Archive for Downsizer For an ethical approach to consumption
 


       Downsizer Forum Index -> Conservation and Environment
Ty Gwyn

Been good news for the Green`s this month

As the title states,
Lanc`s council turned down Quadrilla application to frack near Blackpool,

Kellingley and Thorsby Collieries to close next month,

Hatfield Colliery announced closure today,

Aberpergwm Colliery to close next month.
OtleyLad

Re: Been good news for the Green`s this month

As the title states,
Lanc`s council turned down Quadrilla application to frack near Blackpool,

Kellingley and Thorsby Collieries to close next month,

Hatfield Colliery announced closure today,

Aberpergwm Colliery to close next month.


Well yes and no. It would be good if the government had a coherent strategy for substituting fossil-fuel with renewables (which could provide alternative employment).
Mistress Rose

I don't think the closure of collieries without a replacement is a good thing. We need to produce energy, and home produced coal is better than imported gas. As OtleyLad says, a bit of coherent thinking would be a good thing. But then I suppose if market forces dictate closing the collieries, what can (or will) the government do about it. Idiots.
dpack

i recon we could find a viable 30 yr plan from now to fully sustainable in a morning.

removing the tax exemption on the scottish "sporting"estates would incentivize biomass growth etc etc
Tavascarow

Fossil fuels, particularly petrochemical are still hugely subsidised by the government. If those subsidies where switched to renewables it wouldn't take long to fill the gap.
Instead the government we have is removing what renewable subsidies exist at present.
Sucking up to big business as usual.
Rob R

They can't win.
Nick

Fossil fuels, particularly petrochemical are still hugely subsidised by the government. If those subsidies where switched to renewables it wouldn't take long to fill the gap.
Instead the government we have is removing what renewable subsidies exist at present.
Sucking up to big business as usual.


Trouble is, when we run out of fuel for 48 hours, carnage ensues. It does need to be changed, but it needs to be managed incredibly well. Not the government's forte (any of them).
Slim

...home produced coal is better than imported gas.

Anyone care to fill me in on why you feel this way your side of the pond?

Is it primarily because of the jobs? My first thought is greenhouse gas equivalents, and that would point me in the opposite direction....
Nick

...home produced coal is better than imported gas.

Anyone care to fill me in on why you feel this way your side of the pond?

Is it primarily because of the jobs? My first thought is greenhouse gas equivalents, and that would point me in the opposite direction....

We are an island. We hate being held ransom by foreigners. They could suddenly cut us off and we would starve/freeze to death.

No idea if this is her reason, but it's a common British view.
Falstaff

...home produced coal is better than imported gas.

Anyone care to fill me in on why you feel this way your side of the pond?

Is it primarily because of the jobs? My first thought is greenhouse gas equivalents, and that would point me in the opposite direction....

Ever heard of such things as .."Balance of Trade..." "...... National Debt...." "........National Interest...." ?
Falstaff

...home produced coal is better than imported gas.

Anyone care to fill me in on why you feel this way your side of the pond?

Is it primarily because of the jobs? My first thought is greenhouse gas equivalents, and that would point me in the opposite direction....

We are an island. We hate being held ransom by foreigners. They could suddenly cut us off and we would starve/freeze to death.

No idea if this is her reason, but it's a common British view.

It's also common knowledge that the US of A hoilds the voiew that self-sufficiency in Energy is not only desireable, but essential !
dpack

it is a bit difficult being rude to the chap who provides ones gas without shooting yersel in the foot Tavascarow

...home produced coal is better than imported gas.

Anyone care to fill me in on why you feel this way your side of the pond?

Is it primarily because of the jobs? My first thought is greenhouse gas equivalents, and that would point me in the opposite direction....
The gas is mainly coming from the middle east via tankers through the Suez & from Russia piped across Eastern Europe.
Both areas rather volatile & subject to wars & political upheaval. It wouldn't take a lot to shut GB PLC down completely. A lot of our electricity is being generated by gas turbines now as well because it's cleaner & more efficient than coal & easier to start & stop at peak/slack times.
Bebo



It's also common knowledge that the US of A hoilds the voiew that self-sufficiency in Energy is not only desireable, but essential !

Was that a New Jersey accent?
Slim

...home produced coal is better than imported gas.

Anyone care to fill me in on why you feel this way your side of the pond?

Is it primarily because of the jobs? My first thought is greenhouse gas equivalents, and that would point me in the opposite direction....

We are an island. We hate being held ransom by foreigners. They could suddenly cut us off and we would starve/freeze to death.

