terms of their lavish lifestyle in the US, not about what each individual home could do to be self sufficient just to run some light bulbs or charge up a cell phone, but there's nothing about offering our coal exports that stops them from choosing that path instead.

You do know it takes quite a bit of coal to power a generating station right? How are you going to get that to remote villages on a regular basis unless there's a local source.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,512
17,016
136
You do know it takes quite a bit of coal to power a generating station right? How are you going to get that to remote villages on a regular basis unless there's a local source.

Do you think it's easier for a third world country to dig its own coal or to get solar power stations setup?
 
Jul 9, 2009
10,758
2,086
136
Why do you hate clean air so much?
Why do you wish babies to get emphysema and lung cancer?
Why do you hate babies so much?
I don't, but so many of the posters in here are ignorant about power options, uninformed about costs and misinformed about benefits. You strut your ignorance so proudly that it humors me to give you a few facts.
 

Thebobo

Lifer
Jun 19, 2006
18,574
7,672
136
I don't, but so many of the posters in here are ignorant about power options, uninformed about costs and misinformed about benefits. You strut your ignorance so proudly that it humors me to give you a few facts.

But

Coal prices are on the rise again. With benchmark rates in Australia up over 30 percent since July — approaching the $100/t mark that prevailed in November 2016 after a massive run-up last year.


And

U.S. coal production fell in first half of 2017 after increasing in late 2016


main.png
 

KMFJD

Lifer
Aug 11, 2005
32,646
52,077
136
Do you think it's easier for a third world country to dig its own coal or to get solar power stations setup?

In the long run renewable energy systems, but most countries seem to think only in the short term.
 

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,653
205
106
So there are actually 2 problems with the power in Africa.

First and foremost, Africa has 54 countries and 1.2 billion people.
There is already a very large and extensive power grid, but it is unreliable, and even if it was, their generating stations do not have enough capacity to meet the need.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/01/africa/africa-state-of-electricity-feat/index.html

Marred by insufficient capacity, poor reliability and high costs, the energy infrastructure in Africa is still problematic, with 25 nations in sub-Saharan Africa facing "a crisis," according to The World Bank.
On average, only 69 percent of households that are connected to the grid, actually have electricity that works most or all of the time, Afrobarometer found.


A seperate issue is the 600 million who do not have access to the current grid.
http://fraym.io/600-million-unconnected-africa-can-pay-off-grid-power/
Six hundred million people are unconnected to the grid, but 330 million of them are currently not in a position to be able to pay for the solutions presently available to them.

The same proportion of the unconnected population – more than 50 percent – is concentrated in six countries. Five of these six countries share traditional borders, suggesting the need for solutions that can be integrated regionally.

Sounds like a cheap coal plant and a powergrid expansion is still the best solution here also.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ivwshane

1prophet

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
5,313
534
126
The reason for coal in 3rd world nations is to minimize their reliance on energy from nations like Russia. Once they have every independence their economy will be more stable, a more stable economy allows for a stronger/growing middle class. Eventually if everything goes right the country can then look into alternative energy sources such as solar. Right now countries need stability.
That is feel good neo-liberalism bullshit since one of the main reasons many "resource rich" 3rd world countries are in the state they are in is the American foreign policies enacted under the guise of protecting them from the "Soviet Union" and today the favorite liberal bogeyman is "Russia" which is no different than the gay/atheist bogeyman is to conservatives.

The Earth/nature doesn't recognize borders, nationalities, races. etc., but it does become affected by pollution and in return ALL of humanity has to deal with its after effects that's why a developing country is no more entitled to pollute than a developed country regardless of some feel good farce of how they need to "evolve",

especially since they are ahead IN A SENSE because they have access to all the information and environmental mistakes that developed countries made, no need to reinvent the wheel by polluting.

3RD WORLD COUNTRIES ARE MORE THAN CAPABLE OF MOVING FORWARD IF COUNTRIES OF EUROPE, AMERICA, RUSSIA, AND NOW CHINA GIVE THEM A LITTLE BIT OF HELP WITHOUT GIANT STRINGS TRYING TO CONTROL THEM AND THEIR NATURAL RESOURCES.
 
Feb 16, 2005
14,079
5,450
136
That would require central power generation and construction of a grid. Better to go solar right off as it would likely be cheaper than coal and everything that goes with it.
that is the devils light and no righteous man would let it prevent him from getting his rape on. Only fossil fuel energy can do that.
 

WelshBloke

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
33,087
11,269
136
I'd have thought that solar and battery arrays would be the ideal thing for rural villages.

They are low maintenance, you dont need to have an extensive country wide power grid, you don't need to deliver loads of coal and water, the raw materials for solar cells are, IIRC, found in the continent so it could kick off some good industry there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KMFJD and ch33zw1z

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
39,749
20,323
146
really, so much land area to use as well.

i dislike the all or nothing attitude. theres no reason we cant be smarter and more mindful of our planet, using coal when its the best option, renewables when theyre the best. ending up with a hybrid, with a mindset of longevity leading the method
 
  • Like
Reactions: sao123 and KMFJD

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,857
31,346
146
I don't, but so many of the posters in here are ignorant about power options, uninformed about costs and misinformed about benefits. You strut your ignorance so proudly that it humors me to give you a few facts.

It's as if you didn't post that link that you clearly don't understand in order to defend your ignorance. lol.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,512
17,016
136
That is feel good neo-liberalism bullshit since one of the main reasons many "resource rich" 3rd world countries are in the state they are in is the American foreign policies enacted under the guise of protecting them from the "Soviet Union" and today the favorite liberal bogeyman is "Russia" which is no different than the gay/atheist bogeyman is to conservatives.

The Earth/nature doesn't recognize borders, nationalities, races. etc., but it does become affected by pollution and in return ALL of humanity has to deal with its after effects that's why a developing country is no more entitled to pollute than a developed country regardless of some feel good farce of how they need to "evolve",

especially since they are ahead IN A SENSE because they have access to all the information and environmental mistakes that developed countries made, no need to reinvent the wheel by polluting.

3RD WORLD COUNTRIES ARE MORE THAN CAPABLE OF MOVING FORWARD IF COUNTRIES OF EUROPE, AMERICA, RUSSIA, AND NOW CHINA GIVE THEM A LITTLE BIT OF HELP WITHOUT GIANT STRINGS TRYING TO CONTROL THEM AND THEIR NATURAL RESOURCES.

You know that Paris agreement that trump pulled us out of? It had a commitment to help fund such countries. Who did you vote for again?