No idea if this is her reason, but it's a common British view.

It's also common knowledge that the US of A hoilds the voiew that self-sufficiency in Energy is not only desireable, but essential !

Yes, though many of us differ drastically in our ideal means to this end.
Falstaff



It's also common knowledge that the US of A hoilds the voiew that self-sufficiency in Energy is not only desireable, but essential !

Was that a New Jersey accent?

New Jersey ? Yessiree - I'm following the principle of "Buying my straw hats in the fall" ! (Just in case we DO decide to close all those power stations and buy gas ! )
Mistress Rose

Yes, the main reason I prefer using British coal is political instability in gas providing countries and being held to ransom. As far as carbon is concerned, I don't think there is a lot to choose between them, but coal contains other impurities which make it less 'efficient' and produces things that have to be scrubbed out. dpack

so does gas ,h2s being a good example however that gets flared off at the point of extraction (so it dont count Rolling Eyes )

radon is also found in some gas (from natural radioactive decay in the rocks)

coal has a variety of stuff ranging from complex organic chems,sulfur compounds etc etc and some even has enough uranium family nucleotides to make it worth using the ash as uranium ore.

both are finite and have a big downside compared to moving water etc etc but could be well used to fill a need until safe ,sustainable power is online.
Slim

Yes, the main reason I prefer using British coal is political instability in gas providing countries and being held to ransom. As far as carbon is concerned, I don't think there is a lot to choose between them, but coal contains other impurities which make it less 'efficient' and produces things that have to be scrubbed out.

I'm pretty sure that you have a much larger effect in terms of greenhouse gas emissions when you burn coal, than when you burn natural gas. (let alone all the other nasties like sulfur and mercury that come with coal)

This site suggests just a bit under twice as much carbon dioxide for every million btus produced with coal rather than gas....
http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=73&t=11

Clearly that's not the only aspect of the choice to consider, but it weighs heavily for me.
dpack

you are correct but the uk situation needs fossil fuels to keep it going until sustainable is online.

i recon a 30 yr plan would be sensible ,the current situation is a mess and needs sorting
Mistress Rose

I am surprised at those figures Slim, but have no reason to doubt them. Of course coal is made up of more complex hydrocarbons as well as other things, so burning it will not produce the same amount of heat as a simple molecule like methane.

It is very complex subject and depends on what you take into account as to which fuel causes the least pollution.

Agree with you Dpack; we need fossil fuel until we get renewable sources. Sadly this has been the case the whole of my adult life. I supported the use of nuclear power when I was in my 20s because I saw the chaos that would cause if we didn't have a stop gap before renewable came on line. Now in my 60s I rather despair that we will ever get there, and a new generation of nuclear power stations are needed to fill the stop gap.
Tavascarow

Nuclear is not an alternative or a stop gap.
The time it takes to get a nuclear station online is about 15 years.
Uranium is more scarce than gas & coal, & the sources are in areas just as politically volatile as gas supplies.
Renewables are the only alternative with gas turbines to fill the slack periods.
Falstaff

Coal is a viable and plentiful resource in the uk.

Rather than closing coal power stations on a whim, they should be put to good and economical use.
tahir

i recon a 30 yr plan would be sensible

We're not German, long term planning is not British, everything is geared towards the next election.

Having said which coal burning is not the answer, ensuring all new builds are energy efficient would be a start but even latest regs do no such thing. Reducing demand is at least as important as sustainable supply
Rob R

i recon a 30 yr plan would be sensible

We're not German, long term planning is not British, everything is geared towards the next election.


We do have a 25 year plan for bTB, though. First metrication, now this, we must be becoming more German.
dpack

anglo SAXON and the real names of the incumbent royalty hints at how german ukplc is ,at least in part.the falling out 14/18 led to a serious denial of how german the uk is and the 39/45 unpleasantness reinforced that.

however ukplc is also quite french /celtic which does even things up by adding a shrug and a bucket of tribalism

add in the profit motives of the energy supply companies and we have little chance of a sensible and achievable secure sustainable energy supply .

using less is obvious to everyone except politicians ,capitalists and the public.
Slim

Since we're getting idealistic:

I think I'd like to see low GHG (greenhouse gas) fuels like gas be used as the modulating power generation (for lulls in renewables, etc...) and as a bridge to the time in the near future when advanced nuclear options can go online (thorium reactors in the short term, and nuclear fusion plants in the long term). All of this with the continuing advance of renewables like solar, wind, tide, wave, etc....

I completely understand wanting to protect local employment, and self-sufficiency for energy, but I think that coal is one of the worst ways to go about it, and extremely short-sighted. You might be better off in the long run spending money to educate those workers, and invest in research to create advanced nuclear options, etc.... (which will certainly require workers to build and maintain)

Coal just brings too much carbon to the surface, and far too many unwanted elements tagging along.
Ty Gwyn

Well that cover`s power generation,what about Steel and Cement manufacture,are these run on Gas in the US?
As far has i know they are both coal fired in the UK.
dpack

both use coal based stuff in the uk,bought in now.

iirc the coking plant in south yorks closed a while back so the dragon does not happen locally but fuel is brought in pre coked.

a lot of cement is bought in as is most steel,there are a few steel makers left but they mostly work from imported metal rather than from ore and coke.iirc the south wales place (port talbot?)imports both fuel and ore

of big construction stuff aggregate is the only stuff done locally(big hole in scotland etc etc )
Slim

Well that cover`s power generation,what about Steel and Cement manufacture,are these run on Gas in the US?
As far has i know they are both coal fired in the UK.

I'm no expert, and I can't find sources that are more recent than 2013, but I did find this claiming that gas will replace coke: http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4190319-u-s-steel-natural-gas-process-will-soon-replace-coke/

Other things I googled make it look like cement producers are looking alternative fuel sources as well (gas, biomass, tires, etc...), but I didn't find anything that says any real numbers concisely and don't have that much time to do a thorough reading! Plenty of info out there though

Again, not an expert in this area!
vegplot

Cement production relies heavily on coal both as a fuel (burns hotter than gas and with greater luminosity) and also because cement products often use flyash from coal powered power stations. Other fuels are used and as Slim points out even tyres are burned. Cement is certainly not an environmentally sound product.

I'm happy to say our new build home won't be using any cement at all.
dpack

cement using tyres could be a good idea so long as the scrubbers work but as a simple long,hot,turning tube with no environmental controls it would be very messy Ty Gwyn

The best grades of coking coal in the UK were only obtained in Durham and South Wales.

A meeting i attended in Cardiff Uni,Mining engineers regarding the Margam drift mine proposal by Tata in Port talbot,a few year`s back,the coal used there came from a large opencast in Mozambique.

Up to date all cement works in the UK use coal in the production,

And as far as i know,all Hot Lime is produced with coal as well,not heard of any other fuel used.
Falstaff

Just out of curiosity, producing 1 tonne of cement, releases 1.6 tonnes of CO2 from the limestone !

- Irrespective afaik of whether the heating is done by burning imported gas - or good old midlands coal !
vegplot

The best grades of coking coal in the UK were only obtained in Durham and South Wales.

A meeting i attended in Cardiff Uni,Mining engineers regarding the Margam drift mine proposal by Tata in Port talbot,a few year`s back,the coal used there came from a large opencast in Mozambique.

Up to date all cement works in the UK use coal in the production,

And as far as i know,all Hot Lime is produced with coal as well,not heard of any other fuel used.

I don't have any figures but this suggests that not all cement production uses coal as the fuel source...
Quote:
Alternative fuels have been successfully used in cement kilns for decades. In the UK, alternative fuels used include secondary liquid fuels, scrap tyres, paper, packaging and household waste, meat and bone meal and sewage sludge pellets.
Falstaff



I don't have any figures but this suggests that not all cement production uses coal as the fuel source...
Quote:
Alternative fuels have been successfully used in cement kilns for decades. In the UK, alternative fuels used include secondary liquid fuels, scrap tyres, paper, packaging and household waste, meat and bone meal and sewage sludge pellets.


I'm not at all sure that burning old tyres is better than burning coal, but it would at least be useful to know where the "Quote" - comes from ?
Ty Gwyn

Just had a look up regarding lime production,and the fuel source is much the same as Veg stated for cement,which shocked me,as years back when we had a load of hot lime from Llandybie lime firms,one would always find lump`s of coal through it,

I was also shocked by the C02 produced in the process of calcinating,if Falstaffs figures are correct regarding the amount of CO2 produced what ever fuel is used in the process,considering the amount of lime used,it is as bad if not worse than coal in this CO2 adding to the atmosphere.
Tavascarow

Just had a look up regarding lime production,and the fuel source is much the same as Veg stated for cement,which shocked me,as years back when we had a load of hot lime from Llandybie lime firms,one would always find lump`s of coal through it,

I was also shocked by the C02 produced in the process of calcinating,if Falstaffs figures are correct regarding the amount of CO2 produced what ever fuel is used in the process,considering the amount of lime used,it is as bad if not worse than coal in this CO2 adding to the atmosphere. AFAIA lime does use as much energy in its production as cement but unlike cement lime reabsorbs carbon from the atmosphere as it slowly cures so in time becomes carbon neutral. Vegplot will no doubt be along to put it in a more technical format. Wink Ty Gwyn

That is interesting if true,as i was about to ask if Cement and Lime pay the same 20% carbon tax as coal in the UK,as against the 5% in the EU dpack

the same amount of co2 released from limestone when making cement or lime is reabsorbed from (dissolved)atmospheric co2 as the mortar cures

cement and lime cure back to carbonates therefore only the co2 from the fuel is added to the global carbon dioxide count unless the fuel is plant based such as tyres which grow on trees now rather than from trees/bugs held as fossils:lol:

charcoal fueled lime or cement would be carbon neutral so long as coppice or replanting was done
Falstaff

the same amount of co2 released from limestone when making cement or lime is reabsorbed from (dissolved)atmospheric co2 as the mortar cures

cement and lime cure back to carbonates therefore only the co2 from the fuel is added to the global carbon dioxide count unless the fuel is plant based such as tyres which grow on trees now rather than from trees/bugs held as fossils:lol:

charcoal fueled lime or cement would be carbon neutral so long as coppice or replanting was done

What a load of old bollix Laughing
Tavascarow

the same amount of co2 released from limestone when making cement or lime is reabsorbed from (dissolved)atmospheric co2 as the mortar cures

cement and lime cure back to carbonates therefore only the co2 from the fuel is added to the global carbon dioxide count unless the fuel is plant based such as tyres which grow on trees now rather than from trees/bugs held as fossils:lol:

charcoal fueled lime or cement would be carbon neutral so long as coppice or replanting was done
AFAIA cement reacts with water not atmospheric CO2 & cure rapidly because of this, traditional lime mortars cure slowly & return to carbonate through reaction to atmospheric CO2.
Mistress Rose

Traditionally, coppice was used to make charcoal for iron production. In fact we are going to the site of a 17th century iron works on Saturday, and the coppice is still there.

If charcoal is used for either limestone burning or iron smelting, it will be more carbon neutral if it is locally produced, but would need an awful lot of coppice for modern industrial quantities, and will need some fossil fuel input for cutting. Sadly, it would probably be imported, but at least is less likely to import pests and diseases than other imported biomass.
Falstaff

the same amount of co2 released from limestone when making cement or lime is reabsorbed from (dissolved)atmospheric co2 as the mortar cures

cement and lime cure back to carbonates therefore only the co2 from the fuel is added to the global carbon dioxide count unless the fuel is plant based such as tyres which grow on trees now rather than from trees/bugs held as fossils:lol:

charcoal fueled lime or cement would be carbon neutral so long as coppice or replanting was done
AFAIA cement reacts with water not atmospheric CO2 & cure rapidly because of this, traditional lime mortars cure slowly & return to carbonate through reaction to atmospheric CO2.

Cement sets by a process of crystallisation.

As lime mortar sets, it develops a holdand slowly (VERY slowly) the lime does combine with acidic carbon, to return to a calcium carbonate state.

I believe some of the Roman stuff has got part way down the path already !

If that is regarded as "Carbon neutral" by the Greenies, it would not surprise me at all in this crazy subject ! Rolling Eyes
Mistress Rose

I think that lime mortar has a lot of other advantages, particularly in old buildings, over cement. On the other hand, cement will set under water, so whichever suits which purpose. Lime mortar can also be reused if rebaked, whereas cement has to be just broken down and used as hardcore. dpack

THE LIMESTONE COMPONENT OF CEMENT

yes most of "cement"first sets due to hydration ,ie roast it ,water gone ,water back,it sets

the bit that releases co2 (ie the ca co3 to ca o )will react with environmental co2(ie same amount as roasted out )

unless im very wrong the long term co2 footprint of either lime or "cement"(there are lots of subcatagories) depends on the energy sources used to mine,transport and to roast the stuff.

cement chemistry is complex but the basics are if it gives off co2 from the minerals it will take them back

this is one reason "cement"continues to gain cohesion (if the dampness/access to environmental input is there)

there is a big difference between set and cured
dpack

as to being a "greenie" did you see the hobbit film when gandalf split the rock to let the sun shine through.
       Downsizer Forum Index -> Conservation and Environment
Page 1 of 1
Home Home Home Home Home